According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect grow

There's no such thing as a silly question.

The subject of instead come is the economy. Just watch out for the will in front of avoid though.

... the economy will (a) avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and (b) instead come in for a 'soft landing'...

If we didn't have a will there:

... the economy (a) avoids the recession and (b) comes in for a 'soft landing'...

Hi TheUltimateWinner,

It's really hard to read the sentence that way, because "many... had come in for a soft landing" doesn't seem to make any sense in this context.

More generally, you will face similar issues in many, many questions. The only thing we can do in such situations is read the question carefully.

Hi Akshay, come is parallel to avoid.

...the economy will avoid...and instead come....

Hi Akshay, come is parallel to avoid.

...the economy will avoid...and instead come....

So "According to some analysts" is to be interpreted as "Some analysts said" ? Why can't it be interpreted as "Some analysts say" , or does this question just indicate that GMAC is okay with having past perfect in combination with simple present? None of the explanations clarified that. So in any other questions that starts with "According to...." , do we presume it indicates past tense?

There's a fine line between adding words/adverbs for clarity/emphasis and repeating the same clarification/emphasis in multiple ways.

Here are a couple examples of redundancy from incorrect choices on official questions:

• "Elizabeth Barber... is an expert authority..." - As explained in this post, "expert" and "authority" describe the same characteristic, so they are redundant.
• "... investors still continued to pour money..." - As explained here, the verb "to continue", by definition, implies that the action is still happening. So including the word "still" in this case is redundant.

And here are a couple examples from OA's that correctly use additional words/adverbs for clarity/emphasis:

• "... men and women who had previously been considered incapable of discerning truth for themselves." - Yes, the verb tense implies that the action happened in the past. But the word "previously" emphasizes and clarifies the timing. For more on that, check out this post.
• "... they denounce the big government... while at the same time supporting..." - The phrase "at the same time" actually helps clarify the meaning of "while," which, as explained here, can mean "simultaneously" or "although".

Back to this question... the word "instead" helps clarify that the economy is NOT expected to enter a period of recession: the economy is expected to come in for a soft landing INSTEAD OF entering the recession that many had feared. Is the word "instead" strictly necessary? No... we can probably figure out the intended meaning without it. However, the word "instead" clarifies/emphasizes that the action of "coming in for a soft landing" is an alternative to entering a recession--it helps highlight the distinction between these two scenarios.

On the other hand, something like this would be redundant:

"The economy is not expected to fall into a recession; rather, the economy is expected to come in for a soft landing instead." - Using one of the two underlined words for clarity/emphasis would be okay. But, since they express the exact same idea, using both would be considered redundant.

Now, are there any black and white rules for deciding whether something is redundant? No, unfortunately. As always, you want to prioritize concrete, irrefutable errors and THEN compare the remaining options in terms of logic and clarity. If a word expresses the same exact thing as something else in the sentence, then it's probably redundant.


The infinitives "to avoid" and "to come" certainly CAN be parallel. However, in choice (B), we are missing a parallelism marker (such as "and") altogether! We would need something like this to make it work:

"The economy is expected to avoid the recession and, rather, to come in for a soft landing." - The "and" properly links the two infinitives.

Try reviewing this post, if you haven't already.

We have several past actions (some of which are implied): 1) many people feared a recession, 2) there were gains in the stock market, 3) the analysts made some statements about what those gains reflect.

The use of the past perfect ("the recession that many had feared earlier in the year") helps clarify that the people feared a recession BEFORE the gains occurred (and before the analysts made their statements).

Does that make the simple past wrong in choice (E)? That's debatable. But the past perfect makes the intended meaning more clear.

Phew... I hope some of that helps!

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come in for a 'soft landing', followed by a gradual increase in the business activity.

(A) that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come

(B) in the economy to avoid the recession, what many feared earlier in the year, rather to come

(C) in the economy's ability to avoid the recession, something earlier in the year many had feared , and instead to come

(D) in the economy to avoid the recession many were fearing earlier in the year, and rather to come

(E) that the economy will avoid the recession that was feared earlier this year by many, with it instead coming

in the question above, about C choice colored parts
I think they are wrong becoz two consecutive modifiers are modifying something, am I right?
pls kindly reply when you see this PM
also can I ask for one more favor, can you detail on the mistake that two consecutive modifiers modifies the same thing? I was some times so confused.
Thanks

Hi karanthakurani,

Yes, the usage of past perfect tense is a bit tricky here. We need to understand the structure and the meaning of this sentence.

"According to some analysts" is equal to saying "Analysts said". This is just implied in the sentence. This is the past tense event for the analysts.

Also "earlier this year" makes it clear that the analysts "feared" before they stated their opinion. So the usage of past perfect tense is correct here.

In the presence of words that establish time sequencing, such "earlier in the year", use of past perfect tense is optional and not incorrect. You may or may not choose to use past perfect tense in the presence of such words.

This is the reason why Choice A is correct here.

In Choice C, placement of “earlier in the year” is not correct. It suggests that recession was earlier in the year and not many had feared it earlier in the year. Also, use of “instead to” is not idiomatic.

Hope this helps

Regards,
Krishna

Hi Namangupta1997,

Good point, but such usage is acceptable. As far as I know, there are no rules that can guide us here, so such calls need to be taken on a case-by-case basis.

We can also try to prioritise other splits.

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come in for a 'soft landing', followed by a gradual increase in the business activity.

(A) that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come

(B) in the economy to avoid the recession, what many feared earlier in the year, rather to come

(C) in the economy's ability to avoid the recession, something earlier in the year many had feared , and instead to come

(D) in the economy to avoid the recession many were fearing earlier in the year, and rather to come

(E) that the economy will avoid the recession that was feared earlier this year by many, with it instead coming

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come in for a 'soft landing', followed by a gradual increase in the business activity.

Start with "confidence that" vs. "confidence in...to." The latter shows intention. Gains in the stock market reflect confidence to avoid the recession? ILLOGICAL! Eliminate (B), (C) and (D). (A) is our clear winner without any errors. (E) uses "by many" but many who? "it" refers to what?

(A) that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come

(B) in the economy to avoid the recession, what many feared earlier in the year, rather to come

(C) in the economy's ability to avoid the recession, something earlier in the year many had feared , and instead to come

(D) in the economy to avoid the recession many were fearing earlier in the year, and rather to come

(E) that the economy will avoid the recession that was feared earlier this year by many, with it instead coming

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come in for a 'soft landing', followed by a gradual increase in the business activity.

(A) that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead come

(B) in the economy to avoid the recession, what many feared earlier in the year, rather to come

(C) in the economy's ability to avoid the recession, something earlier in the year many had feared , and instead to come

(D) in the economy to avoid the recession many were fearing earlier in the year, and rather to come

(E) that the economy will avoid the recession that was feared earlier this year by many, with it instead coming