All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  A recent study of the United States tort syst... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.
  • a)
    twice as many as 1990
  • b)
    twice as much as 1990
  • c)
    twice the amount spent in 1990
  • d)
    a number double those of 1990’s
  • e)
    a number double that of 1990’s
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004...
The word “many” is used to modify countable items, for example “many apples.” For uncountable things, the modifier “much” should be used, as in “much money.” Here, the quantity word refers to the "tort costs." It would be correct to say that the “costs of x are as much as the costs of y.” It could also be correct to say that “costs of x are as many as the costs of y,” but only if referring to the number of types of costs (e.g. fixed, variable, tax-deductible, etc.), rather than the amount of the expenses. Here, since it is the amount that is compared, “as much as” should
replace “as many as” in the original sentence. Additionally, “tort costs” are illogically compared to the year “1990,” rather than to “tort costs in 1990.”
(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence.
(B) This choice correctly uses “as much as” to compare the amount of the costs. However, the comparison is still incomplete: “tort costs” are illogically compared to the year “1990,” rather than to “tort costs in 1990.”
(C) CORRECT. The phrase “twice the amount spent in 1990” modifies $260 billion, correctly conveying the idea that in 1990 the amount spent was $130 billion.
(D) The plural pronoun “those” cannot refer to the singular “a number,” which is the logical antecedent.
“Those” could refer to “tort costs,” but if that is the case, then a comparison is illogically drawn between $260 billion and tort costs. The logical comparison would be between $260 billion and the amount of the
tort costs in 1990. The construction is wordy and awkward, with the possessive “of 1990’s” having no following noun to clearly possess. (not fully followed)
(E) The construction is wordy and awkward, with the possessive “of 1990’s” having no following noun to clearly possess.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004...
B) twice as much as 1990
Attention GMAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed GMAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in GMAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

New observations about the age of some globular clusters in our Milky Way galaxy have cast doubt on a long-held theory about how the galaxy was formed. The Milky Way contains about 125 globular clusters (compact groups of anywhere from several tens of thousands to perhaps a million stars) distributed in a roughly spherical halo around the galactic nucleus. The stars in these clusters are believed to have been born during the formation of the galaxy, and so may be considered relics of the original galactic nebula, holding vital clues to the way the formation took place.The conventional theory of the formation of the galaxy contends that roughly 12 to 13 billion years ago the Milky Way formed over a relatively short time (about 200 million years) when a spherical cloud of gas collapsed under the pressure of its own gravity into a disc surrounded by a halo. Such a rapid formation of the galaxy would mean that all stars in the halo should be very nearly the same age.However, the astronomer Michael Bolte has found considerable variation in the ages of globular clusters. One of the clusters studied by Bolte is 2 billions years older than most other clusters in the galaxy, while another is 2 billion years younger. A colleague of Bolte contends that the cluster called Palomar 12 is 5 billion years younger than most other globular clusters.To explain the age differences among the globular clusters, astronomers are taking a second look at “renegade” theories. One such newly fashionable theory, first put forward by Richard Larson in the early 1970’s, argues that the halo of the Milky Way formed over a period of a billion or more years as hundreds of small gas clouds drifted about, collided, lost orbital energy, and finally collapsed into a centrally condensed elliptical system. Larson’s conception of a “lumpy and turbulent” protogalaxy is complemented by computer modeling done in the 1970’s by mathematician Alan Toomre, which suggests that closely interacting spiral galaxies could lose enough orbital energy to merge into a single galaxy.Which of the following, if true, would be most useful in supporting the conclusions drawn from recent observations about globular clusters?

New observations about the age of some globular clusters in our Milky Way galaxy have cast doubt on a long-held theory about how the galaxy was formed. The Milky Way contains about 125 globular clusters (compact groups of anywhere from several tens of thousands to perhaps a million stars) distributed in a roughly spherical halo around the galactic nucleus. The stars in these clusters are believed to have been born during the formation of the galaxy, and so may be considered relics of the original galactic nebula, holding vital clues to the way the formation took place.The conventional theory of the formation of the galaxy contends that roughly 12 to 13 billion years ago the Milky Way formed over a relatively short time (about 200 million years) when a spherical cloud of gas collapsed under the pressure of its own gravity into a disc surrounded by a halo. Such a rapid formation of the galaxy would mean that all stars in the halo should be very nearly the same age.However, the astronomer Michael Bolte has found considerable variation in the ages of globular clusters. One of the clusters studied by Bolte is 2 billions years older than most other clusters in the galaxy, while another is 2 billion years younger. A colleague of Bolte contends that the cluster called Palomar 12 is 5 billion years younger than most other globular clusters.To explain the age differences among the globular clusters, astronomers are taking a second look at “renegade” theories. One such newly fashionable theory, first put forward by Richard Larson in the early 1970’s, argues that the halo of the Milky Way formed over a period of a billion or more years as hundreds of small gas clouds drifted about, collided, lost orbital energy, and finally collapsed into a centrally condensed elliptical system. Larson’s conception of a “lumpy and turbulent” protogalaxy is complemented by computer modeling done in the 1970’s by mathematician Alan Toomre, which suggests that closely interacting spiral galaxies could lose enough orbital energy to merge into a single galaxy.The passage is primarily concerned with discussing

merican economists continually attempt to gauge the health of the economy, both for the gain of the private sector as well as for the global standing of the United States. Different elements of the economy react differently to changes in prosperity. Some elements rise and fall as the economy waxes and wanes. These are known as coincident indicators. Other elements are known as leading indicators and usually show a downturn before the economy does. A third group of elements are known as lagging indicators and lose vigor only after the economy has already begun to slow. Economists can predict the direction of the economy by monitoring these indicators.Coincident indicators, such as manufacturing and employment rates, are the best gauge of the current state of the economy. A continued shift in these indicators allows economists to determine whether the economy itself is in the process of an upturn or a downturn. These indicators coincide with shifts in the economy because they are dependent on sustained prosperity. But since coincident indicators reflect only the current state of the economy, they are not especially useful in predicting how the economy will perform in the near future. Economists must look to other indicators for that.The indicators with the greatest predictive power are leading indicators, such as mortgage applications and profit margins. When these indicators rise or fall, economists can often foretell similar changes in the country’s economic health. These indicators do not cause changes in the economy. Rather, they often signal changes in economic behavior that lead to shifts in the economic cycle. By contrast, the third type of indicator – lagging indicators – is useless as a harbinger of change. But these indicators can be helpful in confirming the assessments of economists.Determining which elements of the economy fall into which category of indicator requires analysis of copious data and an understanding of the factors that propel the economy. One must determine which events surrounding a turn in the business cycle actually contributed to the change. Establishing a solid framework for understanding the behavior of these indicators helps economists to avoid miscalculations and to guide the country through periods of slow or negative economic growth.Q.The passage suggests that lagging indicators would be least helpful in determining which of the following?

New observations about the age of some globular clusters in our Milky Way galaxy have cast doubt on a long-held theory about how the galaxy was formed. The Milky Way contains about 125 globular clusters (compact groups of anywhere from several tens of thousands to perhaps a million stars) distributed in a roughly spherical halo around the galactic nucleus. The stars in these clusters are believed to have been born during the formation of the galaxy, and so may be considered relics of the original galactic nebula, holding vital clues to the way the formation took place.The conventional theory of the formation of the galaxy contends that roughly 12 to 13 billion years ago the Milky Way formed over a relatively short time (about 200 million years) when a spherical cloud of gas collapsed under the pressure of its own gravity into a disc surrounded by a halo. Such a rapid formation of the galaxy would mean that all stars in the halo should be very nearly the same age.However, the astronomer Michael Bolte has found considerable variation in the ages of globular clusters. One of the clusters studied by Bolte is 2 billions years older than most other clusters in the galaxy, while another is 2 billion years younger. A colleague of Bolte contends that the cluster called Palomar 12 is 5 billion years younger than most other globular clusters.To explain the age differences among the globular clusters, astronomers are taking a second look at “renegade” theories. One such newly fashionable theory, first put forward by Richard Larson in the early 1970’s, argues that the halo of the Milky Way formed over a period of a billion or more years as hundreds of small gas clouds drifted about, collided, lost orbital energy, and finally collapsed into a centrally condensed elliptical system. Larson’s conception of a “lumpy and turbulent” protogalaxy is complemented by computer modeling done in the 1970’s by mathematician Alan Toomre, which suggests that closely interacting spiral galaxies could lose enough orbital energy to merge into a single galaxy.According to the passage, one way in which Larsons theory and the conventional theory of the formation of the Milky Way galaxy differ is in their assessment of the

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice A recent study of the United States tort system indicates that in 2004, accident, productliability,and other tort costs totaled $260 billion, twice as many as 1990.a)twice as many as 1990b)twice as much as 1990c)twice the amount spent in 1990d)a number double those of 1990’se)a number double that of 1990’sCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up
within 7 days!
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup