Dear Friends,
Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
swatirpr
Classical guitar was neither prestigious nor was often played in concert halls until it was revived by Andres Segovia in the mid-twentieth century, having been won over by the instrument's sound despite its relative obscurity.(A) Classical guitar was neither prestigious nor was often played in concert halls until it was revived by Andres Segovia in the mid-twentieth century, having been won over by the instrument's sound despite its relative obscurity.
(B) Classical guitar was neither prestigious nor played often in concert halls until it was revived by Andres Segovia in the mid-twentieth century, having been won over by the instrument's sound despite its relative obscurity.
(C) Classical guitar was not prestigious and was not often played in concert halls until Andres Segovia revived it in the mid-twentieth century, after he was won over by the sound despite the instrument's relative obscurity.
(D) Classical guitar did not have prestige nor was it performed often in concert halls until its revival by Andres Segovia, who in the mid-twentieth century was won over by the instrument's sound despite its relative obscurity.
(E) Classical guitar was neither prestigious nor was often played in concert halls until Andres Segovia revived it in the mid-twentieth century, when he was won over by the sound of the relatively obscure instrument.
Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that Andres Segovia revived the classical guitar in the mid-twentieth century after he was won over by its sound despite the instrument's relative obscurity, and until this revival, the classical guitar was not prestigious and was not often played in concert halls.
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Parallelism• In modifying a clause, the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "having" in this sentence)" implies that the subject of the clause took the action referred to by the participle.
• “neither A nor B” and “either A or B” are idiomatic uses and are only used when referring to two elements; A and B must be parallel.
• All elements linked by conjunction must be parallel.
A:1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence by modifying the clause "it was revived by Andres Segovia in the mid-twentieth century" with the phrase "having been won over"; the use of the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "having" in this sentence) illogically implies that
the classical guitar was won over by its own sound; the intended meaning is that
Andres Segovia was won over by the classical guitar's sound; remember, in modifying a clause, the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "having" in this sentence)" implies that the subject of the clause took the action referred to by the participle.
2/ Option A fails to maintain parallelism between A ("prestigious") and B ("was often played in concert halls") in the idiomatic construction "neither A nor B"; remember, “neither A nor B” and “either A or B” are idiomatic uses and are only used when referring to two elements; A and B must be parallel.
B: Trap.
1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence by modifying the clause "it was revived by Andres Segovia in the mid-twentieth century" with the phrase "having been won over"; the use of the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "having" in this sentence) illogically implies that
the classical guitar was won over by its own sound; the intended meaning is that
Andres Segovia was won over by the classical guitar's sound; remember, in modifying a clause, the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "having" in this sentence)" implies that the subject of the clause took the action referred to by the participle.
C: Correct.1/ This answer choice modifies the clause "Andres Segovia revived it in the mid-twentieth century" with the phrase "after he was won over by the sound despite the instrument's relative obscurity", conveying the intended meaning - that
Andres Segovia revived the classical guitar
in the mid-twentieth century and was
won over by its sound
at some earlier point in time, even
though the instrument was relatively obscure.
2/ Option C avoids the parallelism error seen in Options A and E, as it does not use the "neither A nor B" construction and maintains parallelism between "not prestigious" and "not often played in concert halls"; remember, all elements linked by conjunction must be parallel.
D:1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "who in the mid-twentieth century was won over"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that Andres Segovia was
won over by the classical guitar's sound
in the mid-twentieth century and revived the classical guitar at
an indeterminate point in time; the intended meaning is that Andres Segovia
revived the classical guitar
in the mid-twentieth century and was won over by its sound
at some earlier point in time.
E: Trap.
1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "when he was won over by the sound of the relatively obscure instrument"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that Andres Segovia was
won over by the classical guitar's sound
in the mid-twentieth century and revived the classical guitar
during the same time period; the intended meaning is that Andres Segovia
revived the classical guitar
in the mid-twentieth century and was won over by its sound
at some earlier point in time, even
though the instrument was relatively obscure.
2/ Option E fails to maintain parallelism between A ("prestigious") and B ("was often played in concert halls") in the idiomatic construction "neither A nor B"; remember, “neither A nor B” and “either A or B” are idiomatic uses and are only used when referring to two elements; A and B must be parallel.
Hence, C is the best answer choice.To understand the concept of "Either-Or" and "Neither-Nor" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team