Spanish guitarist and composer Andres Segovia led the

Spanish guitarist and composer Andres Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious enough to be a concert instrument.

The paramount question is whether we take “consider to be” as unidiomatic. If that were so, we have to chuck out choices A, B and D and choose between C and E. C is a blatant fragment. So E must be the final choice. If on the contrary, we decided to pardon the idiomatic gaffe of consider to be, then Choice D looks very promising.

A) Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious enough to be ---- two errors; sufficiently and enough are redundant; not worthwhile

B) Segovia, who led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, had not been considered prestigious enough to be -- --- awful change of meaning. This choice compares Segovia, a person, to a concert instrument

C) Segovia, leading the revival of the classical guitar in the twentieth century, not previously considered sufficiently prestigious for --- No verb in the clause. a fragment

D) Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which had not previously been considered prestigious enough to be
The timeline sequence is correct since Segovia revived (simple past) an earlier perception, described in a past perfect. But alas: who can reconcile with “consider to be”


E) Segovia had led the revival of the classical guitar in the twentieth century, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious for—I have my reservations about the timeline. The non- prestigiousness seems to follow (in simple past) Segovia’s revival, marked in the past perfect. In addition, we have to now justify the touch rule foul of “which”, saying that the twentieth century is actually an essential modifier of the classical guitar and the real referent is only the guitar.

Well: That is GMAT for you
_________________

1. I could not understand what you meant by "sufficiently and enough" together. If you clarify this query a bit, then we may discuss further.

2. Correct idiom: Consider X Y - Here "to be" is outside the idiom structure: X = which, Y = prestigious.
Which (X) is considered prestigious(Y) ... usage is alright and in line with the correct idiomatic structure mentioned above.
Another example: I am old enough to be the captain. ("to be" has no bearing with the verb "is")
Similarly,
I consider you old enough to be the captain. ( "to be" has no bearing with the verb"consider")

I lost considerable amount of time as I eliminated the options with "to be" and found the rest of options really pathetic. What to do if you face such question on GMAT- you eliminated the right answer for rightish wrong reasons?

Should we guess and move ahead or re-read the question?

I think it's option D because the considered to be is not modifying prestigious enough rather that "to be" is used for defining the concert instrument {position}


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Imo D. I agree completely with Daagh sir. From what i've seen in GMAT, imperfect use of Idioms are sometimes permitted but rule along which is rock solid. So I went with D.

Sent from my SM-N910H using Tapatalk

I suppose "considered to be" usage is not appropriate in GMAT

This is a bad question , want to know its source as it uses "sufficently and enough" together and "considered to be" as already highligted . I chose E

Hi,
I will clarify my point :
Spanish guitarist and composer Andres Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious enough to be a concert instrument.

1. what is the difference between "sufficiently" and "enough" , I think both are modifying "prestigious " with the same intention and meaning.
2. here , guitar is considered to be a concert instruement .

"Consider" doesn't take as or to be , take below example for wrong usage :
The President of the United States is considered to be the most powerful person in the world.


In the example provided by you usage is correct becuase there it is considered you to be something .

Your point 2:
No, Guitar is not considered a concert instrument: Guitar is considered prestigious - how much prestigious? enough to be a concert instrument.

There is no difference between my example above and option D except that one is in active voice and the other passive. OK I shall try with another example:

I consider you beautiful. Correct
You are considered beautiful. Correct
I consider you beautiful enough to be the lead actress. Correct
You are considered beautiful enough to be the lead actress. Correct
Now compare:
which is considered prestigious enough to be a concert instrument.

Do you see the point now?

your point 1: Yes, you are right. "sufficiently" and "enough" are both correct in this context. One cannot eliminate answer on the basis of this split: and there is no answer choice, which has been eliminated here because of this split.

Spanish guitarist and composer Andres Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious enough to be a concert instrument.
-------------

A) Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious enough to be
Feel that something is not ok here, need a past perfect for the second part (maybe it is not that clear in the beginning, but it will be in option D). But the first thing that beaks the eys is redundancy (sufficiently and prestigious) - it is unacceptable. Out.

B) Segovia, who led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, had not been considered prestigious enough to be
Well, since "who led ..." is an modifer for Segovia it seems that Segovia is an instrument - not right. Out.

C) Segovia, leading the revival of the classical guitar in the twentieth century, not previously considered sufficiently prestigious for
There is no normal clause gere - no verb. Out

D) Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which had not previously been considered prestigious enough to be
Very nice. No redundancy, normal clause, second part took place in the past before and we see past perfect ---> good

E) Segovia had led the revival of the classical guitar in the twentieth century, which was not considered sufficiently prestigious for
The mess with time. Past perfect in the begining is not riht. Out.

Agree option D is the best. But isn't the use of the Past Perfect Tense and previously for the same activity bit redundant?

D) Segovia led the twentieth-century revival of the classical guitar, which had not previously been considered prestigious enough to be

But this "previously" shows that it was in the past before the past.
So "previously" actually gives us right and obligation to use past perfect here.

Isn't 'previously' marker to show sequence of action in OPTION D?

Could someone help with option D?
isnt the use of past perfect and previously considered redundant?

Hi Sanchitdd, there are numerous officially correct answer choices, where GMAT explicitly uses past perfect tense, despite a time marker (such as previously in this case) being present.

An official example that uses past perfect with the word previously:

In the 1940s popular magazines in the United States began to report on the private lives of persons from the entertainment industry, whereas previously these publications had featured articles on individuals in business and politics.

So, this is clearly an acceptable construct from a GMAT perspective.
_________________

Thank you for the reply.

IN the MGMAT SC book, it is mentioned that if before/after is used in a sentence then the use of past perfect becomes redundant. So is it possible that this exception of time marker being used with past perfect is OK even for before/after?

Thanks in advance.

The personal income tax did not become permanent in the United States until the First World War; before that time the federal government had depended on tariffs as its main source of revenue.
_________________

Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Will have to be careful.

My doubt is regarding option D
How the two verbs "led" and "had been considered" are two sequenced events as the doer of both the actions are different.
also if I modify option A by removing the redundancy error, keeping both verbs in simple past, will option A be correct.

Please clear my doubt. daagh