Dear Friends,
Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
jerrywu wrote:
Over the next few years, increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River, which flows into the Apalachicola River, could alter the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, which would rob the oysters there of their flavor, and to make them decrease in size, less distinctive, and less in demand.
(A) which would rob the oysters there of their flavor, and to make them decrease in size,
(B) and it would rob the oysters there of their flavor, make them smaller,
(C) and rob the oysters there of their flavor, making them decrease in size,
(D) robbing the oysters there of their flavor and making them smaller,
(E) robbing the oysters there of their flavor, and making them decrease in size,
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 increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could alter the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, and as a result, rob the oysters there of their flavor and make them smaller,
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Pronouns + Verb Forms + Paralleism + Grammatical Construction + Awkwardness/Redundancy• "who/whose/whom/which/where", when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma.
• Any element linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.
• If a list has only two elements, they must be joined by a conjunction.
• The introduction of present participle ("verb+ing"- “making” and “robbing” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.
A: This answer choice incorrectly refers to "the saline content of Apalachicola Bay" with "which would rob the oysters there of their flavor", incorrectly implying that
the saline content of Apalachicola Bay could rob the oysters there of their flavor; the intended meaning is that
alteration to the saline content of Apalachicola Bay could rob the oysters there of their flavor; please remember, "who/whose/whom/which/where", when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma. Further, Option A fails to maintain parallelism between "rob the oysters there of their flavor" and "to make them decrease in size"; please remember, any element linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel. Additionally, Option A incorrectly uses the "comma + conjunction ("and" in this sentence)" to join two elements in a list - "rob the oysters there of their flavor" and "to make them decrease in size"; please remember, if a list has only two elements, they must be joined by a conjunction. Besides, Option A uses the needlessly wordy phrase "make them decrease in size", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
B: This answer choice suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as the pronoun "it" lacks a clear referent. Moreover, Option B alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "and it would rob"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could alter the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, and
as a separate action, rob the oysters there of their flavor and make them smaller; the intended meaning is that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could alter the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, and
as a result, rob the oysters there of their flavor and make them smaller. Further, Option B incorrectly uses a comma to join two elements in a list - "rob the oysters there of their flavor" and "make them decrease in size"; please remember, if a list has only two elements, they must be joined by a conjunction.
C: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "and rob"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could alter the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, and
as a separate action, rob the oysters there of their flavor and make them smaller; the intended meaning is that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could alter the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, and
as a result, rob the oysters there of their flavor and make them smaller. Moreover, Option C further alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "making them decrease in size"; the use of the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "making" in this sentence) incorrectly implies that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could rob the oysters of Apalachicola Bay of their flavor, and
as a result, make them smaller; the intended meaning is that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could rob the oysters of Apalachicola Bay of their flavor, and
as a parallel action, make them smaller; please remember, the introduction of present participle ("verb+ing"- “making” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship. Additionally, uses the needlessly wordy phrase "making them decrease in size", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
D: Correct. This answer choice avoids the pronoun error seen in Option B, as it employs no pronouns. Moreover, Option D uses the phrase "robbing the oysters...and making them smaller"; the use of the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "robbing" and "making" in this sentence) conveys the intended meaning - that increasing demands on the Chattahoochee River could
alter of the saline content of Apalachicola Bay, and
as a result take two
parallel actions - rob the oysters there of their flavor and make them smaller. Further, Option D correctly uses conjunction ("and" in this sentence) to join two elements in a list - "robbing the oysters there of their flavor" and "making them smaller". Additionally, Option D maintains parallelism between "robbing the oysters there of their flavor" and "making them smaller". Besides, Option D is free of any awkwardness and redundancy.
E: This answer choice incorrectly uses the "comma + conjunction ("and" in this sentence)" to join two elements in a list - "robbing the oysters there of their flavor" and "making them decrease in size"; please remember, if a list has only two elements, they must be joined by a conjunction. Besides, Option E uses the needlessly wordy phrase "making them decrease in size", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
Hence, D is the best answer choice.To understand the concept of "Which/Who/Whose/Where" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
To understand the concept of "Comma + Present Participle for Cause-Effect Relationship" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~3 minutes):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________