Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit

Hello Everyone!

Let's tackle this question, one issue at a time, and narrow it down to the correct choice! To start, here is the original question with any major differences between the options highlighted in orange:

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

After a quick glance over the options, there are a couple places we can focus on:

1. requiring / require (Idioms)
2. protect / is protecting / are protecting (Subject-Verb Agreement)

Let's start off with #2 on our list: subject-verb agreement. No matter which way we go with this, it will eliminate at least 2 options rather quickly. The first thing we need to do is figure out what the subject is:

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

Now that we know the verb needs to work with the singular subject "compliance," we can rule out any options that don't agree:

(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

We can eliminate options A, C, & D because their verbs are plural, and they don't agree with their singular subject! See - how easy was that?

Now let's go back to #1 on our list: to require / requiring. This is an issue of idioms! By using the wrong idiom here, it actually changes the overall meaning:

(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

This is CORRECT! It's idiomatically correct to say that "laws requiring X" here. It's clear that the law currently requires these changes to be made already. It also uses proper subject-verb agreement (compliance / is protecting).

(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

This is INCORRECT because the phrase "laws to require X" isn't idiomatically correct in English. It also changes the meaning somewhat - the law that exists today will require people to use turtle-excluder devices in the future? That doesn't really make sense with how laws work. Laws require actions to be taken immediately - not in the future.


There you have it - option B is the correct choice! If we focus on the major differences between the options, we can eliminate the wrong options quickly to get to the right one!


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

"laws to require..." isn't a correct idiom if you're discussing the actual text of the laws themselves. if you were discussing the ultimate purpose of those laws, then this could be idiomatic.
examples:
laws specifying long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> correct (___ing), since that's what the laws actually specify.
laws to specify long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> incorrect (that's not the ultimate purpose of the laws)
laws to discourage drunk driving --> correct (this IS actually the ultimate purpose of the laws)

Credits: Ron Purewal

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

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 shrimpers complied with laws that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets, protecting adult sea turtles.

Concepts tested here: Subject-Verb Agreement + Meaning + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• The infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb" - "to + require" in this sentence) is the preferred construction for referring to the purpose or intent of an action.
• The simple present continuous tense is used to refer to actions that are currently ongoing and continuous in nature.
• 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.

A: This answer choice incorrectly refers to the singular noun “compliance” with the plural verb “protect”. Additionally, Option A incorrectly uses the simple present tense verb “protect” to refer to an action that is currently ongoing and continuous in nature; please remember, the simple present continuous tense is used to refer to actions that are currently ongoing and continuous in nature, and the simple present tense is only 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 A uses the needlessly wordy phrase “that turtle-excluder devices be on”, leading to awkwardness/ redundancy.

B: Correct. This answer choice correctly refers to the singular noun “compliance” with the singular verb “is protecting”. Additionally, Option B correctly uses the simple present continuous tense verb "is protecting" to refer to an action that is currently ongoing and continuous in nature. Further, Option B uses the phrase "laws requiring”, conveying the intended meaning – that the shrimpers complied with the particular laws that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets. Besides, Option B is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

C: This answer choice incorrectly refers to the singular noun “compliance” with the plural verb “protect”. Additionally, Option C incorrectly uses the simple present tense verb “protect” to refer to an action that is currently ongoing and continuous in nature; please remember, the simple present continuous tense is used to refer to actions that are currently ongoing and continuous in nature, and the simple present tense is only 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.

D: This answer choice incorrectly refers to the singular noun “compliance” with the plural verb “are protecting”. Further, Option D alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “laws to require”; the use of the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb” – “to + require” in this case) incorrectly implies that the shrimpers complied with general laws for the purpose of requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets; the intended meaning is that the shrimpers complied with the particular laws that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets; please remember, the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb" - "to + require" in this sentence) is the preferred construction for referring to the purpose or intent of an action.

E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “laws to require”; the use of the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb” – “to + require” in this case) incorrectly implies that the shrimpers complied with general laws for the purpose of requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets; the intended meaning is that the shrimpers complied with the particular laws that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets; please remember, the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb" - "to + require" in this sentence) is the preferred construction for referring to the purpose or intent of an action.

Hence, B is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the concept of "Simple Continuous Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

agreed with B

now I have one hypothetical Q

if there is protect(s) instead of protect in option C

which one to choose from? B or C?

B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect


NOTE: This Q is now @ OG 12#133

Still B.

In C : that --> modifies laws.

its like you are introducing suborinate clause:
laws <that> require "turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets" protect

here for verb --> "protect" subject looks like "devices" --> which is gramaticall correct, but logicall incorrect.

If you change the "protect" to protects" is also not going to help in the sentence C.
Now both itis gramatically and Logically incorrect.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect --> the whole modifier requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp is too wordy to modify for laws, single noun their compliance is not suitable with protect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting -->the best: requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is a more simple participle phrase modifier for laws than that of A. Besides, is protecting is compliant with their compliance
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect -->same error of A
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting -->to + Inf here does not clearly modify for which Noun and betterly idiomatically modifies for another to + inf than a Noun. Also, are protecting is grammatical incorrect with their compliance
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting -->same error of D

Note: 'protect' needs the verb form for the subject 'compliance', so should be protects.

A, C, D are gone
D and E are gone for the "to require", which is incorrect.

Only B left

I think that is correct in A, only verb form of protect is incorrect.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect - 'protect' is wrong. 'compliance' protects or is protecting
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting - saying, requiring, protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect - 'protect' is wrong. 'compliance' protects or is protecting
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting - 'compliance' is singular. Hence we need 'is protecting'...'are' is incorrect. 'to require' is incorrect here.
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting - 'to require' is incorrect here.

The best way to solve is look for subject-verb agreement. complaince should have singular verb thus we have only b and e left. E makes no sense as the use of infinitive is wrong. Thus B must be the answer

IMO, this is an ‘open and shut’ case involving S-V matching . Limiting just to the underline part, we may see that the subject of the subordinate clause introduced by ‘ that ‘ is compliance, a simple singular noun and therefore its verb should be matching with yet again a singular . You have the singular specification only in B and E; In E, ‘laws to require’ is unidiomatic while ‘laws requiring’ is the custom usage. So E. any hitch?

Hi Daagh,

Totally agree with you on S/V - leaving us with B or E.

However I would say that 'laws requiring' is the correct phrase. I can't say I have any idiom table that refutes your point, but it just sounds awful to my eat the other way, and it's not an idiom I've come accross

sorry plumber250 ; I meant to write E is out and B is eventually ; Yes E is terrible . That is what I have said in the explanation before my final sentence,; it ia typo

A S/V do not agree in number.
B Correct.
C S/V do not agree in number.
D S/V do not agree in number.
E "To require" is incorrect because the infinitive of purpose does not make sense. The ultimate goal of the law is not "to require" but rather "to protect." The requirement is merely a byproduct of the law.

Hi sayantan2ck,
I know you were trying to explain different concept here but from subject verb agreement point of view i think protects should be used in Eg 2 and eg 3.
Also let me know what do you call compliance in grammatical terms? Is it a noun? I haven't seen much pronoun together with noun placed adjacently as in option A.
Let me know if structure wise the sentence is correct other than SV no agreement in option A in OG.
WR,
Arpit

Hello adkikani/Arpit,


I would be glad to help you resolve your doubt.


The word compliance indeed is a noun. That is the reason why it can act as a subject in a clause.

Also, there is no issue in the expression of their compliance in Choice A. The pronoun their acts as a possessive pronoun that is followed by a noun. For example: my pen, your car, his project, her recipe, etc.

In Choice A, their compliance stands for the local shrimpers' compliance. Hence, choice A only one error - the Subject-Verb number disagreement error.


Let's dive deeper into this sentence to understand how to solve this question by using the meaning-based approach.






Sentence Structure


Meaning
The sentence starts by saying that local shrimpers organized a press conference last week. They did so to take credit for the revival of the Kemp’s ridley turtles that are rare. In this conference, the shrimpers said that they were adhering to laws that require the presence of turtle-excluder devices on nets for catching shrimps. Their adherence to the laws was able to save adult sea turtles.



SV Number Agreement Error: The singular subject “compliance” does not agree in number with the plural verb “protect.”

Note: The usage of the word “requiring” calls for the use of the subjunctive verb in the sentence. Therefore, we see the usage of the verb “be” for the subject “turtle-excluder devices.” This usage is correct.




A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
Incorrect: This choice is incorrect, as explained in the Error Analysis section.


B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
Correct: This choice rectifies the only error of Choice A and clearly presents the intended meaning.

C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
Incorrect:
SV Number Agreement Error: This choice repeats the SV agreement error of Choice A.

D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
Incorrect:

1. SV Number Agreement Error: This choice repeats the SV agreement error of Choice A.

2. Idiom Error: The usage of the phrase “to require” is incorrect in this sentence because requiring the said devices on shrimp nets is not the purpose/intent of the said laws. The intent of the laws is to save the turtle. The law is that shrimp nets must have these devices.

E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
Incorrect:
Idiom Error: This choice repeats the idiom error of Choice D regarding the usage of “to require.”



1. The subject and the verb must agree in number.
2. The expressions used in the correct answer choice must be idiomatic and must convey the intended meaning clearly.



Here is a video solution we made for this question:



Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Last week local shrimpers via which they said: hey turtle X is back. Until now all is ok.

Now the tough part: saying that their compliance with laws I.E. the obedience under certain laws is protecting the turtles.

A. is wrong because requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect is weird and protect seems that the nets protect the turtles itself not the local shrimpers

C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect - same reasons

D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting - to require and are protecting generate a sentence totally wrong. Reading it that way has no sense

E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting - same reasons

B. saying that their compliance with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting adult sea turtles.

Hope now is clear.

Regards

If in C, protect was plural (protects). Would it have been correct? The OG answer says that "that require" is wordy and unnecessary, but that part sounds better to me. Again, assuming it didn't have the protect issue.