tough sc

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:16 am

tough sc

by replayyyy » Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:33 am
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.

(A) that they will, or could,
(B) that they would, or could,
(C) they will be or could
(D) think that they will be or could
(E) think the power stations would or could

OA is D regardless of that "they" in it, which in my opinion could refer to either power stations or journalists (little possibility but there is one). E leaves no place for confusion like that. However, it is considered wrong. Why ?!

User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:18 am
replayyyy wrote: OA is D regardless of that "they" in it, which in my opinion could refer to either power stations or journalists (little possibility but there is one). E leaves no place for confusion like that. However, it is considered wrong. Why ?!
I understand THEY is not ambiguous (bit vague though). This is an issue of Logical Interpretation and Parallelism.

When you say "would or could" this does not make sense. As these two words WOULD and COULD are meant for hypothetical supposition.

Logically there is no difference between "I would go" and "I could go". Both means there is a possibility of me going but not definite. So there is no point in the corresponding usage.

Where as in D one part is DEFINITE (will be) and other part is a POSSIBILITY (could be), this clearly makes sense.

Also "would be or could be" is parallel. BE is required in both of the part of OR.
If the problem is Easy Respect it, if the problem is tough Attack it

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:16 am

by replayyyy » Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:23 am
shovan85 wrote:
replayyyy wrote: OA is D regardless of that "they" in it, which in my opinion could refer to either power stations or journalists (little possibility but there is one). E leaves no place for confusion like that. However, it is considered wrong. Why ?!
I understand THEY is not ambiguous (bit vague though). This is an issue of Logical Interpretation and Parallelism.

When you say "would or could" this does not make sense. As these two words WOULD and COULD are meant for hypothetical supposition.

Logically there is no difference between "I would go" and "I could go". Both means there is a possibility of me going but not definite. So there is no point in the corresponding usage.

Where as in D one part is DEFINITE (will be) and other part is a POSSIBILITY (could be), this clearly makes sense.

Also "would be or could be" is parallel. BE is required in both of the part of OR.
stated this way ... yes, D is preferable. Thanx for the explanation

User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:32 am
replayyyy wrote: stated this way ... yes, D is preferable. Thanx for the explanation
D is Correct. I am not supporting OA as its bit confusing, but I am sure E is definitely wrong (mostly because of parallelism).
If the problem is Easy Respect it, if the problem is tough Attack it