SC: Faulty voting euipment, confusing ballots, voter error,

[thanghnvn]

Following is my work order for question all of which is underlined. pls, comment, thank you

-read entire the original sentence and other choices, look for mechanical grammar error first. I find "they" in A and "citing" in C have no referent.
for this kind of question, there is still always mechanical grammar error.

- after eliminate 2,3 choices. in the remaining choices, look for a chuck moved around. in this case, "2000 election" . we realize the error here as Ron said.


the problem with me is that I find the second step is hard and offen fail at the second step. I can do the first step easily and can eliminate 2,3 choices.

anyone, pls, help , how to realize chuck moved around and realize he error. This kind of question is hard because of this second step

[nileshdalvimumbai]

The best way to understand the chuck moving is to understand what those modifiers are and what they modify. Most of them will be either prepositional phrases or participial phrases. Some of them will be simple adjectives and adverbs and it is easier to identify what they are modifying rather than to identify what the phrases are modifying.

So, if the sentence says "4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes that were cast had not been counted in the 2000 United States presidential election." The prep phrase "in the 2000 United States presidential election", which is an adverbial phrase (since it answers "when") , modifies the immediately preceding verb "had not been counted". Whereas the adverbial phrase should modify the verb "cast" because the time of the election is when the votes are cast and not the time when they are counted. Votes are counted after the Voting Period. So, we can identify that the casting should happen during the election and hence the adverbial phrase should be closer to cast than any other verb.

Similarly the adjective phrase must be closer to the noun it modifies and if any other noun comes closer to this modifier, the chuck is incorrectly moved.

Hope this helps.

[RonPurewal]

I have a question regarding tense in E.

Does "had not been" located betweeen 4 million and of the 100 million have a problem?

that is problematic, yes. even though the events happened in the order you've indicated, the completed event has no bearing/impact on the later event.
in other words, the result of the election (the # of votes that weren't counted) is most accurately described, in the context of the sentence, as an isolated historical event. such events should be expressed in the simple past tense.

[rakshaki]

There is a very basic mistake in E. has estimated 4 million .
Estimated is not followed by that..
Ron, can I eliminate this choice for this reason?

[jlucero]

There is a very basic mistake in E. has estimated 4 million .
Estimated is not followed by that..
Ron, can I eliminate this choice for this reason?

Correct. You are not estimating votes. You are estimating THAT votes had not been counted.

[rspcat]

Option D and E can be eliminated for use of past perfect tense. Is my understanding correct?

[tim]

Sorry if the thread did not make this clear, but yes D and E are both out because of verb tense issues.

[rspcat]

Sorry if the thread did not make this clear, but yes D and E are both out because of verb tense issues.

thanks.

[tim]

You're welcome!

[Haibara]

Ron, I have to say the placement of modifiers is really important on GMAT, though I'm bad at discerning them.
In the correct Choice B, the modifier "in the 2000 United States presidential election" is not directly presented in the clause after "estimate". It seems to me that Choice B reads：

#1 In the 2000 United States presidential election，4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast were not counted.

Does the above sentence accurately convey the idea of the original sentence? You said in your previous post that "in the 2000 United States presidential election" should be placed next to "cast", as below:

#2 4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast in the 2000 United States presidential election were not counted.

Do the two sentences above represent the same meaning?
Also regarding choice D (I have noticed the tense error and the redundancy of "that were cast", and have corrected them in the below sentence):
#3 4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast were not counted in the 2000 United States presidential election.

In #3, "in the 2000 United States presidential election" definitely modifies the verb "were not counted". In #1,"in the 2000 United States presidential election" modifies the the whole following clause . I always think that prepositional modifiers that modify the the whole following clause are , in essence, the same as prepositional modifiers that modify the verb in that clause. Technically, I think they are the same. So, from that perspective, why #1 differs from #3 , and #1 is meaningly correct while #3 is not?

Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

Ron, I have to say the placement of modifiers is really important on GMAT, though I'm bad at discerning them.
In the correct Choice B, the modifier "in the 2000 United States presidential election" is not directly presented in the clause after "estimate". It seems to me that Choice B reads：

#1 In the 2000 United States presidential election，4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast were not counted.

Does the above sentence accurately convey the idea of the original sentence? You said in your previous post that "in the 2000 United States presidential election" should be placed next to "cast", as below:

#2 4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast in the 2000 United States presidential election were not counted.

Do the two sentences above represent the same meaning?

In terms of anything that GMAC would ever even think about testing, they're identical.

They're only different if your definition of "election" is limited to the actual casting of votes.
I.e., let's say you define "election" strictly as the actual casting of votes (and NOT the counting that follows). In that case, #1 is wrong and #2 is right.
On the other hand, if you accept the idea that "In the election" can refer to anything involved in the entire election process"”including not just the voting, but also the tabulation of the votes"”then both are fine.

If this is still not clear, imagine replacing the word "election" in both sentences with "voting". Then, in literal terms, #1 doesn't make sense, while #2 does.

[RonPurewal]

Also regarding choice D (I have noticed the tense error and the redundancy of "that were cast", and have corrected them in the below sentence):
#3 4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast were not counted in the 2000 United States presidential election.

In #3, "in the 2000 United States presidential election" definitely modifies the verb "were not counted". In #1,"in the 2000 United States presidential election" modifies the the whole following clause . I always think that prepositional modifiers that modify the the whole following clause are , in essence, the same as prepositional modifiers that modify the verb in that clause. Technically, I think they are the same. So, from that perspective, why #1 differs from #3 , and #1 is meaningly correct while #3 is not?

Thanks in advance.

I have no idea how to respond in general terms, so I'll just give you an example that is easier to understand.

1/
Everyone I knew was tanning at the beach.

2/
At the beach, everyone I knew was tanning.

You see the difference, right?

In #1, "everyone I knew" is not qualified by "at the beach"... because we haven't said "at the beach" yet. (It's not reasonable to expect the reader to understand restrictions that haven't yet been stated!)
So, #1 says that everyone I knew"”like, literally, every single person with whom I was acquainted at all"”was hanging out in the sun.

#2 is talking only about familiar people among people who were at the beach"”a much more reasonable meaning.

This example is easier to understand because both meanings actually make sense (although #1 is a bit crazy).
But, just make an analogy. Your #3, like #1 about the beach, is speaking of "the votes cast" as though they were just a thing, independent of any particular election (like "everyone I knew""”independent of location). Doesn't work.

[RonPurewal]

Most importantly, you introduced these questions by talking about choice B"”but none of these issues is at all related to choice B, in any way, at all, whatsoever.

Choice B is talking about a new study of the 2000 United States presidential election"”in which "of the 2000 US presidential election" modifies the study, not the votes.
Completely different animal.

Once that modifier is presented"”BEFORE any mention of votes"”it is obvious that any later mention of votes is a reference to votes in the 2000 election, i.e., the election actually under study. (A study of the 2000 election would not refer to votes cast in other elections.)

Perhaps you meant another choice"”i.e., maybe you accidentally wrote "B" rather than some other letter. That's a pretty big difference to overlook.

[Khush]

4) can we eliminate D based on estimating?
Thanks,
Raj

nope. (d) is actually perfectly grammatical; the error is in the placement of the modifier "in the 2000 United States presidential election".
the way this sentence is written,it suggests that the votes weren't counted in that particular election, but may in fact have been counted in another election!

Hi Ron,
Do you mean to say that (D) may mean that 100 million votes cast may be total number of votes cast in several years and that some of these 100 million votes were not counted in year 2000, but may have been counted in some other year?

this is a difficult meaning difference(between B and D) indeed.

the correct placement of this modifier is after the word "cast", since that's what they were -- votes that were cast in the 2000 united states presidential election.

also, the correct choice B doesn't place "2000 united stated presidential election" next to "cast", though B places it next to "a new study".

------------------------------------------------------------------
could you please explain the usage of "in estimating" in choice D?
what is the role played by this phrase here?

does that mean "while estimating the number of votes not counted in 2000 election, a new study cited few evidences "?

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,
Do you mean to say that (D) may mean that 100 million votes cast may be total number of votes cast in several years and that some of these 100 million votes were not counted in year 2000, but may have been counted in some other year?

this is a difficult meaning difference(between B and D) indeed.

Any difficulty here arises from "mental set""”i.e., you already have a meaning in mind, so it's harder than usual to read correctly any choice that actually means something else.

I bet that, if I give you an unrelated sentence with the same construction, you'll understand the correct meaning immediately.

Only 40 of the 500 participants in Smith's survey had never taken a vacation in California.
--> Smith did a survey, to which 500 people responded. Of those 500 people, 460 had taken at least one vacation in California.
We have no idea where the people were from.

I bet you read that sentence correctly. Now, compare it to choice D, and you'll see the issue.