According to the space agency, the proposed transmitter

since the sentence is in present form ,we require the condition to be in future .Only E satisfies it

E is the correct answer choice as it is in future tense.

According to the space agency, the proposed transmitter would not last barely a month if it is subjected to the intense heat of space.

a) Usage of two negatives - "not" and "barely" - Not required

b) could not last hardly a month if it is - Same problem here plus we are not talking about an action that has happened already, Usage of "Could" is incorrect

c) will last no more than hardly a month if it is - Usage of "no more than" and "Hardly" - both mean the same, redundancy error

d) would not last a month if it will be - Usage of simple future twice in the same sentence is incorrect

e) will not last a month if - Simple future used and "if subjected" conveys the right meaning - Correct

it is not traditional if then clause.

Just restructure sentence u will find following make sense.

According to the space agency, the proposed transmitter, if subjected to the intense heat of space, will not last a month.

Shouldn't would be used instead of will?

'Would' depicts uncertainty and will depicts certainty. The meaning here is certain or uncertain probability?

Yes, you are correct would is used to represent uncertainty, But usage of 'WOuld' be incorrect out here.
If-then construction already comes with a condition, which shows possibility. and it do follow certain rule.

If clause -- present tense / THen clause -- present or future tense or it can show uncertainty with verb may or might verb
If clause -- past tense / Then clause -- past tense or 'would+verb' form

Got it. So because present tense is used in if clause, future tense 'will' is used.
If simple past would have been used then in then clause we would have used 'would' , right?

Posted from my mobile device

daagh AjiteshArun
in option E there is no present tense after if so how the if then clause is correct ?

According to the space agency, the proposed transmitter would not last barely a month if it is subjected to the intense heat of space.

Meaning-proposed transmitter would last atmost a month, if transmitter is subjected to heat.

Error: if then construction: if(present tense "is" ) , then (present / future) . If there is uncertainty in "if clause" ,then "would" can be used for "then construction".

A)would not last barely a month if it is - mentioned above.

B) could not last hardly a month if it is - not /hardly - wrong ... If(present"is"), then could.. ( uncertainty) WRONG.


C) will last no more than hardly a month if it is
- no more /hardly.

D) would not last a month if it will be - if( future tense) , then would( uncertainty)... If(certain "will"... the event will happen..it is not a speculation...so whenever "if clause has " will", then there is a certainty about the event.
Uncertainty in "if clause" or speculation/ something which hasn't happened yet but we are speculating about it , we use "were"
For eg: if it were Christmas, I would be singing jingles righr now.
( It isn't Christmas yet.. I am speculating a moment in the future ...so what happens after the "if clause" is my opinion, but an opinion may not be a fact or may not actually happen so use of "would" is warranted..
Remember to use " if were...then would" for complete uncertainty...

E) will not last a month if
- here "if then ", construction is not used... "If subjected" is used as a modifier modifying " transmitter"
Rearrange -

According to the space agency, the proposed transmitter, if subjected (participle modifier) is subjected to the intense heat of space, will not last a month.

Then construction is not optimal per se , but it is the best amongt the five

Posted from my mobile device

Here the subject and part of the verb are assumed. For example:

He will go there if called.

This is a shorter way of saying

He will go there if he is called.

Isn't "subjected" in E past tense? Isn't if the "If" statement contains past tense, you should use the conditional statement "would" or "could" in the "then" statement?

Hi Meisme,

Subjected is a past participle there, not a verb.

... if subjected to X. ← This is a shorter way to say "if it is subjected to X".

You can see this more clearly with eat (past: ate, past participle: eaten):

... if eaten regularly... ← This is fine.

... if ate regularly... ← This is incorrect.

AjiteshArun

Is the past participle here served as adjective to modifier transmitter? Usually verb-ed modifier follow by "by', in this kind of situation how can I differentiate whether it is a verb-ed modifier or a real verb in past tense?

Thank you for your help!

This sentence uses the 'if-then' construction.

Going by MGMAT-SC Guide

The if-then construction in here uses 'if (Future) then (something happens without any uncertainty)'
In here - 'If (subjected to intense heat) then (proposed transmitter WILL not last more than a month)

we need 'Will' to qualify for the certainty of the event. This eliminates answer choices with would/could constructions.

C - will last no more than hardly a month - usage of 'hardly' is redundant.

E - By POE is the answer. we don't require a qualifying pronoun such as 'it' to refer to the subject 'proposed transmitter'. The subject is implied, IMO.

That's a very good question.

We are actually looking at a clause. It's just that the subject and part of the verb are not explicitly included. However, in such cases the subject of the dependent clause is almost always assumed to be the same as the subject of the other clause. This means that we do end up referring to the proposed transmitter.

... the proposed transmitter will not last a month if subjected... ← Subjected is a participle here. This is another (slightly shorter) way of saying "if it is subjected" or "if the proposed transmitter is subjected".

... the proposed transmitter will not last a month if it is subjected... ← The subjected itself is still a participle, but is subjected is a verb. The subject is it, which is understood to refer to "the proposed transmitter".

There are some exceptions to this (that's the reason for the "almost always" above). For example, if necessary:

If necessary, she will reschedule her exam. ← This is correct (it does not mean that "she" is "necessary").

Obvious error: If present, then should be present or future. then statement should have will/ can

A, B and D are out

Between C & E, C is too wordy and has redundant words barely/ no more than. So, C is out.

E is the answer

I narrowed it down to C & E but chose C as it (subject) in "if" clause is missing.
Is such usage acceptaable?