Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 09:10 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 09:10

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Jun 2019
Posts: 5344
Own Kudos [?]: 3964 [34]
Given Kudos: 160
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34
WE:Engineering (Transportation)
Send PM
Director
Director
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Status:Learning
Posts: 876
Own Kudos [?]: 566 [2]
Given Kudos: 755
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Sep 2019
Posts: 49
Own Kudos [?]: 21 [0]
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
GPA: 3
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Dec 2019
Posts: 18
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
While I agree that the sentence should be properly punctuated with a semi-colon or a comma + conjunction per the FANBOYS conjunction or a semicolon rule. However, is improper punctuation enough of a reason to reject an answer?

I am thinking the best two answers are A or C. However, I am not sold that the punctuation error in A is enough to discount it.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Sep 2019
Posts: 49
Own Kudos [?]: 21 [0]
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
GPA: 3
Send PM
As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
strepanier thanks for your reply. However, I feel (D) is the best answer:
As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.

My reasons:
1. No run on sentence
2. The meaning is correctly conveyed. Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration; how? by ending the exclusion formally; how did it end the exclusion formally? using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954. Do note the years. In 1917 Immigration Act caused exclusion. In 1954 the McCarran-Walter Act stopped exclusion.

Why I am against OA (C)
-leads to a run on sentence; joins two independent clauses, incorrectly, using a comma.


Happy to hear your views.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Dec 2019
Posts: 18
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
1
Kudos
@gandharvm-

If we look at the sentence with D plugged in we run in to several issues- Let's start with the meaning, which is distorted here.

"As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954."

1. As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I,
2. the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States

How did they halt immigration? the author clearly states with the immigration act of 1917 but if we use choice D it states "by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954." - this is illogical- and distorts the author's intended meaning- which is that the the 1954 McCarran-Walter Act ended the exclusion.

I am also wondering where you are seeing two independent clauses? For there to be two independent clauses we would need two subjects, right? In this sentence we only have one subject which is the immigration act. Therefore the comma and semi colon are not a necessity per grammar rules, and the ;lack of them is not a reason to rule out a choice.

More food for thought ;)
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Sep 2019
Posts: 49
Own Kudos [?]: 21 [0]
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
GPA: 3
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
Dear strepanier,


In OA (C), the two independent clauses are:
1) As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States ----The subject is The Immigration Act
2)the exclusion formally ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954. ---The subject is The exclusion

This is why I feel option C results in a run on sentence as the two independent clauses aren't joined by a semicolon/ , + FANBOYS

..

For option (D), wanted to understand what is the meaning being conveyed in (D) that makes it incorrect/illogical?
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Dec 2019
Posts: 18
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
gandharvm
answer choice d=States by ending the exclusion formally using

so here the whole sentence reads:

"As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954."

The meaning here is not logical. Per this they halted immigration by having immigration by McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.

Using pause points to get to the meaning we can interpret:

As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I= this independent clause tells us that Xenophobia hit an all time high prior to WWI

the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States= this independent clause tells us that the Immigration act of 1917 stopped immigration from most Asian countries.

by ending the exclusion formally = a prepositional phrase, which as we know, prepositional phrases serve as an adjective modifying a noun, as an adverb modifying a verb, or as a nominal when used in conjunction with the verb form to be. We can rule out the use of the nominal since there is no conjunction. S owe are left with either adjective or adverb. So what is by ending the exclusion formally modifying? Either immigration act or halted? But that does not make sense.

using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954= what used the the McCarran Warren Act? this verb phrase can only modify the Immigration act of 1917, which is illogical.

Hope this break down helps to clarify the meaning choice D brings.
Director
Director
Joined: 21 Feb 2017
Posts: 521
Own Kudos [?]: 1037 [0]
Given Kudos: 1091
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V39
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
experts, could you please help with the diff between B and C?
Manager
Manager
Joined: 03 May 2013
Posts: 95
Own Kudos [?]: 50 [1]
Given Kudos: 114
Location: India
Send PM
As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
1
Kudos
gandharvm wrote:
arvind910619 in (C), doesn't the part after the comma result in an independent clause being joined incorrectly?
"the exclusion formally ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954." seems like a complete sentence. Why doesn't it warrant the use of FANBOYS conjunction or a semicolon?



"the exclusion" is noun and "formally ended" is noun modifier ,( which makes the underlined segment in said option a noun phrase, not an independent clause) if it would have verb as "was" in option A , then it would have called Independent clause and we would have needed either fanboys or semicolon
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2018
Posts: 167
Own Kudos [?]: 80 [0]
Given Kudos: 899
Location: Australia
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V28
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
egmat pls explaon why B is incorrect and C is correct?
Intern
Intern
Joined: 07 Feb 2022
Posts: 6
Own Kudos [?]: 11 [0]
Given Kudos: 11
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V36
GMAT 2: 770 Q50 V47
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
junii

Option B begins "formally ending the exclusion by" which means that the Immigration Act of 1917 itself was responsible for formally ending the exclusion which is not true.

Option C says "the exclusion formally ended by" which means that the McCarran-Walter Act ended the exclusion, which is the correct meaning.
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17220
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne