In the panopticon, a unique type of prison designed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham in 1785, cells were arranged around a central observatory, where the occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated prisoners.


A. where the occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated prisoners

B. whose occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated

C. the occupier of which was not able to be seen by the incarcerated

D. having no ability for the occupier to see the prisoners

E. with no possibility of the occupier being seen by the prisoners



_________________

Saving was yesterday, heat up the gmatclub.forum's sentiment by spending KUDOS!

PS Please send me PM if I do not respond to your question within 24 hours.

There are multiple typo and errors in the question and I don't think it is a good question to practice.

In the panopticon, a unique type of prison designed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham in 1785, cells were arranged around a central observatory, where the occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated prisoners.


A. where the occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated prisoners

B. whose occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated -> Prisoners are missing and without it , it doesn't make any sense.

C. the occupier of which was not able to be seen by the incarcerated -> "was not seen" is fine and "to be able" to doesn't add any value to the meaning of the sentence.

D. having no ability for the occupier to see the prisoners -> having modifies "central observatory" which makes no sense.

E. with no possibility of the occupier being seen by the prisoners -> comma + with becomes an adverbial modifier and the adverbial modifier talks about how the action is done. So incorrect.

As per the question, A) seems to be correct.
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal
My Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267.html#p1449379
My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/kinjal-das/

Please click on Kudos, if you think the post is helpful

incarcerated -> is imprisoned. Right?

So the sentence becomes

whose occupier could not be seen by the imprisoned .

Now imprisoned is a past participle modifier and it has to modify something. Where is this something?

BTW: Economist GMAT has pulled down this question. I guess there is a reason for that.
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal
My Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267.html#p1449379
My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/kinjal-das/

Please click on Kudos, if you think the post is helpful

In the panopticon, a unique type of prison designed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham in 1785, cells were arranged around a central observatory, where the occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated prisoners.


A. where the occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated prisoners

B. whose occupier could not be seen by the incarcerated

C. the occupier of which was not able to be seen by the incarcerated

D. having no ability for the occupier to see the prisoners

E. with no possibility of the occupier being seen by the prisoners

https://gmat.economist.com/gmat-practic ... ve-pronoun

A - INCORRECT:
This answer choice is stylistically flawed. The phrase where the occupier is ambiguous, since it is not clear who the occupier is - the occupier of a cell or the occupier of the central observatory? In addition, the use of the phrase incarcerated prisoners is redundant, as prisoners repeats the meaning of the incarcerated.

B - CORRECT:
This answer choice corrects the original ambiguity by changing where the occupier to whose occupier. Using the possessive relative pronoun whose makes it clear that the occupier is the occupier of the observatory, and not the occupier of one of the cells. Furthermore, this answer choice corrects the original redundancy by replacing the redundant phrase incarcerated prisoners with the more concise the incarcerated.

C- INCORRECT:
While this answer choice corrects the original ambiguity and redundancy, it creates a new stylistic flaw. The phrases the occupier of which and was not able to be seen are both wordy and redundant

D- INCORRECT:
While this answer choice corrects the original redundancy, it is illogical. The phrase having no ability for the occupier to see cannot refer to anything in the sentence, because nothing previously mentioned in the main clause can logically have the ability to see or not to see (the panopticon, cells, observatory).
Furthermore, this answer choices reverses the original meaning of the sentence, by noting the occupier cannot see the prisoners, whereas in the original sentence the prisoners are the ones who cannot see the occupier.

E - INCORRECT:
While this answer choice corrects the original redundancy, it repeats the original ambiguity: it is not clear who the occupier is - the occupier of a cell or the occupier of the central observatory? Furthermore, this answer choice creates another stylistic flaw. The use of the preposition with is awkward and confusing, since it is not clear who or what with refers to.[/spoiler][/quote]