As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2

Hi,
i'll just replace the underlined portion with C and lets test the choice then

As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2,500 megawatts nationwide, but production is expected that it will almost double by the end of the year to provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households

The usage of that after expected requires a subject and production cannot be the subject for it..
production is expected that it will almost double by the end of the year.. THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE

If I write :-
It is expected that production will almost double by the end of the year... would be ok if there is an antecedent for "it"..
but than "to provide" is to parallel with ''expected almost to double ", which requires a different construction ..

so two ways to speak is..
production is expected to double..
OR it is expected that the production will double

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning of this sentence is that it is expected that production will almost double by the end of the year and thus provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Pronouns + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• "who/whose/whom/which/where", when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma.
• The introduction of the present participle ("verb+ing"- “providing” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.

A: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "almost expected to double"; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that it is almost expected that production will fully double by the end of the year; the intended meaning is that it is fully expected that production will almost double by the end of the year. Further, Option A incorrectly modifies "end of the year" with "which would provide", illogically implying that the end of the year would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households; the intended meaning is that the "production (of energy from windmills)" would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households; please remember, "who/whose/whom/which/where", when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma.

B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "almost expected that it will double"; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that it is almost expected that production will fully double by the end of the year; the intended meaning is that it is fully expected that production will almost double by the end of the year. Further, Option B suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as "it" lacks a clear referent. Additionally, Option B uses the passive voice construction "expected that it will double", leading to awkwardness and redundancy. Besides, Option B redundantly uses "thus" alongside the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "providing" in this sentence)" construction, leading to further awkwardness; this usage is redundant, as both terms imply a cause-effect relationship; please remember, the introduction of the present participle ("verb+ing"- “providing” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.

C: This answer choice suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as "it" lacks a clear referent. Further, Option C uses the passive voice construction "expected that it will almost double", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "expected almost to double", conveying the intended meaning - that it is fully expected that production will almost double by the end of the year. Further, Option D uses the phrase "and thus to provide", avoiding the modifier error seen in Options A and E and conveying the intended meaning - that the "production (of energy from windmills)" would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households. Additionally, Option D avoids the pronoun error seen in Options B and C, as it uses no pronouns. Besides, Option D is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

E: This answer choice incorrectly modifies "end of the year" with "which would thus be providing", illogically implying that the end of the year would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households; the intended meaning is that the "production (of energy from windmills)" would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households; please remember, "who/whose/whom/which/where", when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma. Further, Option E uses the passive voice construction "would...be providing", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

Hence, D is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Comma + Present Participles for Cause-Effect Relationships" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~3 minutes):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

This question is based on Construction.

The modifier ‘almost’ is misplaced in Options A and B. As it is placed, the adverb modifies the verb ‘expected’. However, it is supposed to modify the adjective ‘double’.

The relative pronoun ‘which’ seems to modify the noun ‘year’. Since this is illogical, Option A can be ruled out.

The pronoun ‘it’ is redundant in Option B as the antecedent ‘production’ is what is expected to double and it is already mentioned in the sentence. So, Option B can also be eliminated.

The same error of a redundant pronoun has been repeated in Option C. So, Option C can also be ruled out.

The pronoun ‘which’ refers to the noun ‘year’. The meaning thus conveyed is illogical. So, Option E can also be ruled out.

In Option D, the modifier ‘almost’ modifies the adjective ‘double’. The last part of the sentence conveys the two aspects of production – that it is expected to double and thus to provide. Parallelism is thus maintained. Therefore, D is the most appropriate option.

Jayanthi Kumar.

As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2,500 megawatts nationwide, but production is almost expected to double
by the end of the year, which would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households.

ALMOST EXPECTED is wrong modifier.Author intend to say almost double and which is used incorrectly
This also clear out B and E
We are left with C and D

The problem with C is the THAT clause.
THAT begin a new clause and sentence is now incomplete. Production is expected THAT.... household .. Production is expected what and THAT is modifying expected
Hence D is the correct answer

A. almost expected to double by the end of the year, which would provide
B. almost expected that it will double by the end of the year, thus providing
C. expected that it will almost double by the end of the year to provide
D. expected almost to double by the end of the year and thus to provide
E. expected almost to double by the end of the year, which would thus be providing

A and B
-almost is incorrectly modifying expected implying it may or may not happen
-modifying double implies it may or may not double.
C - unidiomatic
E - wordy
D - parallel and concise

what is to happen 'almost'? doubling of production, or the expectation of doubling of production. Since expectation being almost is awckward, while a figure getting almost double is alright, all answer choice with almost expecte are rejected rightaway. This gets rid of A and B

C. says that ' production is expected that it will almost double by the end of the year to provide' This is clearly wrong usage of pronoun it- either it should be 'it is expected that production will almost double', or 'it is expected about production that it will almost double' (wordy but gramatically sensical)
Therefore, C is rejected.

Between 'thus to provie' and 'which would thus be providing' I choose D. Thus to provide.
production is the subject f this clause- it is expected to double and thus to provide for blah blah..
use of 'which would thus be providing' makes this more wordy, changes the tatructure of the sentence, and also use of which is confusing.
hence D is the correct option.

Hello pikolo2510,

I will be glad to help you out with this one.

First of all, it is imperative to identify the correct parallel list.

Following is the sentence with the correct answer choice D:

As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2,500 megawatts nationwide, but production is expected

almost to double by the end of the year and
thus to provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households.

The thing to understand here is that the words almost and thus are adverbs = action modifiers.

Hence, their presence before the core parallel entities to double and to provide does not affect the intended parallelism because the modifiers attached to the core parallel entities have no bearing on parallelism.

Hence, Choice D is perfectly parallel.

We do cover this point about modifiers of core parallel entities not affecting the parallel list in our concept named Parallelism: Helpful Tips.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

a)almost expected to double by the end of the year, which would provide - Incorrect

b)almost expected that it would double by the end of the year,thus providing

c)expected that it will almost double by the end of the year to provide- Incorrect

d)expected almost to double by the end of the year and thus to provide - Correct

As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2500 megawatts nationwide, but production is expected almost to double by the end of the year and thus to provide enough electricity for 1.3 million household.

e)expected almost to double by the end of the year, which would thus be providing - Incorrect

D correctly maintains parallelism Hence IMO (D)..

The problem is the word "thus". If we apply "almost" to both parts of the parallel list, we get:

"Production is expected almost to double and [almost] thus to provide." That clearly doesn't make any sense, so we can't apply "almost" to both parts.

More importantly, if you know why the other four are wrong, you don't need to worry about this minor point.

You cannot "almost expect". You either expect or you dont. There is no middle ground. Therefore, "almost" is placed incorrectly in A and B. Both out.

"production is expected that" is incorrect. "production is expected to" or "it is expected that production" is correct. C out.

"which" is incorrect in E.

D it is.

A more comprehensive POE:

A. 1. "almost" placed incorrectly.
2. "which" is incorrect.
3. "would" the past future tense is incorrect. We need a future tense since the sentence is written in the present tense ("production is")

B. 1. "almost" placed incorrectly.
2. The verb of intention "to" is preferable. This is not very crisp in meaning.

C. 1. "production is expected to" is correct not "production is expected that"
2. Meaning error. The production is expected to double with an intention to provide electricity?

D. 1. "almost" placed properly
2. "to double" correct.
3. Parallelism good. expected...to double || to provide.

E. 1. "which" is wrong.
2. Who is providing?

Answer: D

As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2,500 megawatts nationwide, but production is almost expected to double by the end of the year, which
would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households.


Split 1 : Almost expected Vs Expected almost
both are correct but in this context, Almost expected creates illogical meaning . Expected almost is correct

Option A, B, C are wrong on this basis.

Lets do POE, to eliminate rest.

A. almost expected to double by the end of the year, which would provide
split 1 discussed above and Which - refers to year, year will not provide anything - incorrect

B. almost expected that it will double by the end of the year, thus providing
Split 1

C. expected that it will almost double by the end of the year to provide
It will almost double - Production wont double anything - Incorrect.

D. expected almost to double by the end of the year and thus to provide
expected
to double and
to provide
no error in parallelism - correct

E. expected almost to double by the end of the year, which would thus be providing
Which refers to year - incorrect

Its the meaning..

"... expected..... it will...."

How can you expect an event and be sure that it will happen too? This is an oxymoron.

I expect that I will score 700 in GMAT. -- Incorrect.
I expect to score 700 in GMAT. -- Correct.

Saurabh




Actual D


This is the re-phrase of your point.



If we introduce the subjunctive 'would', then the sentence would suffer bad parallelism. One thing is that we cannot get away from the idiomatic 'expected almost to double' in the first arm and therefore if we introduce the word 'would' in the second arm only, then parallelism would get warped.

Or else, the entire sentence should be changed as --- production is expected that it would almost double by the end of the year and thus would provide enough electricity for 1.3 million households ---.

We can't assume that every modifier in the first part of a parallel construction applies to the second part as well.

For instance, if I write, "Tim is a terrible cook and world-class canasta player," it wouldn't be terribly logical to apply the modifier "terrible" to both noun phrases and conclude that Tim is a "terrible world-class canasta player," right?

Same deal here. That "almost" doesn't apply to both elements. So the production is expected almost to double and production is expected to provide enough electricity. Makes sense.

And for what it's worth, I could see myself having the same question you did, especially under time pressure. The key is to pause and ask if you're CERTAIN that the construction is wrong. If you can see how the parallelism could work, but you're not sure, don't treat it as a concrete error, and look for other decision points.

I hope that helps!

Choice D keep the phrases parallel. Production expected to double by the ........... and (expected) to provide enough electricity.......

While in Choice E, The usage of which creates ambiguity. which/that refers to the closest noun i.e. year in this case.

For other Choices

A) Incorrect Placement of ALMOST. Misplaced Modifier WHICH

B) Incorrect Placement of ALMOST. Unidiomatic Usage Production is expected that it would double CORRECT USAGE IS Production is expected to double OR It is expected that Production will double

C) Same Unidiomatic Usage here too.

Hope That Helps!

which: cannot modify a whole clause

almost expected: almost is misplaced.

Hello Tracy95!

Thanks for your question! I don't think the word "thus" is redundant here because it's showing the reader the order of events. If we leave out the word "thus," it implies that the doubling of windmill production and powering more homes happens at the same time, rather than the production doubling then homes getting power.

I hope that clears it up! If you have any other questions, feel free to tag me at EMPOWERgmatVerbal!