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

Redeem

Congress is debating a bill

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Kolkata, India
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:5 members

Congress is debating a bill

by pesfunk » Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:34 pm
Congress is debating a bill requiring certain employers provide workers with unpaid leave so as to care for sick or newborn children.

A provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
B to provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
C provide workers with unpaid leave in order that they
D to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can
E provide workers with unpaid leave and

[spoiler]Isn't D ambiguous pointing to both employers and workers ?

I chose B over D[/spoiler]
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:33 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by vijaynaik » Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:36 pm
SO AS TO is incorrect idiom.

So D is the better option. Even i felt 'they' is ambiguous. But i had to pick the best of the worst.
There must be some explanation to it :)
Top
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:07 pm
pesfunk wrote:Congress is debating a bill requiring certain employers provide workers with unpaid leave so as to care for sick or newborn children.

A provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
B to provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
C provide workers with unpaid leave in order that they
D to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can
E provide workers with unpaid leave and

[spoiler]Isn't D ambiguous pointing to both employers and workers ?

I chose B over D[/spoiler]
This is NOT a test of subjunctive mood so we can discard A, C, and E.

As per B the usage of "so as to" is wrong. In GMAT correct usage of IDIOM is "so (adjective) as to (verb)".

The taste of the sauce was so spicy as to obliterate the taste of the food.

Answer is D. "They" seems ambiguous but it is not. I don't remember the video workshop by RON (Thursday with RON) but he said that the Pronoun ambiguity is tolerated in this kind of cases.

Here THEY refers to immediate Antecedent and which is the correct INTENDED meaning. It correctly refers to workers.

Suppose somehow if "They" would have refered back to Employers then the Ambiguity would not have been accepted.

Rule is: See the immediate Antecedent. Logically correct then it is not violation of Pronoun Ambiguity.
If the problem is Easy Respect it, if the problem is tough Attack it
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Kolkata, India
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:5 members

by pesfunk » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:46 am
Since we cannot measure the tolerable limit of GMAT, I guess I will then end up getting this wrong always.

shovan85 wrote:
pesfunk wrote:Congress is debating a bill requiring certain employers provide workers with unpaid leave so as to care for sick or newborn children.

A provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
B to provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
C provide workers with unpaid leave in order that they
D to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can
E provide workers with unpaid leave and

[spoiler]Isn't D ambiguous pointing to both employers and workers ?

I chose B over D[/spoiler]
This is NOT a test of subjunctive mood so we can discard A, C, and E.

As per B the usage of "so as to" is wrong. In GMAT correct usage of IDIOM is "so (adjective) as to (verb)".

The taste of the sauce was so spicy as to obliterate the taste of the food.

Answer is D. "They" seems ambiguous but it is not. I don't remember the video workshop by RON (Thursday with RON) but he said that the Pronoun ambiguity is tolerated in this kind of cases.

Here THEY refers to immediate Antecedent and which is the correct INTENDED meaning. It correctly refers to workers.

Suppose somehow if "They" would have refered back to Employers then the Ambiguity would not have been accepted.

Rule is: See the immediate Antecedent. Logically correct then it is not violation of Pronoun Ambiguity.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:20 pm
Thanked: 74 times
Followed by:4 members

by uwhusky » Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:10 am
Here you go:

https://www.beatthegmat.com/erosion-of-e ... 38928.html
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-sc-questi ... t9375.html
https://www.beatthegmat.com/parallel-con ... 20369.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/pyramids-of-g ... 85840.html

These are OG questions and they all have similar construction.
Yep.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1