GMATNinjaAmazing session once again!!
Can you elaborate illogical meaning conveyed by option (A) for #Q4.
Re-posting for easier analysis:
Under a provision of the Constitution
that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.
A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it
B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
E. has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
Assuming a query posted by non-American citizen
who is not aware of presence of congress/ provision in US in 2017,
does not
has been required (present perfect tense - denoting an action started in past whose effects are still continuing)
make sense with provision
was never applied(simple past tense - denoting point of time event that occurred in past) How can we be 100% sure that provision may be applied
nowjustifying usage of present perfect in OA based on context of the sentence?