According to some economists, Japan is in danger of plunging into a de

E) As i understand, Japan can't strain a society, depression can. But in E the sentence says: "Japan is in danger ...and could... strain "

B in my opinion is correct but too wordy. Between A and B, I choose A

Therefore, the winer is A

could you tell me why we use 'that' instead of 'with' ?
please explain briefly

Hi,
Lets break down the sentence as usual and concentrate on the important part.
Japan is in danger of plunging into a depression
that(depression) could severely strain a society that(society) regards lifetime employment as a virtual right of citizenship.
Subject-verb pair/s: in agreement
Modifier: According to some economists correctly modifies the following statement. "with double-digit unemployment" is inside a comma pair.
Pronoun:that - correctly represent the entity as stated in brackets.
Meaning: "with double-digit unemployment" correctly provides the additional information about how depression is going to affect.

Looks alright. Keep for now.
changes the meaning of modifier. Modifier inside a comma pair is an additional information, not the very reason. Second, strain is supposed to be the verb not the object of the sentence. This changes the meaning. Incorrect
No singular antecedent for IT.Incorrect
strain is supposed to be the verb not the object of the sentence. This changes the meaning. Incorrect
Use of and makes the second part of the sentence an individual clause with Japan as its subject, which is nonsensical. Incorrect

A is the winner.

A) and B) are both structurally correct right? Just the meaning of those two differs.
How does one know which version of those two is the intended meaning? I could not decide between those two. From my understanding the intended meaning could be both.
The depression plus the double-digit unemployment could severely strain their society
or the depression could be a severe strain for society explicitly because of the double-digit unemployment.
To me, B seemed more reasonable, so i chose B. Is there any fault in my thinking?

egmat GMATNinja @empowergmat @veritasprep
Can someone pls explain me the role of comma with double-digit unemployment comma
I am getting pissed of with such constructions now.

I have a query : (C) with double-digit unemployment, and it could severely strain

It is possible "it" refers to unemployment & remaining sentence supports C ?
Does the rest of the sentence be considered(?) which talks about employment! "a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right of citizenship."

1.Japan is in danger....and it could strain...

=>Per the original meaning, a depression could strain...
Eliminate Options C,D and E.

2. 'A depression could strain' vs 'a depression could be a strain for'

Gmat prefers verb to adjective.
A depression could strain is more preferable. Eliminate option B
Moreover, Option B changes the meaning. It introduces causal relation.

Option A is the correct answer.

Posted from my mobile device

According to some economists, Japan is in danger of plunging into a depression that, with double-digit unemployment, could severely strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right of citizenship.


(A) that, with double-digit unemployment, could severely strain

(B) that, because of double-digit unemployment, could be a severe strain for

(C) with double-digit unemployment, and it could severely strain

(D) with double-digit unemployment and could be a severe strain

(E) with double-digit unemployment and could severely strain

IMO A

Why C is wrong?
According to some economists, Japan is in danger of plunging into a depression with double-digit unemployment, and it could severely strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right of citizenship.

Two independent clause and be joined with 'AND' (FANBOYS).

Japan is in danger of plunging into a depression with double-digit unemployment.
AND
it(unemployment) could severely strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right of citizenship.

GMATNinja

(C) might not have a glaring concrete error, but it does have a couple of problematic elements.

First, the use of "and" to connect two independent clauses is certainly grammatical, but it's not quite logical. Boiled way down, here's what (C) looks like:


Typically, when we have a pronoun, such as "it," as the subject of a clause, the referent will be the subject of the previous clause.

Here, because "Japan" is the subject of the first clause, it kind of sounds as though it's Japan that's straining its own society! If you reread, you can probably figure out that the author means that the "depression" is straining the society, but the initial confusion certainly isn't ideal.

Also, using two independent clauses makes it seem as though the ideas in those clauses aren't logically connected. There's the fact that Japan is experiencing a depression. And then there's the unrelated fact that a depression is straining the society.

This isn't WRONG, necessarily, but it seems far more logical to show that the ideas are connected by using the second part of the sentence to modify the first, describing what kind of depression Japan is dealing with, namely one "that could strain society." This is the construction we have in (A).

Combine the above issues with the problematic usage of "with," as we describe in this post, and you've got enough reasons to prefer (A) over (C), even if there's no definitive grammatical error in (C).

I hope that helps!

Dear Experts,

According to some economists, Japan is in danger of plunging into a depression...with double-digit unemployment (as in option C, D, & E).

Can it be interpreted as... Japan & DOUBLE DIGIT UNEMPLOYMENT are both plunging in depression?

Regards.

Can someone explain why it's not B?

GMATNinja why is (B) incorrect?

The part between the comma is additional, extraneous info. So, we don't need it. --1
But "because of" indicates that the part between the comma is necessary as it indicates why there is depression in Japan. So, we need it. --2
Statements 1 and 2 are contradictory. Do we need it or not? Hence eliminate option B