Grockit GMAT Prep

Learn more about Grockit's GMAT Test Preparation

GMAT Verbal Posts

Anatomy of a Weaken Question – Part 2

Last time we discussed that CR is testing not the implication of single words but the logic of entire arguments, and the need to write down the Conclusion, Evidence & Assumptions as you practice CR to better hone in on what the BASIS is for each argument. We need to spend more time with the argument itself BEFORE reading the answer choices when we practice to improve. For a “weaken” question, the answer choice that MOST weakens the argument will always undermine the premise for the conclusion. If you do not understand the argument first, then you will be tempted by the wrong answer choices that seem to relate to a small part of the premise. It’s all about the bigger picture.

Find out how you can track your progress across specific skills and target your efforts accordingly on Grockit.

Let’s look at the passage and the question we analyzed last time:

Recent U.S. legislation limiting the emissions permissible from automobiles will require auto manufacturers to incorporate new technology and more costly components in cars. This will drive up the price of cars, both at home and abroad. Therefore, the legislation will result in the loss of many export markets.

Conclusion: Legislation = loss of export markets

Evidence: Legislation requires $$ technology; will drive up price of cars

Assump: US cars are more expensive to foreigners; they will stop buying the US cars

Now let’s see how the assumption relates to the answer choices:

The argument to the left is most seriously weakened by which of the following?

A            Most of the countries to which U.S. automobiles are exported have recently enacted similar             legislation limiting emissions.

B            Non-compliance with the new legislation can be punished with high fines.

C            Training factory workers to use the new technology required to manufacture compliant             automobiles will be expensive and time-consuming.

D            Some automobile manufacturers will choose to relocate their plants to other countries that do not             have stringent emissions standards.

E            Environmental groups have been leaning heavily on the auto industry to voluntarily institute such             emissions standards.

This question is weakening “the argument” so we will take the entire argument into consideration here. There are no outside opinions or secondary conclusions we need to worry about. We know the assumptions are NECESSARY to the strength of the argument, and we understand that the underlying assumption here links Legislation à Loss of Export Markets, so the correct answer will make that link invalid. Look for the answer choice that creates a gap between the Legislation and the Loss of Export Markets.

For weaken questions that ask about the entire argument, you can reverse the assumption to make a prediction. If the assumption is something that is necessary, then reversing the assumption will strongly weaken the entire argument.

Prediction: US cars are NOT more expensive to foreigners; they will NOT stop buying US cars

With our Prediction in hand, we can see the correct choice is A. If the legislation has been already enacted, then the US cars will not be more expensive than the foreign cars in the exported countries. Therefore, the conclusion that there will be a loss of export markets is unlikely.

Remember that CR is not based on what you think (or what I think), or on what seems “logical.” It is not an inference. It is based on the ARGUMENT. Don’t start to eliminate or compare answer choices until you have thoroughly broken down the premise. In Part 3 of this series, we’ll look at two harder Weaken questions!

See other articles in this series:

Anatomy of a Weaken Question – Part 1

Anatomy of a Weaken Question – Part 1

Weaken questions are among the most common CR question-type. When students get these questions incorrect, it’s usually for one of two reasons: either they did not understand the necessary assumptions, or they choose an answer choice that seemed logical rather than one that more clearly related to the argument. In this series, we’ll be dissecting Weaken Questions, looking closely at their wording, set-up, and answer choices. Hopefully after this series you’ll be on your way to better scores on this GMAT question-type!

Try this GMAT critical reasoning question for practice!

Let’s start with the basics – how do you know you’re looking at a Weaken question? Here are some examples of the phrasing you might see on Test Day:

-Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the claim that periodontal disease is a cause of Coronary Artery disease?

-Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument to the left?

-Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument to the left?

Sometimes the word “weaken” will be in the question itself, and sometimes not. The idea is that the answer choices will somehow hurt the passage’s claims.

What is being weakened? Most of the time the entire argument is being weakened, however occasionally only one aspect of the argument is being weakened, or a secondary conclusion. Make sure you know WHAT is being weakened. Otherwise, you risk choosing an answer choice that is weakening the wrong part of the argument!

-Which of the following, if true, most undermines the conclusion stated in the passage to the left?

In this question “the conclusion” is what needs to be weakened, so as you narrow down and compare answer choices, you will need to ask yourself: which choice hurts the conclusion the most? Two answer choices may sound logical, but only ONE will direct its venom more squarely on the conclusion.

In taking apart an argument, you should already be comfortable identifying the Conclusion, the Evidence, and coming up with 2-3 logical Assumptions. You will need to do this before you can answer any weaken question. Let’s refresh on an easy-level Grockit question:

Recent U.S. legislation limiting the emissions permissible from automobiles will require auto manufacturers to incorporate new technology and more costly components in cars. This will drive up the price of cars, both at home and abroad. Therefore, the legislation will result in the loss of many export markets.

Conclusion: Legislation = loss of export markets

Evidence: Legislation requires $$ technology; will drive up price of cars

We know that Evidence + Assumptions = Conclusion, so the assumptions here are anything that will increasingly link the legislation’s requirements to a loss of export markets. Ask yourself: why would the increasing price of cars lead to a loss of export markets? An “export market” means that the US cars are sold overseas. The idea here is that if they are more expensive, then no one overseas will buy them because they will be more expensive than their native automobiles. Here’s how we could write that down in shorthand:

Assump: US cars are more expensive to foreigners; they will stop buying the US cars

Look out for part 2 of this series to see how this Assumption relates to the answer choices in this question! In the meantime, try out some easier Weaken questions in one of Grockit’s group games!

For more GMAT Critical Reasoning advice check out these posts!

GMAT Sentence Correction: Gerunds and Possessives

You may have heard native English speakers hesitate when using a gerund in the possessive case. This particular grammar issue is often shirked by textbooks and school teachers, so many of us are never quite sure whether to use a possessive adjective with a gerund in certain cases. Take this example of a common mistake below:

Incorrect: Jake dancing is the result of weeks of practice.

Many English speakers would use this sentence without noticing the error, and probably many of us would not hear any error if we heard the sentence as it’s written. The problem with the sentence, though, is that the noun, Jake, as the agent of the action, dancing, must be in the possessive case. The simple reason is that Jake himself cannot be the result of weeks of practice. Rather, it is Jake’s dancing that is the result of weeks of practice.

Try this GMAT sentence correction for practice!

Correct: Jake’s dancing is the result of weeks of practice.

Now while this seems simple enough, there are still some nuances that have to be reviewed before we can safely decide when to use a noun in the possessive case when it precedes a gerund. The main rule we must remember is that the “ing” verb that comes after the noun does function as a noun; in other words, make sure the ‘ing’ verb is a gerund before you use the preceding noun in the possessive case. Notice the subtly different meanings created by sentences below:

Ambiguous: I like Jake dancing.

Apart from any given context, the sentence above is a bit ambiguous and odd, though not grammatically incorrect in the formal sense. What the sentence suggests is that I like Jake when he dances.

Clear: I like Jake’s dancing.

The above sentence is clear and unambiguous. It means simply that I like the dancing that Jake happens to be doing.

Clear: Jake dancing is quite a spectacle.

You may think that you should immediately  change Jake into Jake’s, but this sentence does make sense. Ask yourself, “can Jake himself be ‘quite a spectacle?”’ Yes. Thus, as it stands, the sentence means that Jake, while dancing, is a spectacle.

Clear: Jake’s dancing is quite a spectacle.

This sentence means almost exactly the same thing as the previous sentence, but notice the subtle difference: now I am specifically saying that the dancing itself is a spectacle.

Find out how these GMAT tutors can help you get a top GMAT score!

GMAT Practice: What to Do if You Cannot Spot an Error on SC

Unlike CR and RC, GMAT Sentence Correction is far less “strategy-heavy”, however you can still develop a methodical approach and apply it to every question. Start by asking yourself, can I spot an error? If you can, then go to the answer choices and quickly eliminate those that do NOT correct the error. Scan the remaining choices for a secondary error, and eliminate. But what can you do if you cannot spot an error?
One way to approach each SC is to start with the “VPIMPS” and check systematically for each error. This will take longer than just “spotting” the errors so it’s important to continue working on your knowledge of the tested SC grammar rules so you can better spot the errors, but this is a good method for those times when you just can’t tell what (if anything) is wrong with the sentence.  “VPIMPS” stands for:

Read more »

GMAT Sentence Correction: Eliminating Pronouns

At this point, we should already be familiar with the concept of ambiguous pronouns. To refresh your memory, an ambiguous pronoun is a pronoun whose antecedent is not entirely clear; that is, the ambiguous pronoun could refer to more than one possible noun in the sentence.

Example: After meeting Dave and Bill at the airport, Steve dropped off some luggage at his house.

Here, we don’t know if “his house” refers to Dave’s house or Bill’s house, so the pronoun is ambiguous. You could fix the problem a number of ways. You could change “his” to “their,” so we know that Dave and Bill share the house that Bill is visiting, or we could replace the “his” with either “Dave” or “Bill” in order to clarify the ambiguity by eliminating the noun.

Test your GMAT skills with this sentence correction practice question.

There is, however, another alternative that the GMAT seems to favor. Because repeating the noun sounds repetitive and clunky, we can use a synonym for the antecedent that acts as a generic placeholder for a noun. The synonym should always be more general than, or should encompass, the antecedent.

Example: New state-of-the-art plastics use polymer compounds that give these materials unmatched durability.

Notice in the above sentence that the phrase “these materials” functions as a pronoun for “plastics,” which, as opposed to “polymer compounds,” can easily be described as “materials.” Using the pronoun “them” would result in a case of pronoun ambiguity, since we have two possible antecedents—plastics and polymer compounds.

Example 2: After the controversial policy agreement was ratified, the committee submitted a bill that would allow more for control over such contracts in the future.

The above sentence exemplifies the same case. “Such contracts” clearly refers to the “policy agreement” because only policy agreement can be described as a type of contract. The other possible antecedents, committee and bill (but really only “bill” because the “committee” is the subject of the verb), do not pose any problems for the sentence.

Challenge yourself with adaptive solo practice sessions on Grockit today!

GMAT Sentence Corrections: Advanced Rules for Comparisons

Ambiguity with “More”

When using the word “more” to modify an adjective-noun pair, ask yourself what is the sentence really saying. For example, if I say “The school has more teachers than before,” then the meaning is clear: there are more teachers now than there were before. But, what if I say something like this:

The school has more experienced teachers than before.

Find out how Grockit can track your progress across specific skills and target your efforts accordingly.

At first glance, the meaning seems clear: the school has more teachers, who happen to be experienced teachers, than it did before. There is, however, a lurking meaning in the sentence. The sentence could be trying to say that the school’s teachers are now more experienced than they were before. On the GMAT, this is an ambiguity that should be resolved. Depending on what the sentence intends to say, here are the options:

Correct: The school has more teachers who are experienced than before.

Correct: The school has teachers even more experienced than before.

Implied Comparisons

When using verbs that imply a comparison, e.g. exceed, make sure that it is possible or logical to compare the two items in the sentence; in other words, make sure they are parallel.

Incorrect: The occurrence of this weather pattern in Asia exceeds Europe.

The sentence above exhibits a classic error in parallelism: “occurrence” cannot exceed, or be more than, Europe. Here are a few ways to fix the error:

Correct: The occurrence of this weather pattern in Asia exceeds its occurrence in Europe.

Correct: The occurrence of this weather pattern in Asia exceeds that in Europe.

Using ‘that’ as a pronoun is a simple and easy way to fix a parallelism mistake, since, after all, most parallelism mistakes are errors of omission.

The Use of “In Addition To”

The phrase “in addition to,” when placed at the beginning of the sentence, can effectively add an example to the subject or the object of a sentence. The versatility of this phrase should be acknowledged, since it can neatly articulate a complex subject or object.:

Correct: In addition to cats, dogs make great pets. (adding to the subject)

Correct: In addition to asparagus, I strongly dislike eggplant. (adding to the object)

Be prepared for test day. Get personalized tutoring in live online sessions with an experienced expert instructor.

GMAT Sentence Correction: Possessives

While most rules with possessives are pretty straight forward, there are some controversial rules with possessives which the GMAT takes a stand on.

Do not use ‘s with “of”

In other words, do not choose the option that uses the form “of [blank]’s,” as in the sentence “I am a friend of John’s.” While this is a very common speech pattern in English, know that the GMAT prefers to avoid the ambiguity inherent to the pattern, so opt for either “of [blank]” or simply [blanks]’s.

Wrong: Pamela, a cousin of Bill’s, was late to the wedding.

Correct: Pamela, Bill’s cousin, was late to the wedding.

Try this GMAT sentence correction question for more practice!

Plural Possessives

Though plural possessives like “the boys’ toys” are not at all considered incorrect usage, the GMAT tends to avoid them for a number of reasons. First, using the possessive limits the relationship between the nouns to one of ownership (the “of” relation), and thus precludes all possibilities of more specific or nuanced prepositions. Secondly, the plural possessive can be misread because it sounds the same as a singular possessive.

Not Preferable: Particular humans’ viruses  are known to spread through the air.

Preferable: Particular viruses in humans are known to spread through the air.

Notice that the first sentence sounds slightly awkward because we can’t be sure whether the adjective “particular” modifies humans or viruses. The amended version fixes that mistake by eliminating the possessive form, so we know that “particular” modifies “viruses.” Also notice that using the possessive sounds awkward in this case because the preposition “of,” or rather the relation of ownership, is not entirely appropriate to make the connection between viruses and humans. It certainly makes more sense to say “viruses in humans” than it does to say humans’ viruses.

As always, remember that plural possessives are not 100% incorrect. By no means should you eliminate plural possessives blindly. Just remember that if you are caught between two attractive answers, and one of them happens to be a plural possessive, you can probably safely eliminate the plural possessive.

Review your answers with detailed explanations and strategies on Grockit today.

3 Ways to Look at a GMAT Sentence Correction Question

Even if you’re a grammar rock-star, remember that some SC’s will contain more than one grammatically correct answer choice. In that case, what choice should you pick? It’s important to recognize that there are THREE areas to consider for EACH SC. Considering meaning and style will help you select the correct choice on Harder Sentence Corrections on Test Day!

Try this GMAT sentence correction practice question and test your GMAT skills!

1. Grammar. If you’ve been studying SC for any length of time, you should already be familiar with the common grammatical errors: verb disagreement, pronoun disagreement, run-ons, mass count words, faulty comparisons, etc. This should definitely your first-stop in your SC elimination process.

2. Meaning. Most students who can’t break 700 on the GMAT ignore the “sense” of a sentence. Sometimes what seems like a grammar error, will actually be correct if you consider the MEANING of the sentence. This is especially true for modification and pronouns.

Read more »

GMAT Sentence Correction: Pronoun Suitability

The basics of pronoun agreement begin with pronoun number and pronoun gender, but on the GMAT, they do not end there. Let’s go over a few of the other ways we determine whether or not a pronoun agrees with its antecedent.

  1. The Law of Repeating Pronouns: If you repeat the same pronoun in a sentence (e.g. it or him), the pronoun should refer to the same antecedent.
  2. The Law of Proximity: Generally, a pronoun should refer to the closest possible antecedent. Conversely, note that a pronoun and antecedent cannot be directly next to each other (consider the sentence “In my car it is forbidden to smoke,” where “car” cannot be the antecedent of “it).
  3. Law of Priority:  Generally, the pronoun’s antecedent occurs earlier in the sentence than the pronoun itself. Though there are clear exceptions to the rule (e.g. Before he left his apartment, Jack grabbed his coat), we want to observe antecedent priority as a guiding principle.

Note that these laws are really just guidelines; each can be broken while maintaining correct pronoun usage. Here is a sentence that may appear to violate some of the rules above, but when we read, we cannot deny that each pronoun is clear and unambiguous.

Try this GMAT sentence correction question for more practice!

Example: While the corporation has improved in sales because of its new data-management team and its renovated website design, in the current financial crisis it may actually find itself struggling to stay profitable.

While we can logically deduce that “the corporation” is the antecedent of the two “its,” what is the antecedent of the third “it?”.

First, examine pronoun number and gender. Since the pronoun in question is “it,” our number is “singular” and our gender is “neutral.’ The possible antecedents, then, are corporation, team, design, and crisis. So, as we can see, not much as been accomplished by using the two must fundamental rules for pronoun agreement. Let’s check out the three laws, then.

Repeating Pronouns: Because the first two “its” refer to “the corporation,” the law of repeating pronouns tells us that the third “it” must also refer to “corporation.”

Proximity: According to the law of proximity, “crisis” is simply too close to the pronoun “it.” The closest eligible antecedent, then, is “design.”

Priority: The sentence automatically fullfils the law of priority because there are no eligible antecedents after “it.”

Notice, then, that the law of repeating pronouns takes precedent over the law of proximity. Not all the rules must be fulfilled for pronoun usage to be unambiguous.

Find out how you can collaborate with your peers on Grockit to reinforce your knowledge and theirs.

GMAT Sentence Correction: Comparisons with Numbers

When making a comparison with numbers—e.g. trying to communicate that one quantity is more than another quantity—there are a few ways you can go about it, not to mention a few easy ways to make mistakes.

Relate Quantities by Multiplying

When I say “that car is nearly three times as old as you,” I’m making a comparison with numbers using multiplication. Make sure that when we use the word “times” to denote multiplication, we also use the “as…as” comparison structure:

Incorrect: That car is nearly three times older than you.

Correct: That car is nearly three times as old as you.

Reserve the “than” comparison for other forms; when using multiplication, stick with the “as…as” structure.

Alternatively, you can also denote multiplication when you leave out “as:”

Correct: A gallon of milk now costs $6, three times the cost fifteen years ago.

Find out how Grockit can predict your score with adaptive full-length computer adaptive tests.

Relate Quantities by Addition/Subtraction

For addition or subtraction, use more than/less than.

Incorrect: Molly is five years as old as you.

Correct: Molly is five years older than you.

Quantitative Comparisons without Numbers

When using the words more or less without numbers, you have many options to choose from. Notice that the words “more” and “less” can be used as many different parts of speech.

Correct (as noun/pronoun): I owe you more than I’d like to. (Here, more stands in for money, or whatever it is that I owe).

Correct (as adverb): I drive more than I’d like to. (Here, more modifies “drive;” that is, it tells me how I am driving, so “more” functions as an adverb).

Correct (as adjective): I have more money now than I’ve ever had.  (“More” describes money, so it functions as an adjective).

The words “high” and “low,” and “higher” and “lower,”  by contrast, should only be used as adjectives.

Correct: My expectations are much lower than they were five years ago.

Incorrect: I owe you lower than I did last year. (use “less” instead)

Try this GMAT sentence question practice question today!