Sentence Correction

The tourism commission has conducted surveys of hotels in the most popular resorts, with the ultimate goal of reducing the guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the service in the hotels .

(A) with the ultimate goal of reducing the guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the service in the hotels.
(B) with the goal to ultimately reduce the number of guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service
(C) ultimately with the goal to reduce expressions of overall dissatisfaction by the guests with the hotel service
(D) in an ultimate attempt to reduce the number of guests that ends up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service
(E) with the ultimate goal of reducing the number of guests who express overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service

the correct answer is E.

I spot the first split as " goal to" vs. "goal of" and considered "goal to" to be the correct idiomatic way, which leads me to choose B. The explanation in OG2017 suggests that the placement of "ultimately" is awkward and unidiomatic. Can someone explain the reasons why E is better then B?

bubblehead0922 wrote:
the correct answer is E.

I spot the first split as " goal to" vs. "goal of" and considered "goal to" to be the correct idiomatic way, which leads me to choose B. The explanation in OG2017 suggests that the placement of "ultimately" is awkward and unidiomatic. Can someone explain the reasons why E is better then B?

(B) with the goal to ultimately reduce the number of guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service
(E) with the ultimate goal of reducing the number of guests who express overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service


the contest in the options of this question is over the meaning.
Ultimate goal Vs Ultimate reduction.
When you shit ultimate from goal to reduction you should notice that there is a subtle shift in the meaning.

Adding Some more information -
Reducing the guests and reducing the number of guests.

Many will argue that GMAC doesn't tests article, but I have seen in one or two questions that they do.
Here the introduction of the definite article "the" in few choices: B, D, and E has corrected the meaning error. It is not all guests that needs to be reduced, but more specifically those who complaints their numbers needs to be reduced.
Notice the shift in meaning "their numbers" needs to be reduced.

With that said we are down to B, D, and E.

We have already discussed why B should be eliminated.

We are don to D and E.

I think in D and E - It is that Vs Who
WHO is correct. I am snot sure If that could also be correct here, but certainly who is better.

In all options after the COMMA we have
with_______
in_________
ultimately(Verb+Ing)

All three are adverbial and do not creates any modifier errors. Some expert can verify this.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

bubblehead0922 wrote:The tourism commission has conducted surveys of hotels in the most popular resorts, with the ultimate goal of reducing the guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the service in the hotels .

(A) with the ultimate goal of reducing the guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the service in the hotels.
(B) with the goal to ultimately reduce the number of guests who end up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service
(C) ultimately with the goal to reduce expressions of overall dissatisfaction by the guests with the hotel service
(D) in an ultimate attempt to reduce the number of guests that ends up expressing overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service
(E) with the ultimate goal of reducing the number of guests who express overall dissatisfaction with the hotels' service

In A, reducing the guests implying the GUESTS are to be made smaller in size.
This meaning is nonsensical.
Eliminate A.

Generally, an infinitive modifier serves to express INTENT.
B and C: with the goal to reduce
Here, the infinite modifier in red implies that the goal is intended TO REDUCE something.
This meaning is nonsensical: a goal cannot be used to reduce something.
Eliminate B and C.

D: the number...that ends up ends up expressing dissatisfaction
Here, the portions in red imply that an actual number -- 100, 1000, etc. -- is EXPRESSING dissatisfaction.
This meaning is nonsensical.
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is E.

OA: with the ultimate goal of reducing the number of guests
Here, the modifier in blue describes not the intent of the goal but the NATURE of the goal.
What KIND of goal?
The goal OF REDUCING THE NUMBER OF GUESTS.
This meaning makes sense.

Hi GMATGuru,

'with...' modification usually is used to serve as HOW the action is done. However, in the above sentence it is nonsensical to say that

How has the commission conducted the surveys?

The commission has conducted the survey with the goal of reducing........... The answer does not reflect How the survey conducted.

Can you clarify 'with....' modification?

Thanks

Mo2men wrote: Hi GMATGuru,

'with...' modification usually is used to serve as HOW the action is done. However, in the above sentence it is nonsensical to say that

How has the commission conducted the surveys?

The commission has conducted the survey with the goal of reducing........... The answer does not reflect How the survey conducted.

Can you clarify 'with....' modification?

Thanks

Generally, COMMA + with serves to introduce something that ACCOMPANIES the preceding action.
OA: The tourism commission has conducted surveys of hotels, with the ultimate goal of reducing the number of guests who express overall dissatisfaction.
Here, COMMA + with serves to introduce the GOAL that accompanies the preceding action (has conducted).
In this sense, the COMMA + with modifier can be said to express HOW the surveys have been conducted.
Question:
HOW have the surveys been conducted?
Answer:
They have been conducted WITH A PARTICULAR GOAL (reducing the number of guests who express overall dissatisfaction).

Hello GMATGuruNY, B says "to ultimately reduce".

Wanted to check with you if this comes under the category of split infinitive and could this be another reason to eliminate B?

iongmat wrote:Hello GMATGuruNY, B says "to ultimately reduce".

Wanted to check with you if this comes under the category of split infinitive and could this be another reason to eliminate B?

Traditional grammar holds that an adverb such as ultimately should not be positioned between the to-portion of an infinitive and the verb portion.
Such a construction is known as a split infinitive.
But in recent years the GMAT has become less strict about this sort of rule.
The modern GMAT is concerned more with clarity of meaning than with arcane grammar rules, and the splitting of an infinitive does not result in any loss of meaning or clarity.
For this reason, I would not eliminate an answer choice simply because it contains a split infinitive.

Thanks. Can you give an example from GMAT where an option with split infinitive is correct?

iongmat wrote:Thanks. Can you give an example from GMAT where an option with split infinitive is correct?

To my knowledge, no OA has included a split infinitive.
But recent OAs have included other constructions that were once considered incorrect.
For an example, check my post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/although-she ... 84514.html
To repeat:
The modern GMAT is concerned more with clarity of meaning than with arcane grammar rules.
For this reason, I would not eliminate an answer choice simply because it contains a split infinitive.

Hi Mitch, can you advice in which context have you provided the link? Which error is GMAT now ok with?

iongmat wrote:Hi Mitch, can you advice in which context have you provided the link? Which error is GMAT now ok with?

In years past, it was considered incorrect for a subject pronoun (such as he) to refer to a antecedent possessive (such as John's).
In the OA to SC138 in the OG16, she serves to refer to Elizabeth Barrett Browning's, indicating that it is now permissible for a subject pronoun to refer to an antecedent possessive.