The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West, forming a new company for controlling nearly fifteen of the nation's gasoline sales.
A. forming a new company for controlling
B. forming a new company that would control
C. which would form a new company that controlled
D. which formed a new company for controlling
E. which formed a new company that would control
my doubt: i am somehow not able to justify the usage of "would" in option B ."would" is used in two circumstances
1)to describe some hypothetical situation such as --> if i had one million, I would .....
2)to describe an even that was still a future event at the time described in the sentence but is no longer a future event
for instance ----> last year,people predicted that germany would win the world cup.
the "would" of B gives me a notion that all this controlling has been achieved and that someone is speaking this sentence after 20 years of that merger!!
also "for controlling" seems much better because at least it is giving a purpose of that merger
how do i reconcile this ?
thanks and regards
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
. The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and m
This topic has expert replies
-
aditya8062
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
-
theCodeToGMAT
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1556
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:18 pm
- Thanked: 448 times
- Followed by:34 members
- GMAT Score:650
There's a slight difference in the meaning of {A} & {B}
{A} gives the meaning that merging was intended so as to control nearly 15 nation's sales.
{B} gives the scenario of cause-effect.
Since the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B}
What is the OA?
{A} gives the meaning that merging was intended so as to control nearly 15 nation's sales.
{B} gives the scenario of cause-effect.
Since the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B}
What is the OA?
R A H U L
-
aditya8062
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
well both A and B are adverbialSince the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B}
also the merger can be done with some intention
the OA is B but honestly i am not able to justify the usage of "would" in B, as mentioned above
-
theCodeToGMAT
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1556
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:18 pm
- Thanked: 448 times
- Followed by:34 members
- GMAT Score:650
Yep, both are written in Adverbial form; however, first gives a meaning that controlling was motive but second gives that in cause-effect form..aditya8062 wrote:well both A and B are adverbialSince the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B}
also the merger can be done with some intention
the OA is B but honestly i am not able to justify the usage of "would" in B, as mentioned above
But yeah, "would" usage is kindda confusing! What's the source?
R A H U L
-
GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
One purpose of would is to express the FUTURE-IN-THE-PAST: an action expected to take place AFTER ANOTHER PAST ACTION.aditya8062 wrote:The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West, forming a new company for controlling nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
A. forming a new company for controlling
B. forming a new company that would control
C. which would form a new company that controlled
D. which formed a new company for controlling
E. which formed a new company that would control
my doubt: i am somehow not able to justify the usage of "would" in option B ."would" is used in two circumstances
1)to describe some hypothetical situation such as --> if i had one million, I would .....
2)to describe an even that was still a future event at the time described in the sentence but is no longer a future event
for instance ----> last year,people predicted that germany would win the world cup.
the "would" of B gives me a notion that all this controlling has been achieved and that someone is speaking this sentence after 20 years of that merger!!
also "for controlling" seems much better because at least it is giving a purpose of that merger
how do i reconcile this ?
thanks and regards
The two oil companies AGREED to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West, forming a new company that WOULD CONTROL nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
Here, after the companies AGREED TO MERGE (in the past), the new company WOULD CONTROL (sometime AFTER the agreement) nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
This meaning is perfectly logical:
If -- prior to the agreement -- one company controlled about 10% of the market, while the other company controlled about 5% of the market, then the merger of the two companies WOULD CONTROL nearly 15% of the market.
A: a new company for controlling nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
Here, for controlling serves as an adjective describing a new company.
What TYPE of new company?
A new company FOR CONTROLLING nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
The implication is that 15% of the nation's gasoline sales NEEDED TO BE CONTROLLED.
Not the intended meaning.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
