First, a few practice GMAT Sentence Correction questions for warm-up.

1) Had the United States allowed the California Republic to remain independent after the Bear Flag Revolt rather than annexing it with military force, this “California nation” might have become the wealthiest nation in North America.

1. Had the United States allowed the California Republic to remain independent after the Bear Flag Revolt rather than annexing it with military force, this “California nation” might have become
2. With the United States annexing the California Republic after the Bear Flag Revolt instead of allowing it to remain independent, this “California nation” didn’t become
3. The United States annexed the California Republic after the Bear Flag Revolt and didn’t allow it to remain independent, to prevent it to become
4. The United States didn’t allow the California Republic to remain independent after the Bear Flag Revolt, it annexed it with military force instead, and this “California nation” didn’t become
5. The United States, by not allowing the California Republic to remain independent after the Bear Flag Revolt and, instead, by annexing it, it prevented this “California nation” from becoming

2) Compared to Bach’s astonishing output of music each year over his relatively long life, Brahms, ever the perfectionist, destroyed many of his compositions and only published those few that met his high standards.

1. Compared to Bach’s astonishing output of music each year over his relatively long life, Brahms, ever the perfectionist, destroyed many of his compositions and only published those few that
2. Compared to Bach’s astonishing output of music each year over his relatively long life, Brahms’ compositions, many destroyed because of his perfection, and only those few published
3. Bach had an astonishing output of music each year over his relatively long life, but Brahms, always a perfectionist, destroying many of his compositions and only publishing those few that
4. In contrast to Bach having had an astonishing output of music each year over his relatively long life, Brahms, always a perfectionist, destroyed many of his compositions and only published those few that
5. Whereas Bach had an astonishing output of music each year over his relatively long life, Brahms, ever the perfectionist, destroyed many of his compositions and published only those few that

3) While many people believe either lead or gold is the densest naturally occurring element, osmium, due to a pattern of density among the elements, holds this distinction, and they call it “Lathanide contraction.”

1. osmium, due to a pattern of density among the elements, holds this distinction, and they call it
2. it is osmium that holds this distinction, because of a pattern of density among the elements known as
3. osmium, holding this distinction, because of a pattern of density with the elements known as
4. osmium, holding this distinction, for a pattern of density in the elements is known as
5. osmium, which holds this distinction, because a pattern of density among the elements is known as

Sophisticated idioms

This post discusses three relatively sophisticated idioms.  All three are relatively uncommon in colloquial speech, so some native speakers might not have heard them.   They are characteristic of formal language, and thus each is “fair game” for the GMAT Sentence Correction questions.   Here are the idioms:

Whereas X, Y

Had A done X rather than doing Y

It is A that does X/ that is B

I will discuss each separately.

Contrast

The “whereas” is similar in meaning to “while.” The word “whereas” almost always comes at the beginning of a sentence.   It is a subordinate conjunction, which means it will be followed by one full [noun + verb] clause, and after that we will need another full [noun + verb] clause for the main clause of the sentence.  The full structure is “whereas” [clause #1], [clause #2].  These two clauses should be in parallel, and they should contrast one other in some essential way.

4) Whereas California contains the highest point in the lower 48 states, Alaska contains the highest in North America.

5) Whereas most professional sports, such as American football and basketball and soccer, are played against a clock, baseball is free of the influence of clock.

Hypothetical language

The next idiom is used to present not what is true, but rather what would be true under alternate hypothetical conditions.  Suppose actor A, in real life, did action Y.  That’s what really happened.  Then we would say, “Had A done X rather than Y …”, to imagine a world different from the factual world we share, a world in which A did X instead of Y; the goal of the structure is to analyze the consequences in this alternate world.  The grammatical form “Had A done X rather than Y …” is similar to an “if” clause: we need an independent main clause to follow that will state the consequence in this hypothetical world.  Because this is all hypothetical, the verb of the main independent clause should be in the subjunctive.

Also, notice: if X and Y are nouns that take the same verb, we can just have a noun in the Y place.  BUT, if two different verbs are needed, the “done X” place is taken by the first verb (in the subjunctive) and the Y place is taken by a gerund phrase involving the second verb.

6) Had Columbus sailed south rather than east, what would he have discovered?

7) Had the Kuomintang defeated Mao rather than retreating to Taiwan, China as a whole would have been a capitalist ally of the United States, and the Soviet Union would have fallen much sooner.

8) Had General Lee consolidated his gains in the south after his victory a Chancellorsville, rather than crossing the Potomac and invading the Maryland and Pennsylvania, the Confederacy could have held out much longer, perhaps fighting to a stalemate.

Emphatic language

The final idiom, rarely used, is appropriate only when extraordinary emphasis is needed.  The difference between (a) A does X, and (b) It is A that does X is subtle: both communicate the same factual information, but the latter emphasizes, perhaps contrary to expectations, the significant role that A has at the actor or subject in the sentence.  This structure is not appropriate for conveying an ordinary fact.  It is only appropriate when the context requires unique emphasis on the identity of the subject.

9) In the late 1950s and early 1960s, many ministers of the Nation of Islam were identified as radicals, but it was the skilled orator Malcolm X that drew the most FBI attention.

10) Paris is rich in historical and artistic treasures, but it is the Eiffel Tower that most tourists want to see.

Summary

If you had any flashes of realization while reading, you may want to give the practice questions at the top a second look before reading the solutions below.  Know the idioms given in bold in this post.  As always with idioms, read, read, read!   Search for the idioms in this post in context.  You understand English best when you understand it in context.

Practice Question Explanations

1) Choice (A) follows the exact pattern of the idiom discussed in this blog — first verb (“Had … allowed“) in the subjunctive and second (“annexing“) as a gerund, and the independent clause after the comma is in the subjunctive.  This is quite promising.

Choice (B) uses the preposition “with” as a quasi-subordinate conjunction, with the construction “with” [noun][participial phrase].  The GMAT considers this incorrect 100% of the time.  Also, the independent clause after the comma is in the indicative mood, giving the mistaken impression that the “California nation” actually existed.  (B) is not correct.

Choice (C), up to the comma, is promising — a factual statement of what the US did and didn’t do, and the infinitive of purpose in the second half is fine, but unfortunately, this choices makes an idiom mistake.  The idiom with “to prevent” is “to prevent A from doing X“, NOT “to prevent A to do X.”  Because of this idiom mistake, (C) is not correct.

Choice (D) is an example of false parallelism, putting the three verbs of the sentence into the grammatical relationship of parallelism without considering their logical connection.  Everything is in the indicative, so the hypothetical nature of the “California nation” is lost.   Perhaps  most significantly, this makes a major pronoun mistake: “it annexed it” — a repeated pronoun for two different antecedents.  (D) is not correct.

Choice (E) has makes double subject mistake — “The US [long modifier] it prevented …”  Either “the US” or “it” has to be the subject of “prevented” — both cannot be the subject simultaneously.  Also, ” … annexing it, it prevented …” — this choice makes the same kind of repeated pronoun mistake found in (D).  (D) is not correct.

The only possible answer is (A).

2) Split #1: position of the word “only” — which is correct? (a) “only published those few“, or (b) “published only those few“?  The latter correctly say that, in contrast to the large number Brahms destroyed, only a few were published.  In the former, the adverb “only” applies illogically to the verb “published” — as if Brahms might have done some action more serious than publishing but instead settled on “only” publishing them.  That makes no sense.  Each choice in which “only” precedes the verb is wrong.  Choices (A) & (C) & (D) make this mistake.

Split #2a: comparisons.  Choice (A) compares Bach’s music to Brahms the person, a faulty comparison.  Choice (B) correctly compares Bach’s music to Brahms music.   Choice (D) correctly contrasts Bach the person with Brahms the person.

Split #3: the  missing verb mistake.  In choice (B), there’s no verb in the entire sentence.  Choice (C) attempts a “but” construction, and before the “but” is a bonafide independent clause, but after the word “but”, there’s no verb to make that second half another independent clause.   Both (B) & (C) make this mistake.

Split #4: “always the perfectionist” vs. “ever the perfectionist.”  This is a false split.  Both are perfectly fine.

Split #5: too much after a preposition.  The “in contrast to” structure ends in preposition, and that preposition can take a single noun, as well as a gerund or a substantive clause.   The GMAT, though, does not like the construction [preposition][noun][participial phrase] — if you want to talk about that much action, use subordinate clause with a full [noun]+[verb] structure.  Choice (D) makes this mistake, “in contrast to Bach” + a long participial clause.  The GMAT would not find that acceptable.   Choice (D) is incorrect.

For all these reasons, (E) is the only possible answer.

3) Choice (A) illogically suggests that osmium itself, the very existence of the element itself, is “due to a pattern of density among the elements“.  Furthermore, the final three words of (A) are a disaster — “they call it” —- (a) who is “they”?  This pronoun has no antecedent in the sentence; (b) the antecedent of “it” is grammatically ambiguous — it could be osmium, or the pattern, or the distinction.  (A) is incorrect.

Choice (B) uses the emphatic construction discussed in this post — appropriate, because osmium is contrary to many peoples’ expectations on this question.   The rest is grammatically correct.  This is a promising choice.

The section before the underlined section is a subordinate clause beginning with “while”, so the independent clause, the main clause of the sentence, must come in the underlined section.  Choice (C) has no verb, and thus would create a sentence with no verb.  This is the  missing verb mistake.  (C) is incorrect.

Choice (D) has an odd construction.  After the initial subordinate clause, it has a noun + modifier “osmium, holding this distinction”, then a conjunction and an independent clause.  This has the effect of leaving “osmium” as a free-floating noun in the sentence, not part of any clause.   Furthermore, the “for” clause would introduce an explanation, but here, it illogically suggests that what the pattern is called, not the pattern itself, is the explanation of osmium’s properties.  (D) is incorrect.

Choice (E), like choice (C), has no verb, and thereby creates a sentence with no main verb.   Furthermore, the “because” clause suggests illogically that what the pattern is called, not the pattern itself, is the explanation of osmium’s properties.  (E) is incorrect.

The only possible answer is (B).

Hi, everyone!

We’ve just released the FREE Magoosh GMAT Idiom eBook, which includes detailed explanations and examples of 27 different types of idioms: idioms involving prepositions, conjunctions, infinitives, comparison, and many many more! All written by our resident GMAT grammar expert, Mike McGarry .

You should use this eBook as a both a thorough guide to GMAT idioms as well a reference as you go through Sentence Correction questions where you might need some idiom-related help!

Comment below to let us know how you like it, and which GMAT eBook you’d like us to create next (we’ve already done general introduction and Integrated Reasoning).

You can print it out or save the PDF to your computer/phone/tablet for reading on the go, and feel free to share with friends. We hope you enjoy it and find it helpful!

Click here to download it free now .

First, a few Sentence Correction practice questions, all on related grammatical themes.

1) Company policy restricts employees to, at most, three personal days in a month, and even less if the number of Fridays in the month is more than four.

1. even less if the number of Fridays in the month is more than four
2. even less if the amount of Fridays in the month is more than four
3. even fewer if the number of Fridays in the month is greater than four
4. even fewer if the amount of Fridays in the month is more than four
5. even less if the number of Fridays in the month is greater than four

2) The film professor said he regarded Leni Riefenstahl more like a pioneer of cinematographic aesthetics instead of being a Nazi propagandist.

1. more like a pioneer of cinematographic aesthetics instead of being
2. more as a pioneer of cinematographic aesthetics than as
3. more as a pioneer of cinematographic aesthetics instead of being
4. mainly like a pioneer of cinematographic aesthetics, instead of like
5. mainly as a pioneer of cinematographic aesthetics, as opposed to

3) For every one hundred applicants who send their resume to Megatonic Consulting, the interview committee will interview less than six of them.

1. the interview committee will interview less than six of them
2. under six of them will be interviewed by the committee
3. an interview conducted by the committee will be given to fewer than six of that hundred
4. less than six of that hundred will have a committee interview
5. fewer than six will be interviewed by the committee

4)  Major League Baseball policy prohibits use of anabolic steroids, human growth hormone, and no illegal drugs.

1. and no
2. and any
3. or no
4. or any
5. or anything that would be an

5) The controversial restructuring plan for the county school district, if approved by the governor, would result in 30% fewer teachers and 15% less classroom contact-time throughout schools in the county.

1. in 30% fewer teachers and 15% less
2. in 30% fewer teachers and 15% fewer
3. in 30% less teachers and 15% less
4. with 30% fewer teachers and 15% fewer
5. with 30% less teachers and 15% less

Solutions will follow this article.

Comparisons and quantities in grammar

In two previous posts, I have introduced these issues.

(a) http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-grammar-less-vs-fewer/

(b) http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-comparisons-more-vs-greater-and-less-vs-fewer/

The first explores the basic issue of countable vs. uncountable: this includes the infamous distinction of “less vs. fewer”, one of the most widely condoned grammatical errors in English. The second explores the grammar & idioms employed to discuss changing quantities, whether increases or decreases. This post expands into a number of related grammatical situations and idioms:

(i) more X than Y

(ii) for every # P, #Q

(iii) not A, B, and/or  C

(iv) comparatives (increases & decreases) with countable quantities, uncountable items, pure numbers, and percents

More X than Y

Some things in life are black and white, either this or that.   Some other things, though, admit of shades of gray —- aspect #1 is more true, and aspect #2 is less true.   This idiom is for such cases.  The X and Y, of course, must have parallel structure. If a preposition is involved, remember the once outside or twice inside rule.

6) She lectured the students more with a sense of duty than with any enthusiasm.

7) He set the table with more knives than forks.

8) Despite his lifelong rejection of Quantum Mechanics, Einstein was more a constructive critic than an implacable foe for the young movement.

9) She said she considered Willy Mays more an all-around superstar than simply a great hitter.

For every # P, # Q

This idiom is ideal for discussing ratios.   Suppose items A and B are in a ratio of x:y.  Then we could say: For every x A’s, y B’s are ….  Often, after the comma, the very next thing stated is the second number of the ratio.   (This number may be qualified by an adverb or short adverbial phrase —- only, at least, more than, etc.)   If the first number is a direct object, then the second number may follow a short [noun] + [verb] combination.

10) For every dollar the US government spends on education, it spends eight dollars on defense.

11) Among general employees at Ophiuchus Corporation, men and women are equally represented, but for every 17 male managers, there are only two female managers.

12) For every symphony Brahms wrote, Haydn wrote 26.

13) For every 5 drops of precipitation that falls somewhere on earth, only one falls somewhere on land.

 ”And/or” with “not” and negatives

Suppose we have three items, A, B, and C, and we could have or not have any one of them in any combination.  There are eight cases.

Case #1: none

Case #2: A

Case #3: B

Case #4: C

Case #5: A + B

Case #6: A + C

Case #7: B + C

Case #8: all three

The phrase “A, B, or C” includes cases #2-8 — very inclusive.  The phrase “A, B, and C” includes only case #8 — very exclusive.   The word “not” or any other negative word (e.g. “without“) changes these to the complement: that is to say, every included in positive is excluded in the negative, and vice versa.   Thus, “not A, B, or C” means case #1 only — very exclusive.  By contrast, “not A, B, and C” means cases #1-7 — very inclusive.   Most often in such cases, people are trying to say “none” (i.e. Case #1), and don’t realize they need the word “or” to say that. 

Increasing and decreasing, case A: countable nouns

Any things that can be counted one at time are countable nouns.  The hallmark question for countable nouns is “how many?” — if you would ask “how many X?” then X is countable.   For countable nouns:

Increase: more — more cars, more books, more people, more insects, more gallons of milk, more hours, more miles

Decrease: fewer — fewer cars, fewer books, fewer people, fewer insects, fewer gallons of milk, fewer hours, fewer miles

Increasing and decreasing, case B: uncountable bulk

Anything that is continuous without discrete units is an uncountable noun.  The hallmark question for uncountable nouns is “how much?” — if you would ask “how much X?” then X is uncountable.   For uncountable nouns:

Increase: more — more cheese, more rain, more fluency, more justice, more milk, more time, more distance

Decrease: less — less cheese, less rain, less fluency, less justice, less milk, less time, less distance

Increasing and decreasing, case C: numbers

Sometimes we have occasion to talk about either pure mathematical number (i.e. a counted number) or real-world quantities that are numbers — the price of something, the volume of something, the temperature of something, etc. Here, things are far more idiomatic. For pure numbers, counts, we use “greater than” and “less than“. For some quantities, such as price and temperature, we speak of “higher than” and “lower than“.  For other, having to do with size, we speak of “larger than” and “smaller than“.

Increasing and decreasing, case D: percents

If we are taking the percent of something countable, then we follow the countable rules, Case A above. If we are taking the percent of something uncountable, then we follow the uncountable rules, Case B above.

Summary

If this article gave you any “aha!” moments, you may want to look over the questions at the top before reading the solutions below. Here’s another practice question:

14) http://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/3267

If you would like to add anything or have any questions, please let us know in the comments section below.

Practice problem explanations

1) Split #1: We are talking about how many personal days. The phrase “how many” means countable, which means we must use “fewer“, not “less.”  Only choices (C) & (D) get this correct, and the rest are wrong.

Split #2: we can count how many Fridays in a month.  The phrase “how many” means countable, which means we must use “number“, not “amount“.  Only choices (A) & (C) & (E) get this correct.

Split #3: the “number” of Fridays is a number. It probably would be acceptable to say “more than four“, but technically, it is better to say “greater than four.”

The only possible answer is (C).

2) Split #1: idiom.  The correct idiom is “to regard as“, not “to regard like”, which is always wrong.  Because of this, choices (A) & (E) are incorrect.

Split #2: the correct comparative idiom is “more P than Q“.  Only choice (B) uses this correctly.

The only possible answer is (B).

3) Split #1: the question is: how many will the interview committee interview?  The phrase “how many” means countable, which means we must use “fewer“, not “less” or “under“.  Only choices (C) & (E) get this correct.

Split #2: this sentence uses the idiom For every #P, #Q, so we want the numerical phrase close to the beginning of the second half.  Choice (E) begins with “fewer than six”, the numerical phrase right away.   Choice (C) buries the numerical phrase “fewer than six” close to the end of the clause.

Split #3:  concision.   Choice (E) is sleek and elegant.  By contrast, choice (C) distended, bloated monstrosity, way too awkward and indirect to be correct.

For all these reasons, the only possible answer is (E).

4) Split #1: the word “prohibit” is already a negative.  Any answer with “no” would be an incorrect double-negative.  Choices (A) & (C) are incorrect.

Split #2: as discussed in this post, we want a construction that means none of item #1, none of item #2, and none of item #3.  For the construction, we need the word “or.”  Choices (A) & (B) are incorrect.

Split #3: Concision.  Choice (E) is an wordy monstrosity that should be taken out back and shot.   The hypothetical “would be an illegal drug” is totally inappropriate to the context.   It’s not that heroin or cocaine “would be” illegal — they are illegal!!  Choice (E) is far too wordy as well as illogical, so it is incorrect.

For all these reasons, the only possible answer is (D).

5) Split #1: idioms.  The correct idiom is “result in“, not “result with“.  Choices (D) & (E) are incorrect.

Split #2: We can count teachers (“how many teachers?”), so we need “fewer” with the percent of teachers.   Classroom contact-time is uncountable (“how much classroom contact-time?”), so we need “less” with this percent.   Only choice (A) has both of these correct.

Idioms are an important topic on GMAT Sentence Corrections.  With some idioms, a particular verb may demand a single preposition — for example, “able to do X” is correct, and “able for doing X” is incorrect.  See our idiom ebook for more examples.   That’s a great deal to know right there.  To make matters worse, some words have more than one idiom, and different prepositions will be correct in different logical scenarios.  One blog article already discusses the difference of “means of” vs. “means to.”   Here, to start, are four questions exploring this issue.

1) Almost all motor vehicles on the road have a suspension system, that provides a smooth ride by allowing the road surface to have irregularities.

1. that provides a smooth ride by allowing the road surface to have irregularities
2. that provide a smooth ride by allowing for irregularities of the road surface
3. which provides a smooth ride by allowing for irregularities of the road surface
4. which provide a smooth ride by allowing the road surface to be irregular
5. which provides a smooth ride by allowing the road surface to have irregularities

2) The disaster agency revealed to the press the power of the hurricane and the extent of its damage, and, with continuing rain preventing relief efforts, it expressed fear of the welfare of the survivors.

1. with continuing rain preventing relief efforts, it expressed fear of
2. with continuing rain preventing relief efforts, they expressed fear for
3. because continuing rain was preventing relief efforts, they expressed fear for
4. because continuing rain was preventing relief efforts, they expressed fear of
5. because continuing rain was preventing relief efforts, it expressed fear for

3) The Engineering Department, one of the newest departments in the University, has more extensive facilities than every department, due to their graduates’ demand for industry and their correspondingly higher salaries.

1. every department, due to their graduates’ demand for industry and their correspondingly higher
2. every other department, because of its graduates’ demand in industry and their correspondingly higher
3. every department, because of its graduates’ demand for industry and their higher corresponding
4. every other department, due to their graduates’ demand in industry and their higher corresponding
5. every other department, because of their graduates’ demand for industry and their higher corresponding

4) Adolphe Menjou, known for being the “most well-dressed man in America” for many years, starring in many movies as an impeccably dressed profession, and, accordingly, he entitled his autobiography “It Took Nine Tailors.”

1. known for being the “most well-dressed man in America” for many years, starring
2. known to be the “most well-dressed man in America” for many years, starred
3. known to be the “most well-dressed man in America” in many years, starred
4. known as the “most well-dressed man in America” for many years, starred
5. known as the “most well-dressed man in America” in many years, starring

Solutions will be given at the end of this article.

More than one

Here is a short list of words that idiomatically take more than one prepositions.  In each case, each different preposition is correct but denotes a different meaning.  It’s important to keep all these idioms for the same words clear.

agree to/with

allow for/to

demand for/in

fear of/for

known as/for/to

for/in years

I will discuss each below

Agree

The two idioms with the verb “agree” are

agree to

agree with

If people are concerned, we always use the preposition “with” — “I agree with Chris“, “I agree with Aung San Suu Kyi“, “I agree with Plato“.   We can also use “with” to refer to the content of the agreement: “I agree with his decision“, “I agree with the results of the election.”  In these cases, the content of the agreement is something I passively accept: somebody other than me determined it, and I am merely agreeing with it.

The idiom “agree to” has a very particular meaning.  If I “agree to do X“, then someone has asked me to do X or has placed this demand or this responsibility on me, and have accepted responsibility and intend to follow through with my actions.  Suppose a friend asks me to bring cheese to a party.  If I “agree to bring cheese to the party“, I am essentially making a promise that I will carry out and fulfill this action.   If I “agree to a contract“, I am promising to behave in accordance with the demands of the contract.

The “with” idiom is more flexible and more widely used, but the “to” idiom is sophisticated, and the GMAT likes it.

Allow

The two idioms with the verb “allow” are

allow to

allow for

By far, the more common idiom is the former.  When I “allow Q to do X“, I am giving approval or permission.  “The teacher allows the children to play.”  “The Roman Catholic Church now allows its members to eat meat on Fridays not during Lent.”  “The US Constitution allows a defendant to have an attorney.”  The approval or permission may be personal, or may be expressed by something impersonal (a government, a law, etc.)  This idioms is always used if a person is allowing someone to do something.

The other idiom is rarer and more sophisticated.   Only something impersonal (a situation, a condition, a physical law) can “allow for” something.  If we say “X allows for Y“, then we are saying that X, by its very design, has a built-in accommodations that either tolerates Y or makes Y possible.   “Yoga pants allow for vigorous stretches.”  “The algorithm allows for irregularities in the data.” “Grand-Unified Field Theory allows for proton decay.”   When we say “X allows for Y“, this construction sometimes carries the connotation that, normally or naively, we would think that Y is a problem for X or is incompatible with X, and the significance of the statement is that, no, contrary to expectations, we actually can have Y with X.

Demand

The two idioms with the noun “demand” are

demand for

demand in

This is tricky.  First of all, the verb “demand” takes no preposition at all (“Riding a bike demands balance.”), although if the thing demanded is something complex, the  verb “demand” will require a “that“-clause with the subjunctive.  Whether the object of the verb “demand” is a single noun or a clause, in other case, that object is the thing demanded, the thing that someone wants or needs or requires.

5) The mother demanded that her children clean their rooms.

6) The general demanded that all soldiers be present during general inspections.

Now, let’s leave the verb behind and look at the noun.  Really, there’s only one idioms.  When we talk about the “demand for X“, that is that noun equivalent of “to demand X“: the X is the thing that someone wants or needs or requires:  “the demand for nurses“, the demand for higher wages“, “the demand for silver.”

Some demands are universal, such as “demand for oxygen to breath“.  While such things are very important, they tend to make less interesting subjects, because they simply are always true.   In terms of the GMAT, many interesting demands are unique, say, to particular business or particular sectors of the economy, for example, the “demand for electricity in aluminum production.”  Now, suppose the sentence were about the subject “electricity“: then, somewhere later in the sentence, we could talk about “its demand in aluminum production.”   The idiom “demand in Y” is really a sort of abbreviation.   The thing demanded is somewhere else in the sentence, perhaps the subject, and the object of “in” simply denotes the venue or field in which the demand takes place.

Fear

The two idioms with the word “fear” are

fear of

fear for

This is also tricky.  The verb “to fear” can be used with no preposition.  If I say “I fear X”, then I am saying that I am afraid of X: “She fears spiders.”  If this ideas is changed to noun-form, we use the idiom “fear of“: “She has a fear of spiders.”  The object of the “of” in the “fear of” construction is the thing feared, the perceived threat.

The idiom “fear for” can be used with either the verb or the noun, and this has a very different meaning.  In this construction, the object of the preposition “for” is something for which care is shown precisely because it is the object of a threat.  If I “fear for my life“, that means I like my life, but I am worried because I am in some situation in which I believe my life is threatened.

This is a very important distinction, because the different preposition gives the construction almost the opposite meaning.  The person who says “I fear dogs” or “I have a fear of dogs” presumably doesn’t like dogs and is saying that he finds dogs a threat.  By contrast, the person who says “I fear for dogs” or “I have a fear for dogs” is presumably someone who likes dogs and who is worried that dogs are potentially the victims of some external threat.

 Known

The three idioms with the participle “known” are

known as

known for

known to

All of these are in addition to the standard “known by”.  If something is “known by X”, then X is the one who knows.  That’s standard and the same form as all other passive verbs.

The idiom “known as” is most useful for discussing a role for which the person is famous: “known as a great conductor”, “known as a dominant left-handed closer”, “known as the Father of the Scientific Method.”

The idiom “known to” is most useful if a person is famous (or notorious) for a particular action: “known to throw eggs at encyclopaedia salesmen”, “known to have escaped from Alcatraz”, “known to have saved 75 lives”.   This may have the connotation of affirming some suspected about a person.

The idiom “known for” is the most general.   If we describe someone as “known for X”, then X would be the reason that person is famous or infamous: “known for his radio broadcasts”, “known for his unusual features,” “known for climbing the Seven Summits”.  The object of “for” can simply be a noun or noun phrase, the reason why the person is well-known, as in the first two examples.

In the last example, the object of “for” was a gerund, an action.  That may raise the question: what’s the difference between second & third idioms here, the difference between (a) “known to do X”/”known to have done X”, and (b) “known for doing X”.   Both are correct.  The difference in subtle implications is very slight, and not something the GMAT would expect you to know.   There is something almost interchangeable about the second & third idioms here, but not so with the first.  If someone has a role, say, “known as the star of that movie”, then rephrasing this with some form of the verb “to be” in order to fit it into the form of the second idiom (“known to be the star of that movie”) or the third idiom (“known for being the star of that movie”) would be awkward.

Units of Time

Here I will use the unit “years”, but the same would be true of “hours”, “days”, “weeks”, etc.   The two relevant idioms, the same for all these units of times, are:

for years

in years

The first, “for years”, denotes the duration of an activity.  “He worked there for ten years.”  During the ten year time, he was working.   That’s very straightforward.

The other idiom, “in years”, is more subtle.  It denotes the length of an absence, perhaps a time of waiting, and is often used with a negative: “He hasn’t worked there in ten years” — this means that, while at one time he did work there, his work there came to an end at least ten years ago, and during this most recent span of ten years, he hasn’t worked there at all.

I can say of myself, true statement: “I lived in New York City for five years, but I haven’t lived there in 15 years.”   This mean, the five-year span when I did live there must have ended more than 15 years ago.  (Ah, the days when I could take the 7-train to see my Mets!!)

If I say “the tallest tree for 20 years”, I am saying: this particular tree was the tallest true during a span of time that lasted 20 years.  If I say  “the tallest tree in 20 years”, I am implying: for the last 20 years, apparently the trees were all short, or at least not very tall, and now, this particular tree is taller than any tree had been during that entire 20-year span.

Summary

If you had any insights while reading this article, you may want to give the questions at the top another look before reading the explanations below.  Here’s another question on related topics.

7) http://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/3264

If you have any questions about what I’ve said here, let me know in the comments section at the bottom.

Explanations to practice questions

1) Split #1: “that” vs. “which”.  The comma separating this clause from the rest of the sentence indicates that it is a non-restrictive modifier, and the GMAT always uses “which” for non-restrictive cases.  Choices (A) & (B) are incorrect.

Split #2: SV Agreement.  The “suspension system” is singular in this sentence, so it requires the singular verb “provides”.   Choices (B) & (D) are incorrect.

Split #3: idiom with “allow”.  The phrase “allowing the road to have irregularities” implies that, somehow, the suspension system is giving the road permission to have bumps — that’s not the intended meaning.  The intended meaning is that the design of a suspension system allows for a smooth ride despite the fact that the road is bumpy.   For this, we need the idiom “allow for”.   Only choices (B) & (D) use this idiom correctly.

The only possible answer is (C).

2) Split #1: “with” vs. “because”.  This part of the sentence describes an action with a noun and a verb.   For describing a full action, the GMAT does not find acceptable the structure: “with” [noun][participial phrase].   That’s too much action to cram into a preposition phrase.  If you want to talk about that much action, use a full [noun] + [verb] clause, with a subordinate modifier, such as “because”.  The forms with a full clause beginning with the word “because” are correct. Choices (A) & (B) are incorrect.

Split #2: pronoun agreement.   The “disaster agency” may have several employees, but it’s a singular collective noun, and we need to refer to it by a singular pronoun: “it”.  Choices (B) & (C) & (D) use the incorrect plural pronoun.

Split #3: idiom with “fear”.  The “disaster agency” most certainly does not view the ” welfare of the survivors” as a threat or something to fear.   Rather, it is concerned for the survivors precisely because their “welfare” is threatened by circumstances.   The idiom “fear of” is totally incorrect in this context; the correct idiom here is “fear for”.  Choices (A) & (D) use the incorrect idiom.

The only possible answer is (E).

3) Split #1: “every” vs. “every other”.  The Engineering Department is a department, and it can’t have more extensive facilities than itself!   The appropriate comparison is between this department and “every other” department.   Choices (A) & (C) make this mistake.

Split #2: idiom with “demand”.  It’s not that the engineering graduates are demanding industry — I’m not sure what that even would mean!  That’s what “demand for” incorrectly implies in this context.  By contract, there is a demand for engineering graduates in industry — industry is not the thing demanded but the place in which the demand happens.   For this, we need “demand in industry.”   Choices (A) & (C) & (E) use the incorrect idiom, and cannot be correct.

Split #3: pronoun agreement.   The “Engineering Department” may have many members, both faculty and students, but it’s a singular collective noun, and we need to refer to it by a singular pronoun: “it”.  Choices (D) & (E) use the incorrect plural pronoun.

Split #4: the correspondence.  What corresponds to what?  the graduates have a higher demand in industry and this corresponds to the higher salaries they receive.  Higher corresponds to higher, so we need to modify the adjective “higher” — we need the adverb to modify the adjective: “correspondingly higher”.  Only choices (A) & (B) have this correct.

The only possible answer is (B).

4) A question about the very dapper Adolphe Menjou.

Split #1: idiom with “known“.  Here, we are talking about a title, a role, so the most appropriate idiom is “known as“.  The idioms “known for” and “known to” produce unnecessarily awkward constructions.  Only choices (D) & (E) have this correct.

Split #2: the idiom with time.  The prompt make it clear — Menjou held this distinction for a long duration of time.  Many years refers to when he was holding the distinction: this is what “for many years” implies.  It does not refer to an absence of sartorial splendor before him: that is what “in many years” would imply.   Choices (C) & (E) use the incorrect idiom, and cannot be correct.

Split #3: missing verb mistake.  After the word “and” is a complete independent clause, so we need a full independent clause before it.  We have a subject, Adolphe Menjou, but the prompt has no verb for this subject.   We need the verb “starred“, not the participle “starring“, to give this a full verb.   Choices (A) & (E) make the “missing verb mistake,” and cannot be correct.

The only possible answer is (D).

Hello! The answer to this week’s GMAT Tuesday question is…it depends! So find out what types of idioms will show up on your test, and enjoy the beauty of nature while you’re at it :).

As always, leave a comment or question below, too, and I’ll be happy to get back to you :).

Hello!
 
It’s time to get down to business! Have you mastered your GMAT idioms yet? These idioms are not slang, and they’re not Americanisms, but they can be tricky. So watch this video to learn 4 most important ones!
 
And while you’re at it, sign up for our free GMAT idioms flashcards! You can practice with 160 more idioms, and did I mention they’re free?
 
Leave me any questions or comments you have below!
 

Hello!

This week’s GMAT Tuesday video includes both an impostor and more examples of idioms! If you’d like more practice with must-know idioms after you’ve watched the video, be sure to check out our free GMAT idiom flashcards as well.

Also, here’s an image of the final board work here:

If you’ve got a question or comment, feel free to leave it below! See you next week.
 

Happy 1st-of-the-month, GMAT Studiers!

We’re celebrating this day with…more idioms! A number of you have asked for lessons on idioms, so enjoy this video and learn about 4 more “must-know” idioms for the test.

Here’s the final board work from the video:

Let me know if you also have questions you’d like answered in a video–just leave them in the comments below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Hello!

If you can’t enough GMAT idiom practice, then this is the GMAT Tuesday for you! Learn how to use 4 more key idioms in time for test day.

Here’s a still of the final board work:

Feel free to leave me any questions or comments you have below! See you next week.

Hello!

This week, learn how to use the idiom “allow for” correctly AND learn how to avoid it’s common “allow to” trap!

Here’s a still of the final board work:

If you have any questions, comments or suggestions for future videos, please share them with me! Leave them in the comments below, and I’ll get back to you.

Hello!

I made it just in time to talk about more must-know idioms! Learn how to correctly use “because of”, “based on”, “fear of” and “fear for” today.

If you have any questions about this or anything else GMAT-related, please leave them in the comments below.

And as usual, here’s a still of this week’s board work:

See you next week!

Hello!

Looking for more idiom practice? Look no further than this week’s GMAT Tuesday! We’ll be learning how to correctly use the words “amid” and “among” today.

Here’s the board work for this week:

And, if you have comments or questions about this video or anything related to the GMAT, feel free to leave them in the comment box below!

Hello!

Today, join me in rainy Southern California for even more idiom practice!

Here’s the board work for this GMAT Tuesday:

And if you have any questions or comments, be sure to leave it in the comment box below.

Hello!

What do “contrasted with”, “indifferent towards”, and “not so much as” have in common? They are commonly tested idioms you might find on the GMAT! Watch this week’s video to make sure you know how to use them correctly.

Here’s an image of this week’s board work:

If you’d like to learn about any other idioms, let me know in the comment box below!

Hello!

It’s Tuesday again, and today Kevin dives into more Idioms.

In this weeks video, he covers idioms involving the words suggested, consistent, chance, and reluctant. Do you know how to use these words correctly and what prepositions to pair with them? If not, you’ll know in the next few minutes.

Here’s a close-up of this week’s board:

Wow! We’ve made 10 videos now on idioms! That’s awesome!

In this weeks video, I go through some idioms that depend on whether you are talking about an issue or a person, what preposition to use with passives and past participles, as well as idioms to complete parallel structure.

Here’s a look at this week’s board:

There are so many idioms that might appear on the GMAT. At least enough to fill eleven videos.

In this week’s installment, we look at the idiomatic expressions involving predicate, mistake, and unlike.

Some of the trickiest problems on sentence correction questions involve idioms.

Today we look at idioms involving hope and model, and we look at the best way to talk about hypothetical situations on the GMAT. 😀

This week’s board:

“Hello! It’s me!” Kevin from GMAT Tuesdays, not Adele from the famed “Hello” music video!

We are diving into 3 new idioms this week: forbade, in danger, and concluded. Make sure you know which ones take gerunds, which ones take infinitives, and which ones take neither. 😀

Here’s this week’s board:

The post GMAT Tuesday: “Hello” to Idioms appeared first on Magoosh GMAT Blog.

Idioms—you need to know! 😀

This week we look at idiomatic expressions involving prevent, less/fewer, amount/number, and wonder.

 
Here’s this week’s board.

 

The post GMAT Tuesday: Must Love Idioms #14 appeared first on Magoosh GMAT Blog.