Remember, it is compared with "a time", not times.
So The fifties has to be singular.
Could someone please explain why the above logic does not apply? If "the fifties" is being referred to as a plural noun here then the later part of the sentence should read "... now appear to have been times
of considerable achievement in the arts."
I usually nail SC this one definitely did not strike me as consistent with the GMAT, do we know the source?
I couldn't agree more. This source seems way too dubious and the logic of answers aren't quite satisfactory.
First -- The fifties was a period. (A timeframe so singular but the number of days or months is plural?? Debatable)
Second -- The fifties WAS a period. ( It's in the past.)
I find it easier to rule out based on Timeframe rather than singular/plural on this question.
The fifties, for all their advertised conformity, now appear to have been
a time of considerable achievement in the arts.
(A) for all their advertised conformity, now appear to have beenCORRECT
(B) despite all their advertised conformity, now appear to be Now appear to be? So, previously they didn't have considerable achievement in the arts? Senseless.
(C) for all their advertised conformity, now appear that they were This is wordy -- now appear that they were. Now appear that -- is non-idiomatic. I suppose its an old type of question not the new styled of GMAT question.
(D) despite all their advertised conformity, now appears asThis changes the meaning because appears as is an idiom used to describe something contrasting what is expected. But that was not the intended meaning here. Second problem here is appears is plural verb and their is plural subject
(E) with all advertised conformity, now appears Notice E also changes meaning. Replacing For all with With all has a subtle shift in meaning. For all has a meaning similar to although or even though but with all means JUST with everything without any contrats.
Only two forums had this question this one and Beat the GMAT (Link in here:http://www.beatthegmat.com/the-fifties-tough-one-t110840.html )
Since Manhattan doesnt have it I think its 1000SC source and potentially bogus. I agree with MGMAT with respect to using non-OG styled questions. They tend to distort your thinking a little bit. So, beware!!
I believe that the option A has two verbs appear and have been without being connected properly ?
The subject is 1950s but they are connected by 'to'. Is that even possible ?