Tricky SC Grail question - Expert Request - Page 2 - The Beat The GMAT Forum

Tricky SC Grail question - Expert Request

Expert replies

mundasingh123: Legendary Member; Posts: 2330; Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 amFollowed by: 26 members; Thanked: 56 times

by mundasingh123 » Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:16 pm

Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:
Hi bRian had this law been enacted , would the use of "will " have been justified ?
Yes! Because at that point the law WILL do something:

The new budget, passed yesterday by Congress, will devote twice as much funding to...

The recently-passed law will require all citizens to...

At the point that the law is definite, its results "will" be what they are. But if it's proposed, then "would" is better because it's still uncertain.

Just to confirm , do i take it as a rule ,then , that if a law has been enacted , "will" is to be used

I Seek Explanations Not Answers

Like this post

mirantdon: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 135; Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 9:00 amFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 4 times; GMAT Score:700

by mirantdon » Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:08 am

Thanks a lot Brian . I picked B too . !

Like this post

Brian@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 1031; Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pmFollowed by: 255 members; Location: Malibu, CA; Thanked: 716 times; GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:40 am

Hey mundasingh,

Yes...with a caveat - it's not a 100% absolute rule because there are bound to be some logical uses of would, like:

Pundits predicted that the law would never make it through both houses of Congress, but in actuality it passed quite easily.

Here the law itself has been passed, but "would" is logical because it's a past/conditional usage.

So...in the context that we've been discussing it, you're absolutely right, but be careful and keep logic in mind when you see situations like this in the future. I'd advocate paying attention to the differences between answer choices when it comes to meaning and not only looking for what you expect to see. The GMAT is pretty slick about subtle-but-definitely-illogical meaning differences, and to me they're a lot easier to spot in context, one versus the other, than they are to anticipate well in advance.

Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.

Like this post

mundasingh123: Legendary Member; Posts: 2330; Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 amFollowed by: 26 members; Thanked: 56 times

by mundasingh123 » Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:52 am

Pundits predicted that the law would never make it through both houses of Congress, but in actuality it passed quite easily.

Here the law itself has been passed, but "would" is logical because it's a past/conditional usage.

Hi Brian so at the time the pundits must have predicted , " The law will never make it through ... "
Since the sentence is reporting some event in the past , the future tense is changed to conditional

when we are reporting past events such as the one you have spoken about in the example above , do we never bring in issues of hypothetical situations.
What i means is "dont we use "would" because the pundits predicted that something will hold true but in fact the event doesnt hold take place .
Basically i am mixing issues of Hypothetical aspect of would with the conditional aspect of would

I Seek Explanations Not Answers

Like this post

rishijhawar: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 138; Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm; Thanked: 1 times

by rishijhawar » Sat Jul 09, 2011 4:29 am

Brian, i still feel the usage of will is ok as the word "proposed" takes care of the uncertainty of what would happen.
Please correct me if i am wrong.

Like this post

blackjack: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 40; Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 6:12 am; Thanked: 2 times

by blackjack » Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:27 am

aspirant2011 wrote:
Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Hey mundasingh,

Thanks for the PM! Interesting - you know...I wonder how well-written this question is in a GMAT context. Everyone's saying 'B' but my first thought on this is that "would" should be better than "will" because it's a "proposed" law, so we don't know for sure that anything WILL happen...just what WOULD happen if the law does, indeed, come to fruition. And that would eliminate B (and C).

I'd say that E, then, has an awkward meaning with "repeal AND modify" laws, since once it's repealed it's gone...there's nothing left to modify. So "OR" in A and D is preferable. I'd say that they're probably going for A...I don't even know that I'm completely against the idiom in D like so many are, but the meaning is a little off. They're not repealing these tax breaks to directly lower tax rates...that's a different step altogether. So the phrasing "so that tax rates could be lowered across the board", by introducing another verb, seems more logical with the intended meaning.

So that's my explanation for A... As with any practice problem the process is probably much more important than the result, so hopefully the logic makes sense. I know that my answer contradicts the supposed "OA" but I'm pretty confident in the process here on this question...
Hi Brian,

Request you to clarify on one thing i.e can would & could used in the same sentence????? please share the examples for such usage

---------

I have the same doubt. Would and could in the same sentence???????

Like this post

rishijhawar: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 138; Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm; Thanked: 1 times

by rishijhawar » Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:00 pm

Brian, i still feel the usage of will is ok as the word "proposed" takes care of the uncertainty of what would happen.
Please correct me if i am wrong.

Like this post

rishijhawar: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 138; Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 pm; Thanked: 1 times

by rishijhawar » Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:21 pm

Brian, thanks for great explanation on "so as to". However, I still have a doubt:
If i understood your explanation correctly, there must be a direct cause effect relationship to ensure correct usage of so as to.
i think this is what you meant in your example" "I put on boots (CAUSE) so as to keep my feet dry (EFFECT) while hiking.
Going by the same logic, can't we derive the following:
I repealed tax breaks (CAUSE) so as to lower taxes across the board (EFFECT).
I agree with your explanation, but just curious to make sure that I understood 100% so as to answer the usage correctly on test day.

Like this post

sahilchaudhary: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 153; Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:13 amFollowed by: 7 members; Location: India; Thanked: 22 times; GMAT Score:540

by sahilchaudhary » Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:14 am

Thanks Brian for such an awesome explanation for the question and to the queries posted by the members of BTG.

Long Live BTG!

Sahil Chaudhary
If you find this post helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Thank" icon.
https://www.sahilchaudhary007.blocked

Like this post

Post new topic Locked

GMAT Course Reviews

559 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (560 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review