Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil int

IMO C

(A) fund, with the intention to sustain the state’s economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves

its is ambiguous, it can refer to fund or Alaska. The preferred idiom is "with the intention of ..."

(B) fund, the intention of which is to sustain the state’s economy after they have exhausted their oil reserves

they and their do not agree in number with Alaska.

(C) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after oil reserves are exhausted
Correct.

(D) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after exhausting its oil reserves

its is ambiguous as in A

(E) fund that they intend to sustain the state’s economy after oil reserves are exhausted
they has no reference.

The first thing I notice is that "with" modifier. Does it make sense for Alaska to "deposit... with the intention?" Can a state have an intention? Seems questionable. I suppose the people of the state could, but I don't love it.

Then there's the phrase, "economy after exhaustion." So there's a pre-exhaustion economy and a post-exhaustion economy? Again, seems questionable, but I'm not 100% convinced it's a concrete error.

Let's hold on to it for now, but the other options are going to have some pretty serious problems for me to choose this one.


"The intention of which," jumps out here. What is "which" describing? The intention of the fund? The intention of the state? It's not totally clear.

And then there's the "they" towards the end. I don't see any plural noun that "they" could logically refer to here. So (B) is out.


This seems pretty good. Here "intended" clearly describes the "fund," and it no longer seems as though it's the state of Alaska that's consciously intending to do something.

(C) also gets rid of the goofy phrase "economy after exhaustion." Instead, we're talking about the "economy after oil reserves are exhausted." Much clearer.

Because this one cleans up the confusing meaning issues that cropped up in (A), we'll keep (C) and ditch (A).


I don't like the phrase "exhausting its oil reserves." Who or what is doing the exhausting? It kind of sounds as though the fund is sustaining the state's economy after the fund exhausts its reserves. That clearly makes no sense -- and at the very least, (D) is far murkier than (C). So (D) is out.


Again, there's nothing for "they" to refer to here.

So (E) is gone, and (C) is our winner.
_________________

I also like D.

A) "with the intention to" is not necessary and wordy can change it to "intended"

B) they refers to Alsaka and therefore wrong. It would have been ok if it were state and not possessive "state's economy" Also sentence is wordy

C) Correct

D) Use of its is ambiguous. Pronoun should be as close as the noun. Here also there are several singular nouns (sale, oil etc) and therefore use of it is not correct.

E) same as B

Soomodh

This is how we use "with the intention to ..."

Many countries have also introduced new mining laws with the intention to unlock investment and kick-start exploration.
"unlocking investment" is the intention and action of many countries, not "new mining laws".

Look at our sentence:

Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund, with the intention to sustain the ...

Here, "sustain the economy" will be the action of the fund, not Alaska.

Change it to:

The current Alaskan Govt regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund, with the intention to support the economy later ...

Here, it would be acceptable because the intent of the sentence is that the current Alaskan Govt hopes to support the economy later.

Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund, with the intention to sustain the state’s economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves.
(A) fund, with the intention to sustain the state’s economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves
(B) fund, the intention of which is to sustain the state’s economy after they have exhausted their oil reserves
(C) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after oil reserves are exhausted
(D) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after exhausting its oil reserves
(E) fund that they intend to sustain the state’s economy after oil reserves are exhausted

Can someone explain why "..... fund intended to..." is working on this sentence? I can't understand what role does "intended to" play here?

Many thanks

"Intended to" is playing the same role as "designed for" is playing in the following sentence.

"City Mayor is planning to approve the budget of a water park designed specially for kids".
_________________

Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund, with the intention to sustain the state's economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves.

(A) fund, with the intention to sustain the state's economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves . - Alaska does not have intentions.
(B) fund, the intention of which is to sustain the state's economy after they have exhausted their oil reserves - Fund does not have intentions.
(C) fund intended to sustain the state's economy after oil reserves are exhausted - Correct
(D) fund intended to sustain the state's economy after r exhausting its oil reserves - Who is going to exhaust the oil reserves? Alaska??
(E) fund that they intend to sustain the state's economy after oil reserves are exhausted - Whom does they refer to?



I think the answer is (C).

Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund, with the intention to sustain the state's economy after the exhaustion
of its oil reserves.

(A) fund, with the intention to sustain the state's economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves.
(B) fund, the intention of which is to sustain the state's economy after they have exhausted their oil reserves
(C) fund intended to sustain the state's economy after oil reserves are exhausted
(D) fund intended to sustain the state's economy after exhausting its oil reserves
(E) fund that they intend to sustain the state's economy after oil reserves are exhausted

My preference was to D official answer is C

Apart from this i have also one query.
In choice A "with the intension .........oil reserves" seems to modify the verb 'deposits'
Inchoice C "intended to .............are exhausted" seems to modify 'fund'
How should one decide/recognize which word logically be modified by the modifier.

My preference was to D official answer is C
(D) fund intended to sustain the state's economy after exhausting its oil reserves
-- The pronoun "its" is ambiguous, it can refer to both economy or alaska. Hence choice (D) is incorrect.


Apart from this i have also one query.
In choice A "with the intention .........oil reserves" seems to modify the verb 'deposits'
-- Choice (A) has redundant comma prefixed to "with", because of which the "with clause" appears to modify the entire first part of the sentence. Such constructions are usually less preferred in GMAT (including few OG solutions). And yes, "with intention" refers to the Alaska's action "deposits".

Inchoice C "intended to .............are exhausted" seems to modify 'fund'. How should one decide/recognize which word logically be modified by the modifier.
This is VERB-ED type modifier. Refer to below article and you will be more clear about this type of modifier.
ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html

D is wrong because of ambiguous pronoun "its" - "its" could refer to " Alaska" / "state" or "economy". A possessive pronoun may have a non-possessive antecedent.

Perhaps my explanation was clear: The pronoun "its" may have two antecedents - "Alaska" (or "state") AND "economy". Therefore the pronoun "its" is ambiguous.

(Note: There is no such rule as "In a sentence all the possessives refer to one antecedent" whatsoever.)

I agree that the "its" in D is wrong.
But there are other problems with D as well...

(D) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after exhausting its oil reserves

Fix the "its"

(D) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after exhausting the state's oil reserves


73. Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after exhausting the state's oil reserves.

-- there seems to be a tense problem though I can't pinpoint exactly what.

C

A is incorrect because it is wordy.

B is incorrect is wordy too and uses "they" without giving it a proper antecedent. One could assume "they" refers to "Alaska", but that would also be incorrect as Alaska is not a group of anything.

D is incorrect because it implies that the fund itself will exhaust the oil reserves. D is incorrect because it modifies the sentence's meaning.

E is incorrect because of the ambiguous "they".

I hope that helps

A - says Special fund has some intention, intention is their for Alaska so incorrect

B - they ? , all should be sigular ( use only it or its) - incorrect

C - Seems good , funded intended (which means it is intended for some reason ),

D - Alaska is not trying to exhaust and do something with fund. it planned after the reserves get exhausted - incorrect

E - again they - incorrect

Hi Gaurav2896,

With the intention to may not be correct (with the intention of is far more common). You may also want to solve this question and go through this post.
_________________

this one has not been clarified yet

Alaska regularly deposits some of its profits from the sale of oil into a special fund, with the intention to sustain the state’s economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves.

Comma is redundant (A) fund, with the intention to sustain the state’s economy after the exhaustion of its oil reserves
Too wordy (B) fund, the intention of which is to sustain the state’s economy after they have exhausted their oil reserves
(C) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after oil reserves are exhausted
Wrong (D) fund intended to sustain the state’s economy after exhausting its oil reserves
Meaning changed - fund will be sustained after oil reserves are exhausted (E) fund that they intend to sustain the state’s economy after oil reserves are exhausted

Why is D incorrect? In D it is clear that the state's oil reserves, in C this clarity is missing.

In a sentence shouldn't all the possessives refer to one antecedent? Going by this, the sentence reads as "state's economy" and "its oil reserves". Since there is only one state (Alaska) in question here

state refers to Alaska

and

its refers to state's => Alaska's