The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to

Clearly the non underlined portion is in present perfect tense hence underlined portion should be in present tense. So A and B are the only choices possible. A has a meaning issue here. Hence I will pick B. A means that all member have not met the requirements. B means some have and some haven't.


IMO B

Would love to know wht others think

The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to keep families united even though all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement.

(A) all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement - > Meaning distorted. (all members do not meet ,means no one has met.)

(B) not all their members meet the five-year residency requirement - > correct ans

(C) all their members have not met the requirement for a five-year residency -> Tense error(as it is fact, simple present preferred). Meaning distorted. (all members do not meet ,means no one has met.)

(D) not all their members have resided for five years, a requirement - > Tense error(as it is fact, simple present preferred).

(E) all their members have not resided for five years, as required -> Tense error(as it is fact, simple present preferred). Meaning distorted.

Tough one, I chose B.

The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to keep families united even though (B) not all their members meet the five-year residency requirement.

Two things stood out to me. First, even though/not all. Second, there is a difference in meaning between not all their members and all their members do not. If all their members do not, then no one in the family has met the residence requirement. In that case, no one has standing to remain the the country.

D is right out because a requirement is a fragment. I think it would be right if it were a which- clause.

The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to keep families united even though all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement.

Meaning Analysis: Prior, Every member of a family had to live for five years in the country. But now, The Immigration Service department has the power to keep the family together EVEN THOUGH not every member meets the prior requirement (to live for five years in the country)

Sentence Structure:
The Immigration Service (subject)
now has the discretionary power (verb)
to keep families united (more about the discretionary power of the IS)
even though (contextual word implying "despite the fact that...")
all their members (subject; here "their" refers to plural "families")
do no meet (verb)
the five-year residency requirement (object of the sentence)

Notice: the structure of the five-year residency requirement "five year residency" would be incorrect. We need the -. Similar construction found here https://gmatclub.com/forum/twenty-two-f ... 12821.html (scroll down to daagh post after clicking on the link)

Error Analysis:

Meaning! Meaning! Meaning! We wish to say that "even though not EVERY member lived for five years in the country, the family can still stay together. But this choice says that "all the members" do not meet the requirement. There is a slight shift of meaning in this sentence. (Check choice (B) explanation for more clarity)But if you are in doubt, you can hold on to (A) (as I did) until you come across a better choice.


CORRECT. This choice is much better than (A) Why? let's understand this with the help of an example.

"The parents were politely asked not to give their children expensive lunch boxes. Since not all the students come from a privileged background". Here we are focusing on the fact that "not every child" can get an expensive lunch box (some can but some can't)

Now check this one out. "The school did not organize the fun-fair because all its students could not afford it" Here we are stressing on the fact that each and every student cannot afford the fun-fair. It is no longer the case that some can and some can't


Meaning error of choice (A). Also note that "have met" is correct out here. We are essentially saying that "the members did not meet the requirements and the result of this still exists" CrackVerbalGMAT has explained this point in greater depth in its post.


The placement + usage of "a requirement" at the end of the sentence makes the structure of this choice inferior as compared to that of Choice B.


Meaning error of (A) and (C). I believe the usage of "as required" at the end is alright!

Correct choice: (B)

This SC is a great example to show that MEANING triumphs grammar

ans A
This sentence is a genear statement so auxilliary very do fit best than have . C,D and E are out. Out of A and B , A is the best fit since even though is followed by subject
She left him, even though she still loved him

OA is B
For the same meaning issue, I chose A, I thought A means some have met and some have not, and B means all member have not met, since not is followed by subject, emphasis is on 'not'.

Whew! Great Q!

IMO, Not all = some or at least 1

But to me the real problem is what makes any one think that Immigration services will reject if all of them do not meet the five year requirement. As absurd as it may sound, but there is nothing wrong when it has discretionary powers.

Tricky one! I guess one more GMAT'ism.

Good question. B.
The "even though" part requires "not all" the members to follow. Doesn't make sense to say "even though all don't have the 5 year residency requirement"

"their" is fine; their=families'.
_________________

For me "even though" should be followed by not all, thus B or D should be the correct answer, then D is quite akward, so B is correct.

I think the original question should read all ITS members instead of all THEIR members, but anyways answer is cleraly B because of diction

Ooops, take that back brother

Cheers
J

manishkhare -

Sorry that I tag you almost everywhere, but there is no one available on these good old dusty threads. If you can help me explain choice A and B. The difference s from meaning perspective, so thought I should bug you.

Thanks

Steinbeck ,
Sentence Correction is not only about grammer but also about meaning . Immigration Service has the authority to keep families together however some memebrs may not have completed the mandatory requirement .
We can see a 3:2 split here.
Correct Sentence should start with not . Only Option B and D do so .
Between B and D look at the last part :
meet the five-year residency requirement vs resided for five years, a requirement
B is the right choice.

You can ask the experts VeritasPrepKarishma, mikemcgarry, egmat for your doubts in the verbal sections.
_________________

Thanks manishkhare

Yes it's not only about GRAMMAR

I think there is a meaning issue that I have located. Please let me know if I am correct in locating that.

The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to keep families united even though all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement.

(A) all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement
This means that all the members in the family did not meet the 5 year residency requirement
(B) not all their members meet the five-year residency requirement
This means that not all but some of the family members met the requirement. This looks logical and conveys the meaning clearly
(C) all their members have not met the requirement for a five-year residency
(D) not all their members have resided for five years, a requirement
(E) all their members have not resided for five years, as required

So, my pick is B

Thanks Engr2012

I'll do that from now onwards.

Key lies in the meaning. The sentence intends to say that at least one of the members of the family do not meet the requirements.

B: corrects the error appropriately
C: same error as A
D: corrects the error but inappropriately changes residency requirement to residents, they are two different things
E: inappropriately changes residency requirement to residents, they are two different things

The requirement of five year residency is a condition and usage of 'have' in (C),(D) and (E) indicates event has happened in present which is wrong. Secondly placement of no decides the emphasis, placing it before 'all' makes sense.
Please comment on my above reasoning.

Hi Krish

In C, D and E, the "have" is followed by the past participle form of the verb (met, resided). This is the present perfect tense. This is used to describe events which:

a) began in the past but continue till the present.
eg: I have taught at this university for ten years.
Meaning, I started teaching at this university ten years ago and continue teaching today.

b) occurred in the past and whose effect continues till the present.
eg: I have lost my wallet.
Meaning, I lost my wallet in the past and continue to not have it in the present.

Since the "not meeting" the requirement and the "residing/not residing" for five years is the present situation which began in the past, usage of "have" followed by the past participle is correct.

Your reasoning on the placement of "not" is correct.

Hope this helps.
_________________