BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

OG-11. 1st edition (Purple) 37

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm
Thanked: 1 times

OG-11. 1st edition (Purple) 37

by rishijhawar » Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:03 am
Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were constructed in violation of the city's building cede．
(A) Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were
(B) Some buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake last year had been
(C) Some buildings that the earthquake destroyed and heavily damaged last year have been
(D) Last year the earthquake destroyed or heavily damaged some buildings that have been
(E) Last year some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake had been

[spoiler]Question: Please explain why not E instead of OA (B)
[/spoiler]
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:31 pm
Oh, wow - this question has been sitting here all day with no responses? This is one of my all-time favorites...must be my lucky day! Thanks for letting me take this one...

1) This is a classic "Decision Points" lesson - if you look at the last word of each answer choice, you see multiple verb tenses: "were", "had been", and "have been". It's a verb tense problem, so situate the events in order and test the verb tenses to make sure they make logical sense. What really should happen here is:

First - the buildings were built, in violation of code
Second - last year, an earthquake damaged those buildings

Logically, the "have been" answer choices (C and D) don't make sense...the damaged buildings aren't currently being built in violation of code; the point of the sentence is that it's not surprising that many of those were damaged, as originally they had been built not up to code.

"Had been" perfectly summarizes this sequence of events. The buildings that WERE destroyed last year HAD (previously) BEEN constructed in violation of code. So B and E are looking like great choices. A...A just doesn't quite set that timeline up well enough. If you perhaps added the word "originally" after "were" you could effectively tell the reader the order of events, but as it is with just a simple past-tense "were", the meaning of the sentence isn't clear.


2) Check the meaning of the sentence! Perhaps the most glaring flaw in A, once you've noticed it, is that buildings cannot be both "destroyed AND heavily damaged". "Destroyed" already includes "heavily damaged" - just to a much higher degree. So A is illogical in its description, plus it has a dubious verb tense in "were".

Similarly, E has a real meaning problem, as it starts with the phrase "Last year". That modifier controls the entire subject-predicate relationship of "some of the buildings...had been constructed". But it's illogical to say that, all in the same year, these buildings were constructed and destroyed.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by rishijhawar » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:49 pm
Brian, thanks for taking the question.
But what if the buildings were constructed and destroyed all in the same year, even though it might sound hypothetical.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:42 pm
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 91 times
Followed by:46 members

by EducationAisle » Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:01 am
Even if you think that, it would be wrong, since in that case, you would be at least in some ways, altering the meaning of the original sentence. In general, the intent should be to preserve the meaning of the original sentence.
Ashish
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com

Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:

a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana

b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana

Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by rishijhawar » Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:08 am
Ashish, could you please explain how it alters the meaning.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:50 am
This is a perfect example of the fact that there is no original meaning in sentence correction! Choice A has a meaning but that does not make it THE MEANING.

As Brian has mentioned LOGIC plays a huge role in sentence correction. In the case of this sentence the original (choice A) is not logical.

Rishijhawar - it is not that the buildings were constructed and destroyed in the same year. It is that the buildings were DAMAGED AND DESTROYED IN THE SAME EARTHQUAKE. That is what is not logical. They should either be damaged or destroyed.

Here is a link to an article (posting) I wrote a few months ago about meaning in sentence correction. Remember it is more important that you preserve the intended meaning - which is always the logical meaning. You do not however need to preserve the meaning of answer choice A.

https://www.beatthegmat.com/the-truth-ab ... 76648.html
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by rishijhawar » Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:29 pm
David, I think your explanation and research is awesome. Thanks a lot. Thanks Bryan and Ashish.
Top
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 2:53 am

by 700seeker » Mon Nov 19, 2012 2:55 am
great xplanation brain@veritasprep
Top
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 2:53 am

by 700seeker » Mon Nov 19, 2012 2:56 am
thanx:)

Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Oh, wow - this question has been sitting here all day with no responses? This is one of my all-time favorites...must be my lucky day! Thanks for letting me take this one...

1) This is a classic "Decision Points" lesson - if you look at the last word of each answer choice, you see multiple verb tenses: "were", "had been", and "have been". It's a verb tense problem, so situate the events in order and test the verb tenses to make sure they make logical sense. What really should happen here is:

First - the buildings were built, in violation of code
Second - last year, an earthquake damaged those buildings

Logically, the "have been" answer choices (C and D) don't make sense...the damaged buildings aren't currently being built in violation of code; the point of the sentence is that it's not surprising that many of those were damaged, as originally they had been built not up to code.

"Had been" perfectly summarizes this sequence of events. The buildings that WERE destroyed last year HAD (previously) BEEN constructed in violation of code. So B and E are looking like great choices. A...A just doesn't quite set that timeline up well enough. If you perhaps added the word "originally" after "were" you could effectively tell the reader the order of events, but as it is with just a simple past-tense "were", the meaning of the sentence isn't clear.


2) Check the meaning of the sentence! Perhaps the most glaring flaw in A, once you've noticed it, is that buildings cannot be both "destroyed AND heavily damaged". "Destroyed" already includes "heavily damaged" - just to a much higher degree. So A is illogical in its description, plus it has a dubious verb tense in "were".

Similarly, E has a real meaning problem, as it starts with the phrase "Last year". That modifier controls the entire subject-predicate relationship of "some of the buildings...had been constructed". But it's illogical to say that, all in the same year, these buildings were constructed and destroyed.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1