Closely interrelated concepts, a change in macroeconomic policy tends

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION



• HIGHLIGHTS

-- Although finding splits is frequently the most efficient method to solve SCs, in this case, I think it's easier to take the options one by one.

-- Just a reminder: our job is to find and eliminate the four worst answers, not to look for the best answer.

To answer your question, DivyanshuGupta61 , which you posted here:
This question turns on meaning and causality.

The sentence means:
Because macroeconomic policy and accumulated microeconomic decisions affect each other, any economics curriculum requires a lot of study of both macro- and microeconomic concepts.

The inter-relatedness of the two areas is the logical key to this sentence.
Micro- and macroeconomics should be included in any economics curriculum because each area affects the other—not merely because each area exists, as option D suggests.

THE PROMPT



THE OPTIONS


• Modifier error. Right after the intro, closely related concepts, we should be reading about more than one noun.
-- Closely related concepts illogically modifies a change in macroeconomic policy
-- Stated differently, whatever follows closely related concepts should be at least two nouns that fit the introductory description
-- The "Modifier Touch Rule" says that noun modifiers should be as close as possible to the nouns they modify
ELIMINATE A

• numerously is misused and misplaced.
→ numerously is an adverb that illogically modifies affects. The word numerously should be the adjective numerous, which would modify microeconomic transactions
→ it's not possible to "affect" something "numerously" in this context.
• typically is misplaced; it's an adverb that modifies influences, but typically is much too far from influences.
ELIMINATE B


• huh? The phrase as a related concept now describes only macroeconomic studies (or the focus thereof). It's not clear what macroeconomic studies is closely related to.
ELIMINATE C


• at first glance, this option might seem okay. If you're not sure, move to option E immediately.
• the logical and meaning error is easier to see after we read (E).
→ option D says that Because two closely related concepts [merely] exist, they should be in an economics curriculum.
→ compare to the meaning in E, which says that the fact that these two areas are closely interrelated means that they should be included in any economics curriculum
Option D is not nearly as strong as option E.

ELIMINATE D

Option E makes sense.
→ the sentence after the semi-colon presents the logical conclusion of the first sentence
→ Because macroeconomics and microeconomics are closely related, they should be required in any economics curriculum.
→ Option E may seem repetitive. I don't think so. When fairly esoteric terms of art (specialized terms) are in play, it is often a good idea to repeat the technical words.
The grammar is correct and the meaning is more logical than that in (D).

The best answer is E

Concision really is a thing on the GMAT.
But meaning and logic always trump concision.
Sometimes meaning and logic even trump grammar rules we were sure GMAC would never break.
Whenever meaning and logic are in a contest with anything else, choose meaning and logic.

COMMENTS

aerograce and DivyanshuGupta61 welcome to SC Butler.

nkhl.goyal , it's good to "see" you again.

zhanbo and eakabuah , it is always good to see you.

This question is hard.
Those of you who answered before the reveal of the OA reasoned pretty well.
More to the point, you were brave.
Kudos to all.

(Sidebar: I am woefully behind in writing OEs. I will post most or all OEs in the next two days.)