Sentence Correction

Hi All,

Manhattan says that "Numbers of" is always wrong in GMAT. But if we see the below question OG-10, Q152, it seems that this rule does not fit in GMAT land....similar to "being always wrong" in GMAT...

Can someone please tell is "Numbers of" always wrong in GMAT or not ? or this particular question is an exception since numbers of is present in all the options.

When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970's, it was feared that scientists might inadvertently create an "Andromeda strain," a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it.

(A) it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it
(C) kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them
(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them

I think that the rule you mentioned works when you have to choose between "numbers of" and sth else as this expression is rarely used.
As for this question, it tests something different.

Is C the right answer?

the rule they talk about is a number of and the number of, so if a/the is there it can never be numbers of but only numbers of could be there as is this case...

C is right choice, it seems, as a microbe is the subject of the subordinate clause starting with that...and then and...compound statement, and them can not refer back to a microbe so D E are out,
A B are out because already a microbe is subject of both sentence it is not necessary to replicate ..

my 2 cents,,,

Alexandra S wrote:I think that the rule you mentioned works when you have to choose between "numbers of" and sth else as this expression is rarely used.
As for this question, it tests something different.

Is C the right answer?

Yes OA is "C"

maihuna wrote:the rule they talk about is a number of and the number of, so if a/the is there it can never be numbers of but only numbers of could be there as is this case...

C is right choice, it seems, as a microbe is the subject of the subordinate clause starting with that...and then and...compound statement, and them can not refer back to a microbe so D E are out,
A B are out because already a microbe is subject of both sentence it is not necessary to replicate ..

my 2 cents,,,

There are three rules in Manhattan regarding "number(s) of"
1. Numbers of = Always incorrect.
2. a number of = always plural.
3. The number of = singular.

But can someone please help me understand which one is better sentence:

1. A vast "numbers" of humans will be killed
2. A vast "number" of humans will be killed.

I also checked OG-10...there are quite a large number of places where OG uses numbers of...although they were not the part of underlined part of sentence....

Please help.

Experts kindly share your opinion.

It would be

A vast number of humans will be killed.

This is because 'a' points out the singularity. However, this sentence is also valid:

Vast numbers of humans will be killed.

Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of"....

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?

goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of"....

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?

Actually, I don't think it's ever a good idea to kick out a sentence just because a certain phrase is present. The English language has more than its fair share of quirks, and there are bound to be certain exceptions.

I'm in a bit of a hurry, so I'll answer your second question a bit later.

goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of"....

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?

Goel,
WHy you want explanation for some manhattan tricks? they have made certain rules like that, and they all are situational, I do not think numbers of is wrong sort of think,

pm stacey, she should clarify...

maihuna wrote:

goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of"....

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?

Goel,
WHy you want explanation for some manhattan tricks? they have made certain rules like that, and they all are situational, I do not think numbers of is wrong sort of think,

pm stacey, she should clarify...

Thanks Maihuna...I will pm to Stacey...

Please note that Manhattan in their S-V and idiom list clearly says that numbers of is wrong....

I am not sure about the new edition of Manhattan but the book that I am using says so....

Thanks Stacey.

Can you please look into the following post...there it seems the correct answer is D...

but it contains "the highest numbers of"

Does intrusion of highest between numbers and the...makes it correct here...

https://www.beatthegmat.com/numbers-of-f ... tml#164390