Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
OA:C
And suggests use of that to maintain parallelism, but use of that as well as it is confusing me, because that as well as it is referring to asteroid needlessly.
I stumbled upon C as well, but was not quite satisfied with myself. I was not able to set myself up with any other answer choice and hence C was my last resort.
Their ought to be a better way to nail this answer choice.
Can anybody help ?
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
All Option appear to be wrong..What to do !
This topic has expert replies
-
hifunda
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:05 pm
- Location: Chennai
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:5 members
IMHO,
'that' refers to 'scientists have identified that if it strikes earth...'
while:
'it' most certainly refers to the asteroid.
Hope it's clear, and with practice, the ear can usually pick out C as the best answer, compared to the rest of the answers which are wordy and riddled with mistakes of their own.
'that' refers to 'scientists have identified that if it strikes earth...'
while:
'it' most certainly refers to the asteroid.
Hope it's clear, and with practice, the ear can usually pick out C as the best answer, compared to the rest of the answers which are wordy and riddled with mistakes of their own.
-
dhonu121
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
- Thanked: 16 times
- Followed by:6 members
I feel that the sentence would have been correct if it were worded like this:
Scientists have indentified that... and that....
However, the current construction is not parallel with respect to that..
Scientists have indentified that... and that....
However, the current construction is not parallel with respect to that..
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
-
sam2304
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1239
- Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:25 am
- Thanked: 233 times
- Followed by:26 members
- GMAT Score:680
The construction is same as what you mentioned above.dhonu121 wrote:I feel that the sentence would have been correct if it were worded like this:
Scientists have indentified that... and that....
However, the current construction is not parallel with respect to that..
Scientists have identified an asteroid that is about half a mile wide and that could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
A/B - that parallelism is missing
D - if Earth is struck by it - passive construction
E - if it strikes earth, it - second it is ambiguous.
C is the best of all and very clear.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/
-
hifunda
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:05 pm
- Location: Chennai
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:5 members
Actually, this sentence does not follow parallelism like you said -
I hope you got it now.
rather, the first 'that' starts a modifier for the asteroid, the second 'that' is simply necessary to point out the identification that it could cause damage. It's about understanding the meaning, not just following the structure alone..Scientists have indentified that... and that....
I hope you got it now.
-
ankita1709
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:09 am
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:2 members
dhonu121 wrote:Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would- Isn't this wrong. asteroid is singular and were plural
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
OA:C
And suggests use of that to maintain parallelism, but use of that as well as it is confusing me, because that as well as it is referring to asteroid needlessly.
I stumbled upon C as well, but was not quite satisfied with myself. I was not able to set myself up with any other answer choice and hence C was my last resort.
Their ought to be a better way to nail this answer choice.
Can anybody help ?
Ankita
-
dhonu121
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
- Thanked: 16 times
- Followed by:6 members
Ankita,
The above usage of were is correct. It's a subjunctive mood usage and we use were in such cases rather than was.
eg:
If I were the president of US, I would have done this...
not If I was the president of US, I would have done this..
Hifunda:
I feel that in the above construction as Sam clearly pointed out, the part, if it were to strike earth, is a non-essential modifier and hence the use of that is parallel and correct in C.
I got it now.
Thanks All.
The above usage of were is correct. It's a subjunctive mood usage and we use were in such cases rather than was.
eg:
If I were the president of US, I would have done this...
not If I was the president of US, I would have done this..
Hifunda:
I feel that in the above construction as Sam clearly pointed out, the part, if it were to strike earth, is a non-essential modifier and hence the use of that is parallel and correct in C.
I got it now.
Thanks All.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
-
[email protected]
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:16 am
- Location: AAMCHI MUMBAI LOCAL
- Thanked: 63 times
- Followed by:14 members
Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
OA is no doubt a C. It took me less than a minute to figure out the answer.
Firstly, Parallelism needs to be maintained. The word 'that' makes the sentence parallel. 'That' refers to the asteroid and more details are given about the asteroid i.e its diameter as well as the next thing is its potential for disaster.
So options A and B get cancel out.
we are then left with options C, D and E.
Option D: the pronoun 'it' is ambigiously referring to Earth or the asteroid itself, is actually unknown. So option D gets canceled out.
Option E: When using conditionals, there are 4 rules for it.
First Rule: If clause is in the simple present tense and the then clause is in the simple future tense.
Second Rule: If clause is in the simple past tense and the then clause uses 'would' in the sentence.
Third Rule: If clause is in the Past Perfect Tense using 'had' in the sentence, and the then clause uses would + had in the sentence.
Fourth Rule: Usage of the Subjunctive mood in the sentence.
The option E is not using the correct technique and hence answer choice C serves that by using the subjunctive mood.
I hope that my post really helped to all the above guyzzzz...
in case yes, please acknowledge my post my clicking on the thanks button...
Thank you!!!
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
OA is no doubt a C. It took me less than a minute to figure out the answer.
Firstly, Parallelism needs to be maintained. The word 'that' makes the sentence parallel. 'That' refers to the asteroid and more details are given about the asteroid i.e its diameter as well as the next thing is its potential for disaster.
So options A and B get cancel out.
we are then left with options C, D and E.
Option D: the pronoun 'it' is ambigiously referring to Earth or the asteroid itself, is actually unknown. So option D gets canceled out.
Option E: When using conditionals, there are 4 rules for it.
First Rule: If clause is in the simple present tense and the then clause is in the simple future tense.
Second Rule: If clause is in the simple past tense and the then clause uses 'would' in the sentence.
Third Rule: If clause is in the Past Perfect Tense using 'had' in the sentence, and the then clause uses would + had in the sentence.
Fourth Rule: Usage of the Subjunctive mood in the sentence.
The option E is not using the correct technique and hence answer choice C serves that by using the subjunctive mood.
I hope that my post really helped to all the above guyzzzz...
in case yes, please acknowledge my post my clicking on the thanks button...
Thank you!!!
IT IS TIME TO BEAT THE GMAT
LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!
Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!
Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
-
[email protected]
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:16 am
- Location: AAMCHI MUMBAI LOCAL
- Thanked: 63 times
- Followed by:14 members
Also D is in the passive mood. Please see that what was supposed to say for E is said for D. please rectify that.
IT IS TIME TO BEAT THE GMAT
LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!
Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!
Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
-
hifunda
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:05 pm
- Location: Chennai
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:5 members
I disagree. 'That' is used for essential modifiers. However, you are right regarding the parallel structure. Anyway, glad you got it.Hifunda:
I feel that in the above construction as Sam clearly pointed out, the part, if it were to strike earth, is a non-essential modifier and hence the use of that is parallel and correct in C.
I got it now.
-
dhonu121
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
- Thanked: 16 times
- Followed by:6 members
Yes, that is used for essential modifiers and its exactly for this reason that,hifunda wrote:I disagree. 'That' is used for essential modifiers. However, you are right regarding the parallel structure. Anyway, glad you got it.Hifunda:
I feel that in the above construction as Sam clearly pointed out, the part, if it were to strike earth, is a non-essential modifier and hence the use of that is parallel and correct in C.
I got it now.
in the above choice C, which happens to be the correct choice also, that will modify the part starting from could do tremendous damage to part of the planet and not the part if it were to strike Earth
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
-
GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
If we omit the if clause from the OA, the parallelism is easier to see:dhonu121 wrote:Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
OA:C
And suggests use of that to maintain parallelism, but use of that as well as it is confusing me, because that as well as it is referring to asteroid needlessly.
I stumbled upon C as well, but was not quite satisfied with myself. I was not able to set myself up with any other answer choice and hence C was my last resort.
Their ought to be a better way to nail this answer choice.
Can anybody help ?
Scientists have identified an asteroid THAT is about half a mile wide and THAT could do tremendous damage but probably would not cause planet-wide destruction.
Of course, the if clause is needed to make it clear that all that follows is HYPOTHETICAL:
Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and that, IF IT WERE TO STRIKE EARTH, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
-
sachindia
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:39 am
- Location: Bengaluru, India
- Thanked: 6 times
- Followed by:3 members
- GMAT Score:640
Hi Mitch,GMATGuruNY wrote:If we omit the if clause from the OA, the parallelism is easier to see:dhonu121 wrote:Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
OA:C
And suggests use of that to maintain parallelism, but use of that as well as it is confusing me, because that as well as it is referring to asteroid needlessly.
I stumbled upon C as well, but was not quite satisfied with myself. I was not able to set myself up with any other answer choice and hence C was my last resort.
Their ought to be a better way to nail this answer choice.
Can anybody help ?
Scientists have identified an asteroid THAT is about half a mile wide and THAT could do tremendous damage but probably would not cause planet-wide destruction.
Of course, the if clause is needed to make it clear that all that follows is HYPOTHETICAL:
Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and that, IF IT WERE TO STRIKE EARTH, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
I understand C is correct but I don't understand why 'that' is omitted after 'but' and before 'would'..
Kindly help. .
Regards,
Sach
Sach
-
GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
Here's the intended meaning:sachindia wrote:
Hi Mitch,
I understand C is correct but I don't understand why 'that' is omitted after 'but' and before 'would'..
Kindly help. .
an asteroid that, IF IT WERE TO STRIKE EARTH, would probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
If we insert that after IF IT WERE TO STRIKE EARTH, we get:
an asteroid THAT would probably not cause planet-wide destruction.
Here, the condition if it were to strike earth is not part of the last clause.
Since this condition is needed to convey the intended meaning, the insertion of that before would is inappropriate.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
