RohitKalla wrote:
Despite what was hoped, the introduction of a sixty-five mile per hour speed limit is
reducing neither congestion on rural highways, or it is not contributing to save gas for trucking companies and less pollution from the decreased amount of time trucks spend on the road.
A) reducing neither congestion on rural highways, or it is not contributing to save gas for trucking companies and less pollution
B) reducing neither the congestion on rural highways nor is it contributing to lower gas costs for trucking companies, or to less polluting
C) not reducing the congestion on rural highways nor is it contributing to save gas for trucking companies, and it is not lessening the pollution
D) not reducing the congestion on rural highways, it is not contributing to savings on gas for trucking companies, it is less pollution
E) not reducing congestion on rural highways, nor is it contributing to lower gas costs for truck companies or less pollution
The question is, whats the guiding rule in such constructions and why the answer is what it is.
:
I am definitely not an expert by any means ..... but, this is what I think:
Neither X nor Y .... is a classic idiomatic contraction. But, 'nor' not always warrants for a 'neither' ( But, Neither needs a nor
).Now when 'nor' is not accompanied with a neither , a clause follows nor. The verb is repeated after the nor.
Keeping the aforementioned in mind and following the ll-list ..... we can eliminate A,B & D.
Now, C is eliminated as we have used 2 single word markers to represent 3 elements ( in ll-ism)
In E ..... the construction is
X is not reducing ...... nor is it contributing ...( lower gas cost ll less pollution) [is not reducing ll is it contributing]
_________________
Please let me know if I am going in wrong direction.
Thanks in appreciation.
close
