Ideally, groups focused on environmental justice should be concerned

First point, a run - on occurs when you try to join a phrase with the main sentence with punctuation other than a comma such s period, semicolon or colon. A is a run - on but B is not, since it uses the comma.

Second, -And -is a co-ordinate conjunction its purpose is to join two equal things. In the exercise in front, the main issue is to find how new government projects will impact local populations; whether they specifically pose a burden is part of the main impact and not equal to the impact.

Third, when you use the co-ordinate conjunction, it is justified to skip the subject, provided , you can use the same subject of the main clause, which incidentally in this case is – groups- If you insert the subject - groups – in the second part you can see the absurdity of leaving the subject to imagination. The correct subject of the second part is the – projects – and unless this subject is mentioned, then the choice suffers unclear expression; that is why D is not correct

PS: May I request you not pre-empt the answer; we must get some good discussion before we know the answer.
_________________

Hi.. Daagh

in 3rd point - ur point is that if we put subject 'groups' after AND, then the subject doesn't fit correctly to give right meaning ??? .

guys, can you tell me why not D. the official ans explanation says it changes the meaning. Can you tell me how? Also in ans option B should you have a comma or a colon?

Choices C, D and E change the meaning, why? The subject of the main sentence in all these cases is groups. However, the subject of subordinate clause is projects and the duty of this subject projects stops with affecting local population. Then what will be the subject of the second independent sentence - pose an unjust burden -? The first eligible contender is the subject of the main sentence namely groups. If we mean that groups pose a burden then it is total distortion of meaning. That is why they are suspect.
There may be hot debates that the projects itself can legally stand as the subject of the second part. . In order to avoid this muddle, well, I think GMAT does require a more clear choice that re-mentions the projects as the subject of the second part and seals the debate once for all, in favor of B.
_________________

what is the source of this question. i didnt find any OG SC in which 02 sentences are separated by full stop like this SC.

On second thoughts , I don't see "groups" as a subject of the fragment.

Ideally, groups focused on environmental justice should be concerned with how new government projects will impact local populations. Specifically whether the projects would pose an unjust burden for lower-income and minority


Ideally, groups focused on environmental justice should be concerned with how new government projects will impact local populations and pose an unjust burden for lower-income and minority

It would have been correct if the "would" in the original wasn't present.

Plz correct me if I am wrong !!!

Request you not to write your queries/answers/opinions in question window. It prevents ppl from analysing the question. The whole purpose of GMAT Club forum goes wasted by doing so.


You have response windows to do all such things.

don't you have anything better to do than to write this under every problem you can find? The thread is old!

Being Old does not make the problem inefficient for practice. I just want admin to follow my posts and do some clean up activity so that others will practice better.

Well, in this case you are better off in either reporting the posts that include explanations or writing the admins a private message. You can not expect them to follow your posts just to look for potential inconsistencies.

They already do it.. and that encourages me to do my job more..

looks like exactly noone is following you.

hmm.. i cant paste some of my email responses from admins.. any ways +1 for you for doing some research work on my actions leaving some productive practice to HELL....!!!!

unlike you, I have to be productive with my practice..

I only see you posting the same lines under about every second topic. Very productive.

I recommended to write private messages instead of contributing to even more nonsense in the forums. But as you seem to be repelled by that idea, (sarcastic) kudos to you for that

The original says that it is the duty of the groups to worry whether the projects impact local populations (including every class of people) in general and then specifically whether these projects would pose any unfair burden to the lower class and the minorities.
But, the problem with D is this: It straightaway assumes that these projects do pose an unjust burden to the lower class and minorities than finding out whether the projects pose a burden at all.
Thus, by missing the all important ‘whether’, D varies substantially from the intended meaning.
_________________

Hi @sudharshan22 generis

Please put highlighted part into Spolier

Thanks!

________________
Done. Thank you.
_________________

Here is my reasoning not to choose C and D:

1. "pose" cannot be parallel with "focused" because of difference in tense.
2. "pose" can be parallel with "be concerned". Then this sentence's meaning would be: groups focused on environmental justice should pose an unjust burden... Doesn't make sense at all because groups are posing burdens!
3. "pose" can be parallel with "impact". And in this case: the sentence would be: groups ... should be concerned with how new government projects will pose an unjust burden...
Sounds like it makes sense right? But it changes the meaning! The intended meaning is that they want to know whether projects will pose burden --> yes or no question. Now, this italicized sentence wants to know how the projects will pose a burden. "whether" and "how" are totally different!

Some people might argue that in this case, "pose" has a different subject ("projects" and "new government projects"). But in my opinion, they essentially mean the same thing, so we cannot just eliminate this answer solely based on this.
_________________

A. will impact local populations. Specifically whether the projects would pose an unjust burden
Breaking of the sentence is absoolutely unnecessary distortiing the meaning therefore out

B. will impact local populations, specifically whether the projects would pose an unjust burden
THe meaning is perfect therefore let us hang on to it

C. will impact local populations and pose an unjust burden
THis gives a meaning as though the committe has to impose a burden to the community which is not the case therefore out

D. will impact local populations and, specifically, pose an unjust burden
Similar reasoning as C

E. will be impacting local populations and posing an unjust burden
impacting and posting isn't the right tense therefore out

Therefore IMO B