The Berlin Wall

[Guest]

SOURCE : MGMAT CAT 2

Since 1989, after the Berlin Wall had been demolished, one of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified Germany, in cultural and economic assimilation terms, were the former East Germans, who have had to acclimate to an entirely different political system.

A after the Berlin Wall had been demolished, one of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified German, in cultural and economic assimilation terms, were the former East Germans

B after the Berlin Wall was demolished, one of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified Germany, in cultural terms as well as those of economic assimilation, were the former East Germans

C when the Berlin Wall was demolished, one of the reunified Germany's most problematic ethnic groups, in terms of cultural and economic assimilation, was the former East Germans

D when the Berlin Wall was demolished, one of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified Germany, in terms of cultural and economic assimilation, has been the former East Germans

E after the Berlin Wall had been demolished, one of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified Germany, in both terms of cultural and economic assimilation, have been the former East Germans


The explanation for this question in the MGMAT mainly relies on the correct verb 'has been' since this is found only in D and matches with the 'Since 1989'

I would like to clarify about additional errors in this SC ...

1) After v/s When - Can either one be used ? I undesrtand that 'When' refers specifically to the year 1989 when the event happened. Can 'after' be used ??... If yes, would it refer to the complete phrase 'since 1989'

2) 'In X & Y terms' in option A - Is this correct usage ? I've normally come across 'In terms of X & Y'- as stated in D

Kindly clarify. Thanks

[StaceyKoprince]

It isn't the case that "when" and "after" are generally interchangeable - it just depends on what meaning you're trying to convey.

If I say "since 1990, after she was born" then I know she was born either earlier in 1990 or in some earlier year, but I don't know the exact year. If I'm not trying to convey the exact year, then that's fine. (Though I think it's awkward because of that ambiguity and I wouldn't expect a correct GMAT sentence to be constructed in that way. If she really was born in 1990, I'd want to use the word "when" and if she wasn't, I'd want to say something like "since 1990, three years after she was born.")

If I say "since 1990, when she was born" then I know she was born in 1990. Unambiguous.

Notice that I don't absolutely have to use that rule to get to the right answer here, b/c technically the original ambiguity with "after" is okay if the author had really wanted to be ambiguous about the date. But I can clearly eliminate all of the options using "after" for other reasons (and I was skeptical about "after" - if I'd had to guess, I would've guessed one of the "when" options because I know this test doesn't like ambiguity).

You technically can say "In X and Y terms" but if X and Y are long enough, that can once again be ambiguous (at least until you get to the word "terms"). It is a preference to say "in terms of X and Y" - but not an absolute rule.

This sentence brings up a good point to remember: there are often differences (especially as questions get harder) that are not based on hard and fast rules. The differences are there to get us to waste our time. Deal with all hard and fast rules first. If you can deal with all of those, you will get to the right answer - these "preference" things are never required by themselves to get to the right answer. If you can't get down to one right answer because you don't know all of the hard rules being tested, then (if you have studied the preferences) you can guess based on what you know this test prefers.

[Guest]

Hi Ron,

In the above post should'nt the verb be have been and not has been because is reads as

Since 1989 when the Berlin Wall was demolished, one (of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified Germany, in terms of cultural and economic assimilation,) has been the former East Germans, who have had to acclimate to an entirely different political system.

Now if I drop the prepositional phrase and the modifier the sentence reads as

Since 1989 one ......has been the former east germans ... This does not soun good

But bwlow 2 makes sense..

Since 1989 one of the most problematic ethnic groups ....have been

Or

Since 1989 the one .......has been

I learned this from the below post which you wrote which is superb and has never failed so far..

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/ver ... t2091.html


So am i doing something wrong in this case ? Thanks and appreciate all your help

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

In the above post should'nt the verb be have been and not has been because is reads as

Since 1989 when the Berlin Wall was demolished, one (of the most problematic ethnic groups in the reunified Germany, in terms of cultural and economic assimilation,) has been the former East Germans, who have had to acclimate to an entirely different political system.

Now if I drop the prepositional phrase and the modifier the sentence reads as

Since 1989 one ......has been the former east germans ... This does not soun good

But bwlow 2 makes sense..

Since 1989 one of the most problematic ethnic groups ....have been

Or

Since 1989 the one .......has been

I learned this from the below post which you wrote which is superb and has never failed so far..

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/ver ... t2091.html


So am i doing something wrong in this case ? Thanks and appreciate all your help

hey.

this is a different issue than the issue that forms the center of discussion in the post you've cited.
here, the issue is linking verbs, or copulative verbs, like "is", which state that two things are equivalent.
such verbs are treated differently than other verbs, because they don't have bona fide "objects"; rather, they merely state the equivalence of two things, so they basically have two quasi-subjects. in other words, the nouns on either side of a copulative verb are more or less grammatically interchangeable.

the general rule that's usually followed is this:
when you have a copulative verb construction, such as "x is y" or "x are y", the noun coming BEFORE the verb determines the number of the verb.
in other words, if "x" in the sentence above is singular, then the verb will be "is" (or some other singular form), and if "x" is plural, then the verb will be "are" (or some other plural form).

example:
the worst thing about winter is the high wind speeds --> "the worst thing" is treated as the subject, so it's singular
the high wind speeds are the worst thing about winter --> "high wind speeds" is treated as the subject, so it's plural

--

so in this case, "one" is the subject, so you use "has been".

[avinashsbajaj]

This sentence brings up a good point to remember: there are often differences (especially as questions get harder) that are not based on hard and fast rules. The differences are there to get us to waste our time. Deal with all hard and fast rules first. If you can deal with all of those, you will get to the right answer - these "preference" things are never required by themselves to get to the right answer. If you can't get down to one right answer because you don't know all of the hard rules being tested, then (if you have studied the preferences) you can guess based on what you know this test prefers.

Beautiful point Stacey - I was exactly stuck at trying to sort out the issue between after and when (yes, I overlooked the S/V part - can you believe that ;))

Anyways, now I see how close some ans options can get. Thanks!!

[RonPurewal]

glad it helped.