The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices, but officials of the organization just recently announced that the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginning of next year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day
A. year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output
B. year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed
C. year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed
D. year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output
E. year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output
OA after some discussion!
OPEC gone Crazy!
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
- Thanked: 17 times
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
IMO E
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices, but officials of the organization just recently announced that the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginning of next year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day
A. year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output
B. year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed
C. year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed
D. year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output
E. year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices, but officials of the organization just recently announced that the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginning of next year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day
A. year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output
B. year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed
C. year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed
D. year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output
E. year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output
- viju9162
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:48 pm
- Location: Bangalore
- Thanked: 6 times
- GMAT Score:600
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
Why not the answer "C"? if the output, ......, [then] would/were be trimmed
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
- Thanked: 17 times
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
Acc. to MGMAT, construction involving if and would together is wrong.viju9162 wrote:Why not the answer "C"? if the output, ......, [then] would/were be trimmed
- viju9162
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:48 pm
- Location: Bangalore
- Thanked: 6 times
- GMAT Score:600
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
thanks Madhur.. So if ....[then] were is valid right? It is only with "would" is not possible..
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
- Thanked: 17 times
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
Yes, it is valid. But it can be gramatically wrong according to statement.viju9162 wrote:thanks Madhur.. So if ....[then] were is valid right? It is only with "would" is not possible..
But If and would can never come together.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:32 am
- Location: Mumbai
- Thanked: 2 times
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices, but officials of the organization just recently announced that the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginning of next year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day
A. year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output
B. year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed
C. year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed
D. year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output
E. year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output
A. year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output
B. year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed
C. year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed
D. year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output
E. year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output
- rsadana1
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:52 pm
- Thanked: 16 times
- Followed by:9 members
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
1)The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction {in output} to bolster sagging oil prices,
2)but officials {of the organization} just recently announced
3)that the group will pare daily production {by 1.5 million barrels} {by the beginning of next year},
4)but only if non-OPEC nations, {including Norway, Mexico, and Russia,} were to trim output {by a total of 500,000 barrels a day}
IMO Answer E
Notice the sentence construction – …group will pare…if “non-OPEC nations do something”
This is similar to the construction – if “something happens”, then “something else will happen”
Since the non-underlined sentence is future tense – “will pare”, the underlined portion must include simple present in the “if” clause. And hence Choice E is correct “trim output”
Why other choices are incorrect?
Choice A – if ..were.., then ..will pare… => which is incorrect. If were, then would. Also, but appears to be redundant with “if” already present to express the condition.
Choice B – “is trimmed” – is passive construction. Should avoid passive construction since non-underlined portion is in active voice. “the group will pare..”
Choice C – “would be trimmed” – is passive construction. Same reasoning as B. In addition, since the non-underlined sentence is future tense – “will pare”, the underlined portion must include simple present in the “if” clause and not past tense.
Choice D – “were trimming” – is incorrect since past tense is incorrect and furthermore continuous tense does not make sense in this context.
2)but officials {of the organization} just recently announced
3)that the group will pare daily production {by 1.5 million barrels} {by the beginning of next year},
4)but only if non-OPEC nations, {including Norway, Mexico, and Russia,} were to trim output {by a total of 500,000 barrels a day}
IMO Answer E
Notice the sentence construction – …group will pare…if “non-OPEC nations do something”
This is similar to the construction – if “something happens”, then “something else will happen”
Since the non-underlined sentence is future tense – “will pare”, the underlined portion must include simple present in the “if” clause. And hence Choice E is correct “trim output”
Why other choices are incorrect?
Choice A – if ..were.., then ..will pare… => which is incorrect. If were, then would. Also, but appears to be redundant with “if” already present to express the condition.
Choice B – “is trimmed” – is passive construction. Should avoid passive construction since non-underlined portion is in active voice. “the group will pare..”
Choice C – “would be trimmed” – is passive construction. Same reasoning as B. In addition, since the non-underlined sentence is future tense – “will pare”, the underlined portion must include simple present in the “if” clause and not past tense.
Choice D – “were trimming” – is incorrect since past tense is incorrect and furthermore continuous tense does not make sense in this context.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:32 pm
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:1 members
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
IMO E.
A and B - BUT ONLY - Wrong
C - If and would are in the same clause. WRONG.
D - WERE TRIMMING OUTPUT. There is no hypothetical situation here.
E - CORRECT
A and B - BUT ONLY - Wrong
C - If and would are in the same clause. WRONG.
D - WERE TRIMMING OUTPUT. There is no hypothetical situation here.
E - CORRECT
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 7:14 am
- Thanked: 1 times
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
- [email protected]
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:44 pm
- Thanked: 5 times
- Followed by:3 members
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices
, but officials of the organization just recently announced that
the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginning of next year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day
The subject verb pairs have been highlighted. Now let's move to POE.
A.year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output - Comma + but here is connecting an indep clause with a dep clause. This is incorrect usage. That structure connects 2 indep clauses. The then clause uses future tense so we need present tense in the if clause.
B.year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed - Same structural error with comma + but. Singular verb includes refers to plural subject nations.Is trimmed is past tense.
C.year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed - Would be trimmed is incorrect.
D.year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output - Were trimming is incorrect. Same verb pronoun antecedent incompatibility error as in B.
E.year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output - Correct.
, but officials of the organization just recently announced that
the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginning of next year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day
The subject verb pairs have been highlighted. Now let's move to POE.
A.year, but only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output - Comma + but here is connecting an indep clause with a dep clause. This is incorrect usage. That structure connects 2 indep clauses. The then clause uses future tense so we need present tense in the if clause.
B.year, but only if the output of non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, is trimmed - Same structural error with comma + but. Singular verb includes refers to plural subject nations.Is trimmed is past tense.
C.year only if the output of non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, would be trimmed - Would be trimmed is incorrect.
D.year only if non-OPEC nations, which includes Norway, Mexico, and Russia, were trimming output - Were trimming is incorrect. Same verb pronoun antecedent incompatibility error as in B.
E.year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output - Correct.