Dear Friends,
Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
JarvisR wrote:
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.
(A) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river
(B) restricting the use of water would continue because there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level that
(C) the use of water would continue to be restricted because not any appreciable increase in the river's level had
(D) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciable increase in the level of the river had
(E) using water would continue being restricted because not any appreciable increase in the level of the river
SC02333
Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning is that restrictions on the use of water would continue because a significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers.
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Tenses + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy• The past perfect tense (marked by the use of helping verb "had") is used when a sentence contains two actions in the past; the helping verb "had" is used with the action in the "greater past".
• The simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
• "no + noun" is an idiomatic construction used to refer to the absence of a noun.
A: Trap. This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "appreciative increase"; the use of "appreciative" illogically implies that a
grateful increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers; the intended meaning is that a
significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers. Further, Option A incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "resulted" to refer to the earlier of two actions that concluded in the past - the government making an announcement and a significantly large increase in the level of the river not occurring; please remember, the past perfect tense (marked by the use of helping verb "had") is used when a sentence contains two actions in the past; the helping verb "had" is used with the action in the "greater past", and the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "appreciative increase"; the use of "appreciative" illogically implies that a
grateful increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers; the intended meaning is that a
significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers. Further, Option B uses the needlessly indirect phrase "restricting the use of water" and the passive voice construction "there had not been any", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
C: This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "not + any + noun ("appreciable increase")" to refer to the absence of an appreciable increase in the level of the river; please remember, "no + noun" is an idiomatic construction used to refer to the absence of a noun. Further, Option C uses the needlessly wordy phrase "the use of water would continue to be restricted", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
D: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "appreciable increase"; the use of "appreciable" conveys the intended meaning - that a
significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers. Further, Option D correctly uses the past perfect tense verb "had resulted" to refer to the earlier of two actions that concluded in the past - the government making an announcement and a significantly large increase in the level of the river not occurring. Additionally, Option D correctly uses the idiomatic construction "no + noun ("appreciable increase")" to refer to the absence of an appreciable increase in the level of the river. Besides, Option D is free of any awkwardness and redundancy.
E: This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "resulted" to refer to the earlier of two actions that concluded in the past - the government making an announcement and a significantly large increase in the level of the river not occurring; please remember, the past perfect tense (marked by the use of helping verb "had") is used when a sentence contains two actions in the past; the helping verb "had" is used with the action in the "greater past", and the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past. Further, Option E incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "not + any + noun ("appreciable increase")" to refer to the absence of an appreciable increase in the level of the river; please remember, "no + noun" is an idiomatic construction used to refer to the absence of a noun. Additionally, Option E uses the passive voice construction "using water would continue being restricted", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
Hence, D is the best answer choice.Additional Note: Please note, "appreciable" means "significant enough to be noted", and "appreciative" means "grateful" or "thankful"; the two words are similar, but have completely different meanings.
To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
To understand the concept of "Past Perfect Tense" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________