Dear Friends,
Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
zoom612 wrote:
Nine months after the county banned jet skis and other motor bikes from the tranquil waters of Puget Sound, a judge overturned the ban on the ground of violating state laws for allowing the use of personal watercraft on common waterways.
(A) of violating state laws for allowing
(B) of their violating state laws to allow
(C) that it violates state laws that allowed
(D) that it violated state laws allowing
(E) that state laws were being violated allowing
Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of the crucial part of this sentence is that the ban violated state laws that allow the use of personal watercraft on common waterways.
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Idioms + Tenses• “grounds + that” and “grounds + for” are the correct, idiomatic construction.
• The simple present continuous tense is used to refer to actions that are currently ongoing.
• The simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
• The simple present tense is used to indicate actions taking place in the current time frame, indicate habitual actions, state universal truths, and convey information that is permanent in nature.
• Present participles (“verb+ing” – “allowing” in this case) are used to modify nouns, refer to ongoing events in any time period, and (when preceded by a comma) express cause-effect relationships.
A: This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction “grounds + of”; please remember, “grounds + that” and “grounds + for” are the correct, idiomatic construction. Further, Option A uses the needlessly wordy phrase “for allowing”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “to allow”; the use of the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb” – “to + allow” in this sentence) incorrectly implies that the ban violated state laws
in order to allow the use of personal watercraft on common waterways; the intended meaning is that the ban violated state laws
that allow the use of personal watercraft on common waterways. Further, Option B incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction “grounds + of”; please remember, “grounds + that” and “grounds + for” are the correct, idiomatic construction.
C: Trap. This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple present tense verb “violates” to refer to an action that concluded in the past; please remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past, and the simple present tense is used to indicate actions taking place in the current time frame, indicate habitual actions, state universal truths, and convey information that is permanent in nature. Further, Option C incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “allowed” to refer to an action that is currently ongoing; please remember, the simple present continuous tense is used to refer to actions that are currently ongoing, and the simple past tense is only used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
D: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase “it violated state laws allowing”, conveying the intended meaning – that the ban violated state laws that allow the use of personal watercraft on common waterways. Further, Option D correctly uses the simple past tense verb “violated” to refer to an event that concluded in the past. Moreover, Option D avoids the second tense error seen in Option C, as it uses the present participle (“verb+ing” – “allowing” in this case) to refer to a currently ongoing action; please remember, present participles (“verb+ing” – “allowing” in this case) are used to modify nouns, refer to ongoing events in any time period, and (when preceded by a comma) express cause-effect relationships. Additionally, Option D correctly uses the idiomatic construction “grounds + that”. Besides, Option D is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.
E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “state laws were being violated allowing“; the construction of this phrase leads to an incoherent meaning; the intended meaning is that the ban violated state laws that allow the use of personal watercraft on common waterways. Further, Option E uses the passive voice construction “were being violated”, rendering it awkward and needlessly indirect.
Hence, D is the best answer choice.To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):
To understand the concept of "Simple Continuous Tenses", you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________