After the Great Depression’s exceptionally high unemployment rates

OFFICIAL SOLUTION

Explanation: In (A), (C), and (D) there is a concrete error relating to time that is easily overlooked. You cannot say “after…high unemployment rates” or “following…high unemployment rates.” If you are using “after” or “following” it must be linked with some point in time, action, etc. It is illogical and incorrect to use rates as a time frame. Also, the possessive with the Great Depression is a poor structure: you should say the “high unemployment rates of/during the Great Depression” not the “Great Depression’s high unemployment rates” (as if they belonged to the Great Depression). In (E), “despite the fact that” is wordy and awkward, and more concretely “after the Great Depression AND its exceptionally high unemployment rates” is wrong as it again suggests that something took place after high rates. Only (B) avoids these problems by showing something took place after the Great Depression (not its rates). The part of the correct sentence in (B) “a period in which unemployment rates were exceptionally high” is not a structure that many people are comfortable with, but is a common and properly used modifier.

Here is a link of Egmat, in which you one can understand noun+noun modifier, which is the case in B
https://e-gmat.com/blogs/noun-noun-modi ... ny-entity/

Sentence with the correct choice:
"Although job prospects did improve in the late 1930’s after the Great Depression, a period in which unemployment rates were exceptionally high, as late as 1941 nearly 1 in 6 people were still out of work."

In this sentence, do we not have an ambiguous modifier?

To my understanding, the noun + noun modifier "a period in which unemployment..." can modify any of the following parts of the sentence:

1. Late 1930's
2. The Great Depression
3. Late 1930’s after the Great Depression

Am I analyzing the sentence incorrectly or is it that in spite of this problem, this option should be chosen as other options have more serious problems?

Hi daagh,

But in option B, shouldn't the second clause begin with "which was a period in which..." to modify the great depression. In its present from, the clause "a period in which..." modifies the entire first clause and I felt this should not happen. Any thoughts?

Please can someone explain this!! I have the same doubt.

"which was which ..." Would be wrong the and very awkward...2 "which" in one place is a NO NO.. the construction here is an absolute modifier

For eg: Sam fell down from the balcony,an accident that cost him his legs.

The accident describes the fall /any information related to the fall...can be the result or how it happened or what led that to happen.

An absolute modifier: noun+noun modifier

Here : a period(noun) which...(noun modifier modifying "period")

Posted from my mobile device

If we consider the suggested answer choice B and eliminate the modifier "a period .... high" what we are left with is the following sentence.

"Although job prospects did improve in the late 1930’s after the Great Depression, as late as 1941 nearly 1 in 6 people were still out of work."

This sentence somehow doesn't sound right. After eliminating the modifier, does the above sentence check all the boxes for being grammatically correct?

For me the choice B is vague, since the sentence in the original form talks about the time period following the exceptionally high unemployment rate of the Great Depression, while choice B turns this period into the one following the Great Depression itself. I think we are anticipating that if the time period follows the high unemployment rates of the Great Depression it follows the end of the Great Depression, too.