Under the provisions of the United States Constitution and

Please quote the source of the question.


Thanks

This question is not from the official source. As "him" refers to male.

American constitution is for both male and female.

Please quote the source of the question.

U see he in not underlined section, it points to the fact that citizen is male.

C for me as well

Posted from my mobile device

IMO B.

This is a case of parallelisms in idioms.
idiom: either to X or to Y

In a parallel structure involving infinitives, we can avoid the second 'to'.
Eg: I prefer to swim than (to)sail across the ocean

So i assume that it becomes:
'the gvnt is required either to bring charges against... or (to)release him. '

If they had a bettered structured sentence with to....i would have definitely opted for that.

What is the OA/source?

Thanks

Don't mess with

either... or

neither.. nor

These are sacred construct. not even an idiom can break them. the second part must religiously follow the first part.

B.

Though C - to proceed in releasing him - is paralle to ...either to..., but B is concise.

In C: to proceed in releasing him
in releasing him - in awkward usage.

In B:
release him = [to] release him.

ykaiim

What is the source of the question?

Does anyone know the source of this question. I do not see how B is parallel.

Thanks nusmavrik! I knew they couldnt be parallel!

Found another post : sentence-correction-confusing-94684.html#p731590

I think these idioms lock in the words absolutely - no variations allowed whatsoever

either or
neither nor
both......both

I think the OE can help:

This sentence turns on an idiom: either to x or [to] y where both x and y must be parallel. The sentence should be: the Federal government...required either to bring...or [to] release.

Unfortunately, the current sentence incorrectly reads: the Federal government...required either to bring...or that the government must release. This is not parallel and is wrong.

The correct sentence structure is: the Federal government is required either to bring charges against the individual being held, in which case he is entitled to a lawyer, or release him. Do not be thrown off by in which case he is entitled to a lawyer, which was inserted simply to make spotting the idiom and parallelism more difficult. The phrase in which case he is entitled to a lawyer is merely an elucidation of the preceding idea and is not another item that itself must be parallel.

A) The sentence is not idiomatically correct (i.e., the phrase the Federal government...is required either to bring...or that the government must release is not idiomatically correct)

B) The sentence correctly uses the idiom either to x or [to] y

C) Although the sentence follows the correct idiom either to bring...or to proceed, the phrase to proceed in releasing is not concise and can be replaced by [to] release

D) The sentence is not idiomatically correct (i.e., the phrase the Federal government...is required either to bring...or the government must release is not idiomatically correct)

E) The sentence is not idiomatically correct (i.e., the phrase the Federal government...is required either to bring...or they must release is not idiomatically correct); they, which is a plural pronoun, does not agree with the subject the Federal government, which is singular

Hey ykaiim

I appreciate the help. But the second "to" missing is not allowed in this construction.

I am quoting this from the gmat manhattan instructor




Source : https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/par ... t8628.html

Yes, I see that from Ron.

But, I think this OA is correct, as per the explaiantions.