Niegra Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes. A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping C) reduces the phosphate amount that municipalities have been allowed to dump D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities Why A is wrong? Why can't this sentence be read as - 1972 agreement reduced the amount, the dumping amount which was allowed prior to 1972 agreement. What I mean to say - e.g. before 1972 , allowable quantity for dumping was X, 1972 agreement reduced this amount. OG says D is correct - Since the dumping continues into the present, the past perfect verb had been allowed should instead be the present are allowed I think D changes meaning. How one can assume that dumping still continues- there could be another agreement, which might have banned phosphate dumping altogether. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arangarajan Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 As per what you are saying OA should be A and not D. Please check the OA again. Choice A uses the past perfect Had been allowed which is in line with the simple past Reduced. I agree with your reasoning , choice D changes the meaning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCfobia Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Hello There, I do not know but I agree with D answer and here is why.. If been is used then it should be dumping and that is wrong with choice A. If something is still in action then I believe it should be have been. Had been means carried in past--- well I may sound stupid here -- Again the sentence is not saying that the agreement reduced the current dumping status. What all it is saying the agreement reduced the current amount. Whether that is implemented or not is out of scope of the sentence and is only an assumption. so agrrement reduced amount of ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kindergartenkid Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 I think it should be A. The event of "municipalities ...to dump" happened prior to "the agreement". Only A agrees with the sequence of tenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice cold Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 vote for "A". past perfect is required Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niegra Posted August 23, 2005 Author Share Posted August 23, 2005 As I said earlier- A is not correct . This question is from OG. So we can't doubt the answer key. In my original post I explained OG logic. Erin/800Bob please help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arangarajan Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Not sure why contradicting OA 's are posted.. Can someone verify if the OA is A or D.IMO it should be A Please refer to these threads for earlier discussions on this question. http://www.www.urch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28514&highlight=1972 http://www.www.urch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15408&highlight=1972 http://www.www.urch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=596&highlight=1972 http://www.www.urch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20406&highlight=phosphates Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arangarajan Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 As I said earlier- A is not correct . This question is from OG. So we can't doubt the answer key. In my original post I explained OG logic. Erin/800Bob please help! Can you please tell the OG question number. I am not able to find this question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
800Bob Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 I agree with D. An agreement cannot reduce the amount that had been allowed. That previous amount cannot be changed. There is an allowable amount. That amount was bigger before the agreement, and has been reduced as a result of the agreement. Analogy: Let's say the legislature has changed the speed limit. Which sounds better? 1) The legislature increased the maximum speed that one is allowed to drive. 2) The legislature increased the maximum speed that one had been allowed to drive. I'll go with 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niegra Posted August 24, 2005 Author Share Posted August 24, 2005 Can you please tell the OG question number. I am not able to find this question OG-11th Edition Question-62 I agree with D. An agreement cannot reduce the amount that had been allowed. That previous amount cannot be changed. There is an allowable amount. That amount was bigger before the agreement, and has been reduced as a result of the agreement. Analogy: Let's say the legislature has changed the speed limit. Which sounds better? 1) The legislature increased the maximum speed that one is allowed to drive. 2) The legislature increased the maximum speed that one had been allowed to drive. I'll go with 1. Thanks! It is clear now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arangarajan Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Thanks Bob, that explains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumeet_rana Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Nice Explanation Bob. I would have gone for D. Also is there a big difference in 11th edition of OG versus 10th edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
800Bob Posted August 25, 2005 Share Posted August 25, 2005 is there a big difference in 11th edition of OG versus 10th edition.The 11th edition has a lot fewer questions than the 10th edition, and most (about two thirds) of the questions in the 11th edition are taken from the 10th. But the explanations in the 11th edition are expanded and more detailed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erin Posted November 24, 2005 Share Posted November 24, 2005 Great discussions here. And special thanks to 800bob for sharing his great knowledge of the GMAT. It's nice to have another teacher here. :) If I may be allowed to jump in, I'd like to add my two cents. First, I should note that while you should not change the meaning of A, you will notice in some cases that the literal meaning of A is often illogical; in such cases, you may deviate from the original meaning of A. I think it would be more accurate to say that you should not change the intended meaning of A. Of course we could get into some philosophical discussions of intended meaning, but for the sake of raising your GMAT score, I think it's most productive to try to play along with GMAT. Second, to address this question, it doesn't make sense to use the past tense to refer to the result of the agreement; if you use the past tense, you are saying that the US and Canada agreed to retroactively change the amount of phosphates that could be dumped, which would in all likelihood have the effect of creating a lot of lawbreakers. ;) Since the vast majority of changes to laws are made such that the changes take place at some point in the future, you can safely assume that this is the case here as well. Using the present tense simply means that the new law is in effect right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somratp Posted December 31, 2006 Share Posted December 31, 2006 I love your explaination 800Bob's explaination. Concise and Clear =) Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
club700 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Imo D... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.