Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Concepts tested here: Grammatical Construction + Tenses + Pronouns + Verb Forms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• The present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.
• The simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past.
• Information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.
• "do so" is the correct usage for referring to an action, and "do it" is the correct usage for referring to a noun.
• The infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb" - "to + consider" in this sentence) is the preferred construction for referring to the intent or purpose of an action.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "was never applied" to refer to an action that concluded in the past but continues to affect the present; remember, the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present, and the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past. Further, Option A incorrectly uses the present perfect tense verb "has been required" to refer to information that is permanent in nature; remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense, and the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present. Additionally, Option A incorrectly uses "do it" to refer to the action "call a convention"; remember, "do so" is the correct usage for referring to an action, and "do it" is the correct usage for referring to a noun. Besides, Option A uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "considering" in this case) to refer to the purpose of the action "call a convention"; remember, for referring to the purpose or intent of an action, the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb" is preferred over the present participle ("verb+ing" - "considering" in this sentence) construction.

B: This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "was never applied" to refer to an action that concluded in the past but continues to affect the present; remember, the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present, and the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past. Further, Option B incorrectly uses the present perfect tense verb "has been" to refer to information that is permanent in nature; remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense, and the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present. Additionally, Option B incorrectly uses "do it" to refer to the action "call a convention"; remember, "do so" is the correct usage for referring to an action, and "do it" is the correct usage for referring to a noun. Besides, Option B uses the phrase "for consideration" to refer to the purpose of the action "call a convention"; remember, for referring to the purpose or intent of an action, the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb") is the preferred construction. Option B also uses the passive construction "there has been a requirement", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

C: This answer choice fails to form a complete sentence; as both "Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied" and "whereby Congress is required...states" are both dependent clauses, this sentence lacks an independent subject. Further, Option C incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "was never applied" to refer to an action that concluded in the past but continues to affect the present; remember, the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present, and the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past. Additionally, Option C incorrectly uses "do it" to refer to the action "call a convention"; remember, "do so" is the correct usage for referring to an action, "do it" is the correct usage for referring to a noun. Besides, Option C uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "considering" in this case) to refer to the purpose of the action "call a convention"; remember, for referring to the purpose or intent of an action, the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb" is preferred over the present participle ("verb+ing" - "considering" in this sentence) construction.

D: This answer choice fails to form a complete sentence; as both "Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied" and "whereby Congress is required...states" are both dependent clauses, this sentence lacks an independent subject.

E: Correct. This answer choice acts upon the independent subject noun "Congress" with the active verb "is required" to form a complete thought, producing a complete sentence. Further, Option E correctly uses the present perfect tense verb "has never been applied" to refer to an action that concluded in the past but continues to affect the present and correctly uses the simple present tense verb "is required" to refer to information that is permanent in nature. Additionally, Option E correctly uses "do so" to refer to the action "call a convention". Besides, Option E uses the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb" - "to + consider" in this sentence) to refer to the purpose of the action "call a convention". Option E is also free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

Hence, E 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 "Present Perfect Tense" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the concept of "Infinitives" versus "Present Participles" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps

Because you cannot find a suitable referent for the pronoun it, choices A, B, and C are gone. Between D and E, D is a fragment without a working verb. The conjunction whereby spoils the show for D. E survives

Can anyone explain why "was never applied" is wrong in A , B & C?

"was never applied" is wrong because it's an incorrect tense. Using the past tense implies that the provision can't be applied anymore because it or the constitution doesn't exist anymore. The provision still exists and the Constitution that still stands, so the provision could still be applied. We need to used the present perfect tense "has never been applied" to suggest a beginning in the past but effects that are still ongoing.

KW

I think simple past tense can not go with "never". so, "was never applied" itself. we do not need to analyse the meaning relation of this part to the rest of the sentence.

am i correct? can you give your idea on my thinking

"Never" can be used with simple past. Consider the following sentence:

I did not go there ever. .. correct

The above sentence can be written as:
I never went there. (not ever = never, did go = went) ... correct

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A, B and C are out because: (1) the present perfect tense is preferred since we don't know specific time in the past; or (2) pronoun "it" is ambiguous since it doesn't refer to any specifics.

Option D: conjunction "whereby" makes the sentence incomplete since the first part of the sentence begins with "Under" which subordinates the clause.

Hence E correct.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so --- Correct

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Understanding the intended meaning of this sentence will be helpful in nailing this SC question quickly.

Error Analysis of the original sentence :

1. TENSE USAGE :
The provision of the Constitution was never applied so the usage of "has been required" is incorrect. We are just stating the details of the provision so SIMPLE PRESENT tense would be preferred.

2. TO CONSIDER vs FOR CONSIDERING
To Consider would be preferred over FOR CONSIDERING. Because "To Consider" implies the intention as required by the provision.

3. AMBIGUOUS PRONOUN "IT" in TO DO IT
Usage of TO DO IT is incorrect here, as IT cannot refer back to the entire preceding phrase. TO DO SO is preferred in this context.

4. Usage of whereby is even making the structure incorrect
Under the provisions ....................., whereby.......................... (In this structure there is no Independent Clause.)
Under the provisions... is a prepositional modifier and its modifying Congress. So, the modified entity is needed just after the comma. Also, Dependent Clause (Under the provisions...) requires an Independent Clause to complete the sentence.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it
Incorrect for the reasons mentioned above.

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
required (VERB FORM) is always more clearer AND preferred over the noun form requirement (NOUN FORM). Also, the construction "there has been a requirement" is too wordy.

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
INCORRECT, for the reasons mentioned above.

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
INCORRECT, for the reasons mentioned above.

E. has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
CORRECT.

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it -- verb tense issue-- was never applied is incorrect as it does not indicate the current state of provision ; Congress has been required is incorrect -- we need simple present tense ;
For consideration is unidiomatic -- we need to consider ; pronoun it has been incorrectly used to refer to call a convention

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally -- same as A ; there has been a requirement is wordy

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally -- same as A ; No independent clause

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so --No independent clause

E. has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so--Correct


Answer E

GMATNinja

GMATNinjaTwo

I rejected D based on one simple parallel theory.



I applied the same rule in this question.

Under the provision,......
Now we will straightaway move to what the provision calls for.Hence whereby is redundant an E is the answer.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

This isn't an issue of faulty parallelism, but sure, it's perfectly legitimate to see that "under a provision" is a modifier and that whatever is happening under this provision should follow immediately after. And as you suggested, that doesn't happen correctly in several of the answer choices.

Nicely done!

I think "never was applied" is itself wrong. never implies that the condition exist until now , so, only present perfect is fit. we do not need to see other verb/tense in the sentence.

am I correct?

the second thing is

for consideration and for considering implies that the subject of the main clause, congress, dose not do consideration. this is terrible logic mistake, gmat must test us.

"Was never applied" might work if we were only talking about the past. However, since the point is that it still has not applied up to this day, then the present perfect makes more sense. That doesn't mean "was never applied" is illogical, though. If it HAS NEVER been applied, then it's also true that it WAS NEVER applied in the past.

As for "for consideration," you're right. It's not clear in this case whether congress or some other group will actually do the consideration. "To consider" is much more clear and direct.

The use of the simple past tense ‘was never applied’ does not make sense.
Even after reading it twice, you’ll feel that something is amiss.
It says Congress ‘has been required’ to call a convention under a provision that ‘was never applied’.

Seems like a tense mix up.

Look at the options:
Yes, Options D and E use ‘has never been applied’ which makes sense in this sentence.

Plus, there are pronoun issues in Options A, B and C.

Eliminate the first three options – A, B and C.

When we substitute Option D back into the sentence, we realize that it isn’t a complete sentence. Eliminate.

Option E is the best option.

Hope this helps!

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.


(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

IMO E

I used tenses to eliminate A B and C, D had whereby issues.
So correct answer is E

Posted from my mobile device