More than has any of its competitors, Dynacorp, which will release its annual earnings report on Friday, has staked its future on the business of bringing shale gas from formerly inaccessible locations like the Arctic to energy-hungry nations like India and China.
More than any of its competitors, Dynacorp, which will release its annual earnings report on Friday, is staking its future on the business of bringing shale gas from formerly inaccessible locations like the Arctic to energy-hungry nations like India and China.
Why first sentence is wrong even though ' staked' verb is implied in the sentence.
Please explain me the difference between two sentences.
Source : veritas
Thanks
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
ellipsis problem
This topic has expert replies
-
saranshpuri
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:32 am
- Thanked: 1 times
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
[email protected]
- Elite Legendary Member
- Posts: 10392
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
- Thanked: 2867 times
- Followed by:511 members
- GMAT Score:800
Hi saranshpuri,
The specific meaning and intent of the verb-phrases "has staked" and "is staking" represent the primary differences in these 2 sentences.
In the first sentence, we're told that "Dynacorp...has staked its future...." This implies something that Dynacorp did in the past, but the sentence also references something that Dynacorp will be doing in the future (...bringing shale gas....to...India and China). It's odd to use a past-tense verb to refer to something that will not only happen in the future, but will also happen continuously in the future (since Dynacorp will probably be bringing shale gas to India and China more than once).
In the second sentence, we're told that "Dynacorp...is staking its future..." The verb "staking" is sometimes referred to as a "timeless verb", meaning that it implies an event that takes place at more than one point in time. This implies that Dynacorp is doing something right now (staking its future) and will probably continue to do that thing tomorrow (still staking its future) and continue to do that thing for some time to come. This is the correct meaning and intent of the sentence.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
The specific meaning and intent of the verb-phrases "has staked" and "is staking" represent the primary differences in these 2 sentences.
In the first sentence, we're told that "Dynacorp...has staked its future...." This implies something that Dynacorp did in the past, but the sentence also references something that Dynacorp will be doing in the future (...bringing shale gas....to...India and China). It's odd to use a past-tense verb to refer to something that will not only happen in the future, but will also happen continuously in the future (since Dynacorp will probably be bringing shale gas to India and China more than once).
In the second sentence, we're told that "Dynacorp...is staking its future..." The verb "staking" is sometimes referred to as a "timeless verb", meaning that it implies an event that takes place at more than one point in time. This implies that Dynacorp is doing something right now (staking its future) and will probably continue to do that thing tomorrow (still staking its future) and continue to do that thing for some time to come. This is the correct meaning and intent of the sentence.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
