Source: Official Guide Revised GRE 1st Ed. Part 8; Section 4; #1

11

Only by ignoring decades of mismanagement and inefficiency

Only by ignoring decades of mismanagement and inefficiency could investors conclude that a fresh infusion of cash would provide anything other than a ______________ solution to the company’s financial woes. complete, fleeting, momentary, premature, trivial, total

5 Explanations

1

PRASHANT VERMA

hey can we replace "anything other than" by a "not" as we did in "anything but"

Apr 15, 2017 • Comment

Adam

Hi Pawan,

In terms of meaning, yes, "anything other than" is the same as "anything but." But replacing it with "not" will create an ungrammatical sentence:

Only by ignoring decades of mismanagement and inefficiency could investors conclude that a fresh infusion of cash would provide not a ______________ solution to the company’s financial woes.

This doesn't really make sense on its own, but if it helps you understand the function of "anything other than," then you can still do this.

Apr 17, 2017 • Reply

1

Sheldon Rodrigues

My way of working with the question:

Only by ignoring decades of mismanagement and inefficiency could investors
conclude that a fresh infusion of cash would provide anything other than a
permanent solution to the company’s financial woes.

But since we have anything other we need the opposite of permanent i.e temporary.
Is my thinking correct?

Nov 13, 2015 • Comment

Adam

Hi Sheldon,

I think you meant to write the sentence without the "anything other than" first:

Only by ignoring decades of mismanagement and inefficiency could investors conclude that a fresh infusion of cash would provide a permanent solution to the company’s financial woes.

This would make sense. Then, when we put the "anything other than" back in, we need something that is the opposite of "permanent."

Nov 16, 2015 • Reply

1

Barun Mazumdar

Anything but Useless solution = permanent solution .. That's what is meant right ?

Jul 27, 2015 • Comment

Adam

Not quite! First of all, the answer choice "fleeting" is not the same as "useless."

Secondly, "anything but a fleeting solution" is not equivalent to "a permanent solution." It could be a permanent solution, or something else -- just not a fleeting solution. It could be *anything* except a fleeting solution.

What this sentence is saying is: in order to think that giving more money to this company provide them with a solution that is not temporary, the investors would have to ignore the company's long history of financial problems.

Oct 3, 2015 • Reply

Aashman Gupta

if we were to replace anything other than with anything but, then the new sentence would be: Only by ignoring decades of mismanagement and inefficiency could investors conclude that a fresh infusion of cash would provide anything but a __________ solution to the company’s financial woes. If we fill this blank with momentary/fleeting, wouldn't it mean the solution wouldn't be momentary/fleeting, because it's preceded by "anything but" which is the same thing as anything other than

Jun 17, 2018 • Reply

Sam Kinsman, Magoosh Tutor

Not quite! Keep in mind that "anything other than" and "anything but" have very similar meanings, so changing one for the other doesn't really change the meaning of the sentence.

"Anything but" and "anything other than" mean "something other than". So the sentence says:

"... a fresh infusion of cash would provide anything but a __________ solution to the company’s financial woes."

This really means

"a fresh infusion of cash would provide something other than a __________ solution to the company’s financial woes."

So if we put in fleeting / temporary, we are saying that the fresh infusion of cash would provide something other than a fleeting / temporary solution. So it would provide a more permanent solution. Investors could only believe this by ignoring decades of mismanagement.

Jun 19, 2018 • Reply

1

Pearl Sabarwal

wouldn't 'anything other than a permanent solution = temporary solution' That way A, F should be the answer.

Jun 18, 2014 • Comment

Kevin Rocci, Magoosh Tutor

You are on the right track, but I think you are missing the core meaning of the sentence. We have to pay attention to the fact that this company has mismanaged the company for a long time. They have been inefficient with the use of money.

So the sentence is saying that the investors would be foolish to give more money to the company since they have a reputation of not using money well.

Thus, giving money to them will only be a temporary solution, as you pointed out. And the fact that it is temporary means it couldn't be (A) or (F). That's actually the opposite of what they are saying.

Does that make sense?

Jun 24, 2014 • Reply

4

Gravatar Chris Lele, Magoosh Tutor

Oct 10, 2012 • Comment

Add Your Explanation

You must have a Magoosh account in order to leave an explanation.

Learn More About Magoosh