Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damag

Question

Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits  compensating state governments for damage to  their natural resources but does not allow claims for injury to people.

(A) compensating state governments for damage to

(B) compensating state governments for the damaging of

(C) giving state governments compensation for damaging

(D) giving compensation to state governments for the damage of

(E) the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging

anairamitch1804 · Accepted Answer

We have the command subjunctive here. To be more precise, it is the case when verbs only take infinitive. Such verbs include permit, advise, allow, want, persuade, forbid. 
The structure of the sentence is: PERMIT sth/someone TO 
In our case: PERMITS   TO 
Does this makes sense to you? 
If we use the elimination method we can discard C, D and E for redundancy (they feature both give +compensation); on the contrary, A and B use a single verb to describe that action. 
B is incorrect because of the parallelism issue: 'damaging' versus 'claims (in order to be parallel, it should be 'for claiming').

Both C and E make it sound like the state governments are damaging their own natural resources, which is incorrect, so those choices can be eliminated. The correct idiom is "damage to," not "damage of," which allows D to be eliminated. B is wordy and awkward; "the damaging of" has "of" instead of "to," and unnecessarily uses the definite article and a gerund ("the damaging") where a single word ("damage") performs exactly the same function. Therefore, the sentence is correct as written.

E's use of "for damaging" implies that the compensation was given to the state governments in exchange for the governments' damaging of natural resources. We can logically say that the state governments are not the ones who caused the damage, so E's meaning is incorrect.

daagh · Answer

I think this tests prepositional //ism. ‘For injury to’ people in the non-underlined part should be matched by a corresponding ‘for damage to’ in the underlined portion. Note that only A keeps such a prepositional //ism perfectly; hence that is the correct choice. Because all other choices foul this basic tenet, I would confidently dump them and go to the next.

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Concepts tested here: Parallelism + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• Any elements linked by a conjunction (“but” in this case) must be parallel.
• When “damage” is used as a noun, “damage to” is the correct, idiomatic usage.

A:   Correct.  This answer choice maintains parallelism between “permits compensating state governments for damage to their natural resources” and “does not allow claims for injury to people”. Further, Option A correctly uses the idiomatic construction “damage to”. Additionally, Option A is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

B:  This answer choice fails to maintain parallelism between “permits compensating state governments for the damaging of their natural resources” and” does not allow claims for injury to people”; please remember, any elements linked by a conjunction (“but” in this case) must be parallel. Further, Option B uses the passive voice construction “the damaging of”, rendering it awkward and needlessly wordy.

C:  This answer choice fails to maintain parallelism between “giving state governments compensation for damaging their natural resources” and "does not allow claims for injury to people”; please remember, any elements linked by a conjunction (“but” in this case) must be parallel. Further, Option C uses the passive and needlessly wordy constructions “giving state governments compensation” and “for damaging”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D:  This answer choice fails to maintain parallelism between “giving compensation to state governments for the damage of their natural resources” and "does not allow claims for injury to people”; please remember, any elements linked by a conjunction (“but” in this case) must be parallel. Further, Option D incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction “damage of”; please remember, when “damage” is used as a noun, “damage to” is the correct, idiomatic usage. Additionally, Option D uses the passive and needlessly wordy construction “giving compensation to state governments” leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

E:  This answer choice fails to maintain parallelism between “the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging their natural resources” and "does not allow claims for injury to people”; please remember, any elements linked by a conjunction (“but” in this case) must be parallel. Further, Option E uses the needlessly wordy constructions “the giving of” and “for damaging”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

Hence, A is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

sdrandom1 · Answer

Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits compensating state governments for damage to their natural resources but does not allow claims for injury to people.

(A) compensating state governments for damage to - idiomatic and parallelism is maintained. 
(B) compensating state governments for the damaging of - "for the damaging" not parallel to"for injury to people"
(C) giving state governments compensation for damaging -not parallel to"for injury to people"
(D) giving compensation to state governments for the damage of- "the damage of" not parallen to "for injury to "
(E) the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging - "giving of compensation " unidiomatic

I would go with A.

ykaiim · Answer

IMO A.

Clues:
1. In the case, the damage has already been done and that's the reason federal legislation is a fund. It must be   damage   rather than  damaging . So, A and D are left.

2.  "compensating"  is acting as a gerund here. So, it is better option than  "...compensation..." .

3. || is followed b/w  "for damage to their"  and  "for injury to people" .

I hope this helps.

gmatisnothard · Answer

Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits compensating state governments for damage to their natural resources but does not allow claims for injury to people.

(A) compensating state governments for damage to
(B) compensating state governments for the  damaging of 
 (C) giving state governments compensation for damaging
(D) giving compensation to state governments for the damage of
(E) the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging

=> X to Y and W to Z.
So, A is the answer.

gmat1220 · Answer

Fed legislation permits compensating state Gov for damage to their natural resources.

idiomatic - damage to

daagh · Answer

A) compensating state governments for damage to ….  for damage to //to for injury to – correct choice

(B) compensating state governments for the damaging of --- -for the damaging of not // to for injury to 
(C) giving state governments compensation for damaging …..  for damaging not // to for injury  to
(D) giving compensation to state governments for the damage of -----=  for the damage of not // to for injury to

(E) the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging ---  for damaging not // to for injury to

samsmalldog · Answer

chemicals permits  compensating state governments for damage to  their natural resources
but does not allow claims  for injury to  people.
(A) compensating state governments  for damage to   shoot 
(B) compensating state governments for  the damaging of   unparallel 
(C)  giving state governments compensation  for  damaging    wordy+unparallel 
(D)  giving compensation  to state governments for the  damage of   reasons are same as C 
(E)  the giving of compensation  to state governments  for damaging   reasons are same as C

johng2016 · Answer

Could some experts please clarify this question in terms of "......permits compensating state governments for......"

What is "compensating state governments"? What is it role in the sentence?

chetan2u , could you please help?

chetan2u · Answer

hi,
the sentence reads--
 Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits compensating state governments for damage to their natural resources but does not allow claims for injury to people.. .

A legislation permits SOMETHING... 
WHAT is this something -- compensating state governments for damage to their natural resources but does not allow claims for injury to people...
so compensating here acts as a gerund and behaves like a noun..

How can you check whether it is gerund here..
replace with a NOUN and see if it still stands..
Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits  compensating state governments for damage to their natural resources but does not allow claims for injury to people  alcohol..
may not make sense but is correct grammatically so the original --compensating- is a NOUN..

again compensating X for WHAT -- for damage to....

anje29 · Answer

Though I got the answer. The construction of the sentence seems awkward and I am not able to find the verb. Experts please help.  anairamitch1804

Skywalker18 · Answer

Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits  compensating state governments for damage to  their natural resources
but does not allow claims for injury to people.
(A) compensating state governments for damage to - Correct
(B) compensating state governments for the damaging of - damaging of is incorrect
(C) giving state governments compensation for damaging - ‘Compensating’ is better than “giving compensation”
(D) giving compensation to state governments for the damage of - same as C
(E) the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging - same as C

Answer A

as03691 · Answer

A is the best option. It has the proper idiomatic structure (damage to), maintains parallelism (damage to parallels injury to) and is the most concise.

thangvietnam · Answer

if we say " compensate for damaging", the meaning is that we compensate for the action of damaging but not for the damage, the loss. so, the meaning of "compensate for damaging" is opposite to the "compensate for the damage" somewhat. so, choices b, c and e is wrong.

thangvietnam · Answer

"for damaging" make opposite meaning to " for damage to". 
"for damaing' mean pay money to the person who damage or pay for the damaging. funny meaning. I damage your car and,so, I get money.

Jainavanti268 · Answer

How is compensating state government parallel to Claims. Isnt compensating state government a simple gerund whereas claims a noun? Should the sentence not have been compensating of state governments?

EducationAisle · Answer

Hi  Jainavanti268 , the parallelism here is actually between  permits  and  does  (not allow), both of them  verbs .

GMATNinja · Answer

This is a question that appeared on our  Ask Me Anything About SC thread  -- and I figured that I'd post it here too, just in case it helps somebody out there:

(D) has a meaning problem. "The damage of their natural resources," makes it sound as though the natural resources are causing the damage, or worse, are the damage themselves! That doesn't make sense. It's far more logical to write that the damage is happening  to  the natural resources. This is what we find in (A), which is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!

Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damag

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

Federal legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of sites damag

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards