If a law had been passed demanding that hunters will be punished

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION



THE PROMPT

◘ ISSUES

• command subjunctive
Certain "bossy" verbs such as demand require that we use command subjunctive:
→ bossy verb + THAT + noun (subject) + BARE INFINITIVE
→ the "bare infinitive" is simply the infinitive without the word "to"

___ING words derived from those verbs, such as demanding, also require the command subjunctive structure.
Correct: The judge, demanding that the lawyer be sanctioned for bringing yet another frivolous lawsuit, looked as if she were ready to throw her gavel at the attorney's head.

• conditional sentences and correct verb tenses
The non-underlined portion of the prompt uses the word "if" and talks about something that did not happen in the past.
→ IF + counterfactual in the past = Type 3 conditional.

→ Type 3 conditionals use (IF past perfect, THEN perfect conditional)
past perfect, active voice: HAD + past participle (verbED)
past perfect, passive voice: HAD + BEEN + past participle (verbED)
perfect conditional: WOULD + HAVE + past participle (verbED)

→ In Type 3 conditionals, the sentence describes the opposite of what happened.
Neither the conditional nor its probable result (in the past) happened.
Correct: If I had understood the joke, I would have laughed. (But I did not understand the joke and I did not laugh.)

→ The core of this sentence can be phrased this way: If X had been passed, then Y would [not] have become
(Remember, we are dealing with counterfactuals. The law did not get passed. The quagga did become extinct.)

We need both a command subjunctive construction and a "would have verbED" construction.

THE OPTIONS

• command subjunctive is missing
→ the future tense will be punished is not command subjunctive, which is required by the phrase demanding that
→ correction: . . . demanding that hunters be punished
ELIMINATE A


• wrong verb tense in the second part of the sentence
→ would not become extinct is illogical: the quagga would not become extinct in the past?
No. The quagga would not have become extinct in the past.

→ would not become is used with a Type 2 conditional, not a Type 3
Type 2: If I were you, I would not become a member of that cult.
Type 3: If I had been you, I would not have become a member of that cult.
This option's second verb phrase is incorrect. We need would [not] have become.
ELIMINATE B


• wrong verb tense in the second part of the sentence
→ will not become is nonsensical
We cannot say that in the past, the quagga will not become extinct.
→ will = future = Type 1 conditional, not Type 3
We need would not have become.
ELIMINATE C


• Bingo: the first verb tense is in command subjunctive, and the second verb tense is in perfect conditional
KEEP


• command subjunctive construction is missing
→ we need ". . . demanding that hunters be punished"

• wrong time period
→ are being punished is present tense, whereas the prompt locks us into past tense
ELIMINATE E

The answer is D.

COMMENTS

The Thanksgiving holiday just ended in the U.S.
The Lincoln Project created the most memorable Thanksgiving video I have ever seen.
The Lincoln Project Gives Thanks is the epitome of simple eloquence—in under two minutes.

You know, the effect of tryptophan really is a thing.
I wasn't too sure. I'm sure.

These answers range from good to excellent.
Future aspirants will or should be grateful for the different approaches and different "voices."
Sumi1010 , I am bumping you to Best Community Reply.
Well done. Be safe, everyone.