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

Redeem
TTP OnDemand GMAT Video Course
Featured Course

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.

  • 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
  • 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
  • 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
  • 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
  • 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
  • TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
  • 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
  • OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
  • Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
  • MBA Admissions Consulting now available
  • 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
  • 200,000+ students served
  • 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★ 5.0 (559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start then $127/mo
Start Free 5-Day Trial Read 559 Reviews →

past perfect usage

Expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 31 times
by paes » Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:28 am
In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year, and by the 1990's,this number rose to 3,000.

(A) this number rose

(B) the number had risen

(C) the amount had risen

(D) this number was raised

(E) the number of applications had risen

OA is B
Last edited by paes on Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:59 am
Pick B.

"this number", "the amount" and "the number of applications" are all wrong.

Hope that helps..
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:39 amFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 6 times

by pnk » Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:21 am
hardik.jadeja wrote:Pick B.

"this number", "the amount" and "the number of applications" are all wrong.

Hope that helps..
Do you mean : this numbers wrong bcoz it does not match with "applications";

"the number of applications" - is it bcoz of brevity or some other reason. Thanks
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Sat Jun 26, 2010 6:17 am
paes wrote:In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year, and by the 1990's,this number rose to 3,000.

(A) this number rose

(B) the number had risen

(C) the amount had risen

(D) this number was raised

(E) the number of applications had risen

OA Later
Hardik why using past perfect 2 times ?
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 6:42 am
pnk wrote: Do you mean : this numbers wrong bcoz it does not match with "applications";
"This number" is an incorrect reference. It should be the number, which correctly represents the number of applications per year.
pnk wrote: "the number of applications" - is it bcoz of brevity or some other reason. Thanks
Yes. the number is sufficient here. And in case, you want to expand it, then should have been "the number of applications per year".
nikhilkatira wrote: Hardik why using past perfect 2 times ?
In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year.

This sentence is in Past Tense, not in Past Perfect. HAD is used here as past tense of HAVE.

The first part of the sentence is in the past tense and the next part of the sentence is in the future, relative to the past event. Hence the corresponding tense 'rose' is incorrect. It has to be past participle, because the relationship is to a past event. So 'had risen' makes sense.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:46 am
Thanked: 2 times

by martin.jonson007 » Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:02 am
I believe

sentence will be correct only when it read like...

In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had had approximately 150 applications.....
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:08 am
hardik.jadeja wrote:
pnk wrote: Do you mean : this numbers wrong bcoz it does not match with "applications";
"This number" is an incorrect reference. It should be the number, which correctly represents the number of applications per year.
pnk wrote: "the number of applications" - is it bcoz of brevity or some other reason. Thanks
Yes. the number is sufficient here. And in case, you want to expand it, then should have been "the number of applications per year".
nikhilkatira wrote: Hardik why using past perfect 2 times ?
In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year.

This sentence is in Past Tense, not in Past Perfect. HAD is used here as past tense of HAVE.

The first part of the sentence is in the past tense and the next part of the sentence is in the future, relative to the past event. Hence the corresponding tense 'rose' is incorrect. It has to be past participle, because the relationship is to a past event. So 'had risen' makes sense.
Hardik I am not able to understand your explanation...I guess my SC is very weak..
can you explain in a better way...
I hope you dont mind..
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:25 am
nikhilkatira wrote: Hardik I am not able to understand your explanation...I guess my SC is very weak..
can you explain in a better way...
I hope you dont mind..
I am not an expert but let me try.. A past perfect tense sentence will always have multi-part verb. Eg: had risen, had eaten, had received, had had

The following sentence is written in present tense, not in present perfect tense.

I have two pencils. (I=subject; have=verb; two pencils=object)

Similarly, if you want to write the above sentence in past tense, then it would be

I had two pencils. (I=subject; had=verb; two pencils=object)

The following sentence is similar to the one above.

An elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year.
(An elite preschool in New York City=subject; had=verb; approximately 150 applications per year=object.)

Hope that helps..
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 31 times

by paes » Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:50 am
Jadeja,

I agree with your explanation (and I am able to discard A, C, D and E ), except for the usage of past perfect.

The first part

In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year, --> Simple past, event in 1970

Second part :
and by the 1990's, the number had risen to 3,000. -> the second event is later than 1970, so it can't be in past perfect.

Had the first part been in past perfect and second part in simple past then I will accept it.
OR
Because the two events are independent, so simple past in both the parts should work fine.


Please share your thoughts.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 10:11 am
Well, your reasoning makes sense. In that case all the options have issue. Whats the source?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:39 amFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 6 times

by pnk » Sat Jun 26, 2010 1:25 pm
paes wrote:Jadeja,

I agree with your explanation (and I am able to discard A, C, D and E ), except for the usage of past perfect.

The first part

In the 1970's an elite preschool in New York City had approximately 150 applications per year, --> Simple past, event in 1970

Second part :
and by the 1990's, the number had risen to 3,000. -> the second event is later than 1970, so it can't be in past perfect.

Had the first part been in past perfect and second part in simple past then I will accept it.
OR
Because the two events are independent, so simple past in both the parts should work fine.


Please share your thoughts.
I think 2nd part can be past perfect tense. Look at this constrution: The band U2 ws just just one of the many new groups on the rock musicscene in early 1980's, but less than ten yrs later, U2 had fully ecipsed its early rivals in the pantheon of popular music (source MGMAT). I think B is the right answer
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:48 pm
Location: Bangalore
Thanked: 6 times
GMAT Score:600

by viju9162 » Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:51 pm
Hi pnk,

But will it not contradict the past perfect and simple past. We use past perfect for the actions that happened prior to the past action.

But for events in 1990 - we are using past perfect. But, this happened after the 1970's event.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks,
Viju
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 31 times

by paes » Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:40 pm
hardik.jadeja wrote:Well, your reasoning makes sense. In that case all the options have issue. Whats the source?
Source is
Princeton test-2
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1