longlong

To me the problem lies on the use of modifier in the frist phrase of the parallel structure. A is amibiguous because it suggests that "a resonably quick resolution of" could potential modify "confidentiality" after the comma. B suffers from the same ambiguity: "dramatic reduction of confidentiality"?? C & E same problem: "dramatically reduced confidentiality"?? Only D aviod the ambiguity by putting confidentiality first. Please comment on whether my reasoning make sense. Thanks, Ron

What an idiot I am!!! Thanks for clearing up my confusion. I guess not only my CR need work but also my reading comprehension! Ron

Thanks all for your valuable advice. I guess we can safely conclude that relative pronoun NEED to be placed as close to what it modify as possible, or else distorted means is imminent. Also the reason why E is incorrect is not what the [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip] answer suggested, but rather is because it shifted the meaning of what the orginal sentence intended. Thanks, Ron

Thanks lynn, the [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip] explaination did mention as you suggested. However, my question is rather concerning about the explaination [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip] gives. What I don't understand is what exactly does correctly subordinates sleeping and moving to hangs means? Thanks for your advice anyway. Ron

Evensflow: I understand that it's a Subjunctive question. But that is not where my problem is. As stated in my original post, my problem is how to determine what word "which" is modifying. And why the [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip] is saying "Which" is modifying funding in E. To me, as brstorewala suggested, "which" modifies the noun immediate before it. Thanks for your advice anyway. Anyone else care to comment on it? Ron

Among the more effective kinds of publicity that publishers can get for a new book is to have excerpts of it published in a high-circulation magazine soon before the book is published. The benefits of such excerption include not only a sure increase in sales but also a fee paid by the magazine to the book's publisher. Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above? (A) The number of people for whom seeing an excerpt of a book in a magazine provides an adequate substitute for reading the whole book is smaller than the number for whom the excerpt stimulates a desire to read the book. (B) Because the financial advantage of excerpting a new book in a magazine usually accrues to the book's publisher, magazine editors are unwilling to publish excerpts from new books. © In calculating the total number of copies that a book has sold, publishers include sales of copies of magazines that featured an excerpt of the book. (D) The effectiveness of having excerpts of a book published in a magazine, measured in terms of increased sales of a book, is proportional to the circulation of the magazine in which the excerpts are published. (E) Books that are suitable for excerpting in high- circulation magazines sell more copies than books that are not suitable for excerpting. Ans: A The arguement concluded that posting excerpt in popular magazine a) could increase sale, b) would result in fee paid by the magazine to the publisher. I tends not to agree with A. A said more people will have the desire to read the book than people staisfied with only the excerpt. Yes, it is reasonable to believe that some people with the desire to read the book will indeed buy the book. However, it is just a possibility. Not a definitely fact. Both C and D is a possible candidate to be correct answer. C indicates that the publisher count the circulation of the magazine into the total book sale calculation. It fits the condition a) in the conclusion. It is not implication, but is stated as fact. D indicates the effectiveness of publishing excerpt in magazine which is measured in - in other word "equivalent to" - the increase of sale of book and is proportional to the magazine circulation. Therefore, the magazine circulation is directly translated to increase in book sale, a conclusion that fits condition a). I am totally lost in this question. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Ron

Hotco oil burners, designed to be used in asphalt plants, are so efficient that Hotco will sell one to the Clifton Asphalt plant for no payment other than the cost savings between the total amount the asphalt plant actually paid for oil using its former burner during the last two years and the total amount it will pay for oil using the Hotco burner during the next two years. On installation, the plant will make an esti- mated payment, which will be adjusted after two years to equal the actual cost savings. Which of the following, if it occurred, would consti- tute a disadvantage for Hotco of the plan described above? (A) Another manufacturer's introduction to the market of a similarly efficient burner (B) The Clifton Asphalt plant's need for more than one new burner © Very poor efficiency in the Clifton Asphalt plant's old burner (D) A decrease in the demand for asphalt (E) A steady increase in the price of oil beginning soon after the new burner is installed Ans: E I am having problem understand why E would constitute a disadvantage for Hotco . The amount of money will Hotco receive is equal to the oil saving in last 2 year + the oil cost in the next 2 years. Therefore, the higher the oil price in the next 2 year will yield more money pay to Hotco. Logically, I think it is to the advantage of Hotco instead of disadvantaging hotco. To me the only possible answer is D where reduction in Asphalt demand would imple less production by Clifton which result in less oil used to create Asphalt. Hence reduction on Hotco ultimate receivable. Does my reasoning make sense? Ron

Linda, My guess is that the correct answer support to provide the link between the availablity of salt to the blood pressure. In A, it is clearly indicate the availability of salt and the low blood pressure level among those who live there. But in D, it does not really tell you Yoruba is short with salt supply. Being far from sea and far from Saharan salt mines does not automatically imply low salt availability. Perhaps, they have salt mine available locally. You can at most conclude that they are low in blood pressure, but certainly not conclude that they are short in salt supply. Hope this help. Ron

164. The commission proposed that funding for the park's development, which could be open to the public early next year, is obtained through a local bond issue. (A) that funding for the park's development, which could be open to the public early next year, is (B) that funding for development of the park, which could be open to the public early next year, be © funding for the development of the park, perhaps open to the public early next year, to be (D) funds for the park's development, perhaps open to the public early next year, be (E) development funding for the park, which could be open to the public early next year, is to be Choice B is best. Choice A attaches the relative clause which could be open ... to the noun development, when, in fact, it is the park that could be open. Choice C omits that, the object of proposed that is needed to introduce the clause describing the proposal. C also uses to be unidiomatically where be is correct: the commission proposed [that] funding ... to be obtained is wrong. Choice D incorrectly uses perhaps open to the public ... to modify development; the phrase should modify park. Choice E, which seriously distorts meaning, says that the commission proposed development funding and that such funding could be open to the public.... I know that A and E are both wrong. What I don't understand is how do we determine which object the relative clause which... is modifying. In A, the [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip] say it modify the noun development, but in E, it seems to indicate which is refering to the noun park. Is there any guiding principle on how to determin what object does the relative clause which ... modify? Ron

Pardon my ignorance in English. I am having problem understanding the following question from the [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip]. 163. Found throughout Central and South America, sloths hang from trees by long rubbery limbs and sleep fifteen hours a day. moving infrequently enough that two species of algae grow on its coat and between its toes. (A) sloths hang from trees by long rubbery limbs and sleep fifteen hours a day, moving infrequently enough (B) sloths hang from trees by long rubbery limbs, they sleep fifteen hours a day, and with such infrequent movements © sloths use their long rubbery limbs to hang from trees, sleep fifteen hours a day, and move so infrequently (D) the sloth hangs from trees by its long rubbery limbs, sleeping fifteen hours a day and moving so infrequently (E) the sloth hangs from trees by its long rubbery limbs, sleeps fifteen hours a day, and it moves infrequently enough The [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip] explaination goes like this: D, the best choice, correctly subordinates sleeping and moving to hangs while using the idiomatically correct phrasing so (infrequently) that.... The pronoun its shows clearly that the limbs belong to the sloth, not the trees. Choice A illogically coordinates hang and sleep and, like E, uses the unidiomatic expression infrequently enough that. B creates an awkward and nonparallel series: sloths hang ..., they sleep ..., and with.... C creates a confusing and absurd image with use their... limbs to hang ..., sleep ..., and move .... A, B, and C all mistakenly use the plural sloths, which does not agree , with its coat and... its toes. E wrongly coordinates hangs and sleeps and violates parallelism by inserting it before moves to create a new independent clause. Well, what exactly does correctly subordinates sleeping and moving to hangs means? Does the present participle sleeping and moving modify the verb hangs?? What exactly is the role of these participles in this sentence gramatically? How does these three actions hangs, sleep, and move related together? Thanks, Ron

Thanks! Ron

It is widely assumed that a museum is helped finan- cially when a generous patron donates a potential exhibit. In truth, however, donated objects require storage space, which is not free, and routine conser- vation, which is rather expensive. Therefore, such gifts exacerbate rather than lighten the demands made on a museum's financial resources. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above? (A) To keep patrons well disposed, a museum will find it advisable to put at least some donated objects on exhibit rather than merely in storage. (B) The people who are most likely to donate valu- able objects to a museum are also the people who are most likely to make cash gifts to it. © A museum cannot save money by resorting to cheap storage under less than adequate con- ditions, because so doing would drive up the cost of conservation. (D) Patrons expect a museum to keep donated objects in its possession rather than to raise cash by selling them. (E) Objects donated by a patron to a museum are often of such importance that the museum would be obliged to add them to its collec- tion through purchase if necessary. Why the answer is E but not B? Ron

Anyone can help me in this question? Thanks, Ron Industrialists from the country Distopia were accused of promoting the Distopian intervention in the Arcadian civil war merely to insure that the industrialists' facilities in Arcadia made substantial profits during the war. Yet this cannot be the motive since, as the Distopians foresaw, Distopia's federal expenses for the intervention were eight billion dollars, whereas, during the war, profits from the Distopian industrialists’ facilities in Arcadia totaled only four billion dollars. Which of the following, if true, exposes a serious flaw in the argument made in the second sentence above? (A) During the Arcadian war, many Distopian industrialists with facilities located in Arcadia experienced a significant rise in productivity in their facilities located in Distopia (B) The largest proportion of Distopia's federal expenses is borne by those who receive no significant industrial profits. © Most Distopian industrialists' facilities located in Arcadia are expected to maintain the level of profits they achieved during the war. (D) Distopian industrialists' facilities in Arcadia made substantial profits before the events that triggered the civil war. (E) Many Distopians expressed concern over the suffering that Arcadians underwent during the civil war. Ans: B

That's great! Thank you for clearing up my confusion. Ron

A majority of the internatinoal 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 station would or could Ans: D This one is very confusing. It uses the will and could at the same time. How could it be? Erin, can you do some analysis on this one for us? I understand that the pronoun they is refering to the journalists in D. However, since there are two pural entities journalists and power stations in the sentence, isn't it true that the pronoun they should be avoided as in E? Is E wrong because of the missing that after the verb think? Or is it because of the phrase "the power station" limits it to a particular power station instead of the broad category of power stations as a whole? Thanks, Ron