For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indi

NOTES: "both against X and Y" is not parallel; What robber citizens? the introduction of subsidies.

Ans (C)

This is a murky topic.

Choice A --- We can straightaway dismiss this choice, as it is fragment.

Choices C and D can be also dismissed since the Relative pronoun 'which' cannot modify the subsidies brushing aside the verbs before that.

B--- It is okay except that the word both should be placed just before the two adjectives rather than before the word 'against'.

In E, the placement various commas create plenty of confusion, in addition to the idiom for protecting' being inferior to the infinitive 'to protect' in B.
The benefit of doubt may perhaps favor E as the final choice, as commas are not considered critical in GMAT.

Ans: E
For protecting American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as Chinese, competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994

For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

A. For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate - WRONG. No verb in the sentence.

B. To protect American textile manufacturers both against Indian and Chinese competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994. - WRONG. Modifier issue with 'which'.

C. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994 - CORRECT. 'Subsidies' is the subject here and 'which' modifies it correctly.

D. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition, subsidies in 1994 were introduced by the Senate - WRONG. Little wordy. Better options available.

E. For protecting American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as Chinese, competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994 - WRONG. 'For protecting' is wrong. Better option available.

IMO Answer C.

My answer is (B). It took me 1 minute and 7 seconds.

(A) This version is a fragment, which can never be correct.
(B) This version uses clear and active constructs.
(C) Passive voice "subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994" is not called for.
(D) Again, passive voice is unnecessary. Also, "against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition" is too verbose.
(E) Again, "against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition" is too verbose.

C ..
What is the OA ?

Meaning : To protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by Senate in 1994 . With this activity Senate robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

A. For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate
-- Its an intention .. SO to protect is the correct form -- Out

B. To protect American textile manufacturers both against Indian and Chinese competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994
-- Both X and Y .. not parallel -- Out
C. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994

-- Correct
D. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition, subsidies in 1994 were introduced by the Senate
-- in 1994 .. placement of the modifier is wrong here .out
E. For protecting American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as Chinese, competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994
-- Same as A . Also which refers to subsidies .. that create meaning error .

For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.


A. For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate

B. To protect American textile manufacturers both against Indian and Chinese competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994

C. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994

D. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition, subsidies in 1994 were introduced by the Senate

E. For protecting American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as Chinese, competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994

Answer - B -> Correct placement of noun Senate after the modifier -> Though "which" modifying subsidies is little weird in this since "in 1994" is modifying introduced i.e. a verb and generally "which" can jump over only an essential noun modifier that can not be placed anywhere else in the sentence and not an adverbial modifier. In this sentence, in 1994 can be placed after Senate introduced, in 1994, subsidies. Best among the lot though.

Subsidies is what robbed the US citizens hence has to be closest to which

A) is not a sentence - Eliminate
C) which can not jump over a verb to modify subsidies
D) same as in C; moreover Senate is not the one who robbed
E) For protecting is not the correct way to express the intention of Senate

The right answer is E.

For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

A is not a complete sentence. There is no main clause. We have an opening modifier For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition followed by a noun subsidies, followed by a non-essential modifier introduced by Senate, and a relative clause. The subject subsidies does not have a verb.

B is incorrect because of parallelism error. Both is a parallelism marker and we expect X and Y to be parallel. X is against Indian, and Y is Chinese. X and Y are not parallel. To correct this error, against must precede both or Y must be against Chinese. We can eliminate B based on parallelism error.

In C, the non-underlined relative clause is intended to modify subsidies rather than Senate, since it is illogical to say that the Senate robbed the US citizens. In addition, subsidies are inanimate and therefore inacapable of having a purpose. For these same reasons, D can also be eliminated.

We are left with E as the best answer out of the lot. The relative clause rightly modifies subsidies.

A. For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

B. To protect American textile manufacturers both against Indian and Chinese competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

C. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

D. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition, subsidies in 1994 were introduced by the Senate, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

E. For protecting American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as Chinese, competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.


A. For the protection of American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies in 1994, introduced by Senate

B. To protect American textile manufacturers both against Indian and Chinese competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994

C. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994

D. In order to protect American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as against Chinese, competition, subsidies in 1994 were introduced by the Senate

E. For protecting American textile manufacturers against Indian, as well as Chinese, competition, Senate introduced subsidies in 1994

A is not an independent sentence (No working verb)
B has 'against' AFTER both.
C and D don't are in passive, which renders the 'which' noun modifier away from the 'subsidies'
IMO, it should be E

Even though option C sounds well, here is my reasoning for it to be incorrect :-

In order to protect American textile manufacturers against both Indian and Chinese competition, subsidies were introduced by the Senate in 1994, which robbed US citizens the opportunity of buying inexpensive and high quality clothing.

1) which is modifying "1994". "which" can not modify a clause.
2) "in 1994" is modifying Senate as if the Senate, one appointed in 1994, introduced the subsidies.
3) In order to protect should modify Senate, since he is the one who introduced in order to protect against competition.

For some points above, I see all the options as incorrect.

Please let me know if my reasoning is incorrect.

All my SC learning will go for a toss otherwise.

Hello shameekv1989,

This is in response to your PM.

I agree with your analysis. IMHO, per the GMAT SC rules, all the options are incorrect. In Choice C, which appears to be modifying the preceding action. This is ungrammatical.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Experts,

Can any one of you please explain why C is the OA.

In my opinion E seems to be the best of the lot.

Thanks in advance!