To those who study British English (as I do), C is completely understandable and the first choice within seconds.
1) That structure is the first inversion of If-Clause:
- Should + S + V bare, Clause (Tense in this clause is Simple Future. In rare case of absolute truth, the tense in this clause will be Simple Present)
2) The second inversion (for If Type II) has two types:
- Were + S + Noun, S + would/ could/ might... + V bare
- Were + S + To Infinitive, ....same.....
3) The third inversion (for If Type III):
- Had + S + Past participle, S + would/ could/ might + have + Past participle
There are also structure such as:
a) Were it not for..., clause (for If Type II)
b) If it had not been for...., clause = Had it not been for...., clause (for If Type III)
Well, I do not attempt to compare any thing between those English because we are in GMAT "territory". However, I am just amused by your surprise with such structure. It is very interesting because I also have surprise when study GMAT and know that the case of "being" is considered as RED FLAG because in a majority of cases, "being" is considered redundant.
vshaunak@gmail.com wrote:
If present metal prices continue to sharply rise, the value of the copper in a penny will soon be greater than the face value of the coin.
(A) If present metal prices continue to sharply rise,
(B) If present metal prices are continuing their sharp rise,
(C) Should present metal prices continue their sharp rise,
(D) Continuation of sharply rising metal prices should mean that
(E) Metal prices’ sharp rise continuing should mean that
Please explain. OA later.