Immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or not at

Whether should be used as there are several options.

Between D and E, D might be better because simple present is used in main clause and future tense is used for 'whether' clause, which makes sense. Also, the placement of 'after contracts are signed' in D seems to be consistent with the original sentence and original meaning.

can anyone explain why other options are wrong

Please explain all options.....
_________________

(D) Police presence determines whether immigration wages, after contracts are signed, will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or at all.
(E) Police presence, after contracts are signed, will determine whether immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or at all.

Whether is used for choice not if, which is used only in case of conditionals.
D has correct modifier, so it wins over E.

in d, i do not understand "at all" . pls. help .

It is easy to eliminate A, B, C.
A. This sentence does not make any logical sense.
B. Same as A.
C. Sounds better than previous ones, but "if" does not pass in GMAT in not conditional sentences. We need "whether".

D, E - tricky.
It seems to me that E is about 1 case scenario ("will detemine"), maybe something unusual. For some particular case.
And D is something global ("determines"). It is one of police's usual jobs.
So D is a little more preferable.
Moreover. "After contracts are signed" - it is atrributed to "wages", so it's place in D is better.

We choose D.

IMO D
However, there is a correction required in question
In all the answer option stems "or at all" is given however the question asks for "not at all"
_________________

Really!! What is this sentence exactly trying to convey? How can police presence determine the immigration wages? I just couldn't understand the meaning!!

Two things: Immigration wages paid vs not paid. They will be paid once the contracts are signed. But if police is present(while paying during fortnight/monthend), they will not be paid at all.
To start with, ellipsis comes into play here. Immigration wages will be paid <condition> ,or at all. Note here that the phrase at all is fairly equivalent to the uncertain period forever. For instance,
1.I wonder whether Australian bush fires come down at all.
2.Has the situation in China improved at all?

This is completely my understanding. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Now the answer choices.
(A) Immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or not at all after contracts are signed, depending on police presence. Misplaced modifier. Signing of the contracts is essential for other payments too. Eliminate
(B) After contracts are signed, depending on police presence, immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or at all. Essential modifier. Police presence is essential! Enclosing the phrase within commas make the phrase non-essential, so Eliminate
(C) After contracts are signed, police presence will determine if immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or at all. Poor conditional construction. Generally if is used to denote conditions. If the train comes [Simple Present] late, I will be late [Simple Future] to the meeting. This is the correct construction and option C uses Simple Future on both sides of the condition. Eliminate
(D) Police presence determines whether immigration wages, after contracts are signed, will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or at all. No Error.
at all is in parallel with the list of times (bi-weekly,monthly). or is not to be confused with Whether...or. Here it is used as parallel connector. so Hold on.
(E) Police presence, after contracts are signed, will determine whether immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly, monthly, or at all.Essential modifier Signing contracts is required for getting the wages! So Eliminate.

Option D, it is. Hope this helps

I am confused between C and D. I think the time frame is: contracts are signed->police presence will determine the payment. Also, what should be the differentiating factor b/w if and whether

Hi

You have got the chronology of events absolutely spot on.

The problem with option (C) is the usage of the word "if". "If" is used when we need to introduce a condition. For example:

Give me a call whether you are coming.

This is incorrect. The message to be conveyed is: In the event of you coming, give me a call. This is a typical condition and requires the usage of "if". The correct construction would be:

Give me a call if you are coming.

On the other hand, "whether" is used to indicate a choice among options. For example:

I don’t know if I should stay home or go out.

This is incorrect because, in this sentence, one is debating to choose between two options ("whether" can also be used to indicate a choice between more than two options). Hence, the correct usage would involve the use of "whether".

I don’t know whether I should stay home or go out.

In the sentence given in the question, clearly the payment frequency of wages (bi-weekly, monthly, not at all) is not a condition but one among a few choices. Hence we should use "whether" and not"if" as used in option (C).

Hope this helps.
_________________

Going by the intended meaning of the problem statement, we must realize that no part of the sentence is an inessential modifier.
in both D & E we have one seemingly inessential modifier ...,after contracts are signed,...
A & B suggest ambiguous meaning

Hence answer is C

Please let me know if my approach has any mistake.

Hello f0restreal,

We hope this finds you well.

Having gone through the question and your reasoning, we believe that we can point out one error in your approach. Option C incorrectly uses the simple future tense verb "will determine" for information that is permanent in nature. The intended meaning here is that police presence, as a rule, or habitually, determines something. Thus, it is best to use the simple present tense to convey this information, as Option D, the best answer choice, does. Further, Option C incorrectly uses "if" rather than "whether" to present alternatives -- immigration wages being paid bi-weekly, monthly, or not at all; please remember, “if” is used to refer to phrases that lead to a “then” clause and “whether" is used for showing alternatives; "whether" generally wins over "if" on GMAT. Due to these errors, Option C must be eliminated, outright.

Moreover, Option A features a meaning error in itself. The lack of a comma after "all" in the phrase "or not at all after contracts are signed" illogically implies that immigration wages will be paid bi-weekly or monthly, or specifically after the contracts are signed, they would not be paid at all. Thus, Option A itself does not accurately convey the meaning of the sentence, meaning that "after contracts are signed, being used as an inessential modifier is not necessarily an error.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

How do you choose the correct answer between D and E?
_________________