Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
26 Apr 2019, 11:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
80% (01:25) correct
20%
(01:35)
wrong
based on 4975
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In the United States one of the earliest challengers of the economic principle of free trade was Alexander Hamilton, who in 1792 advocated government policies that would encourage indigenous manufacturing and to protect it from competition from British exports.
(A) and to protect it
(B) but protecting it
(C) while protecting it
(D) for protecting them
(E) to protect them
SC81661.01
Verbal Review 2020 NEW QUESTION
(A) and to protect it
(B) but protecting it
(C) while protecting it
(D) for protecting them
(E) to protect them
SC81661.01
Verbal Review 2020 NEW QUESTION
https://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/22/business/economic-scene-trade-theory-from-harvard.html
FREE trade has been a venerated economic principle in the United States going back 200 years. But there have been challengers. The first was Alexander Hamilton, who in 1791 argued for government policies that would encourage native manufacturing while protecting it from British exports.
Verb form; Agreement; Parallelism
The point of the sentence is that Alexander Hamilton challenged free trade by advocating government policies that would encourage indigenous manufacturing and, at the same time, protect this manufacturing from competition from British exports. Some of the answer choices use the plural pronoun them, but the antecedent of the pronoun is manufacturing, which is singular, so the singular pronoun it should be used. As given, the sentence correctly uses the singular pronoun it, but, because the sentence's predicate is a compound predicate, in which two verb phrases are conjoined by the word and, the same verb form should be used, which is not the case here.
(A) Because the predicate is compound, with verb phrases conjoined by and, the verb forms should be the same; thus, to protect is incorrect. The pronoun it is correct, however, as its antecedent is manufacturing.
(B) Because the predicate is compound, with verb phrases conjoined by but, the verb forms should be the same; thus, to protect is incorrect. The pronoun it is correct, however, as its antecedent is manufacturing.
(C) Correct. The sentence is well expressed. The pronoun it is correct as its antecedent is manufacturing, and the use of the participle phrase while protecting it from competition from British imports (the subject, indigenous manufacturing, is given earlier and need not be repeated) appropriately conveys the idea that Hamilton advocated policies that protected the manufacturing at the same time as they encouraged its development.
(D) The use of them is incorrect. Since it is plural the antecedent cannot be the singular indigenous manufacturing, though that would appear to be the intended antecedent (the idea underlying the sentence is that Hamilton, in a challenge to the principle of free trade, sought both to encourage and protect indigenous manufacturing). To take either of the plural nouns government policies or earliest challengers as the antecedent renders the sentence illogical, as does the use of the preposition for. Although it might make sense to think that encouraging indigenous manufacturing would protect the United States, United States, like manufacturing, is singular, and so cannot serve as the antecedent of them.
(E) As with answer choice D, there is no plural noun that is a logically plausible antecedent for the plural pronoun them.
FREE trade has been a venerated economic principle in the United States going back 200 years. But there have been challengers. The first was Alexander Hamilton, who in 1791 argued for government policies that would encourage native manufacturing while protecting it from British exports.
Verb form; Agreement; Parallelism
The point of the sentence is that Alexander Hamilton challenged free trade by advocating government policies that would encourage indigenous manufacturing and, at the same time, protect this manufacturing from competition from British exports. Some of the answer choices use the plural pronoun them, but the antecedent of the pronoun is manufacturing, which is singular, so the singular pronoun it should be used. As given, the sentence correctly uses the singular pronoun it, but, because the sentence's predicate is a compound predicate, in which two verb phrases are conjoined by the word and, the same verb form should be used, which is not the case here.
(A) Because the predicate is compound, with verb phrases conjoined by and, the verb forms should be the same; thus, to protect is incorrect. The pronoun it is correct, however, as its antecedent is manufacturing.
(B) Because the predicate is compound, with verb phrases conjoined by but, the verb forms should be the same; thus, to protect is incorrect. The pronoun it is correct, however, as its antecedent is manufacturing.
(C) Correct. The sentence is well expressed. The pronoun it is correct as its antecedent is manufacturing, and the use of the participle phrase while protecting it from competition from British imports (the subject, indigenous manufacturing, is given earlier and need not be repeated) appropriately conveys the idea that Hamilton advocated policies that protected the manufacturing at the same time as they encouraged its development.
(D) The use of them is incorrect. Since it is plural the antecedent cannot be the singular indigenous manufacturing, though that would appear to be the intended antecedent (the idea underlying the sentence is that Hamilton, in a challenge to the principle of free trade, sought both to encourage and protect indigenous manufacturing). To take either of the plural nouns government policies or earliest challengers as the antecedent renders the sentence illogical, as does the use of the preposition for. Although it might make sense to think that encouraging indigenous manufacturing would protect the United States, United States, like manufacturing, is singular, and so cannot serve as the antecedent of them.
(E) As with answer choice D, there is no plural noun that is a logically plausible antecedent for the plural pronoun them.
26 Apr 2019, 11:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
generis
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
At its core, this sentence means that Alexander Hamilton advocated government policies that both encouraged the development of U.S. manufacturing and protected U.S. manufacturing from British competition, and in doing so he challenged the economic principle of free trade.
Split #1: Pronoun/noun disagreement
Manufacturing, singular, must be referred to by it
Options D and E use them
-- Them has no logical antecedent.
-- The two plural nouns are "government policies" and "[earliest] challengers." The policies are not protecting themselves or any early challengers of free trade.
-- It's possible that encouragement of indigenous manufacturing might protect the United States—but United States is singular and cannot be the antecedent for them
Eliminate D and E
• Split #2: Parallelism
Compound predicates
-- If more than one verb (encourage, protect) shares the same subject (policies), we have a compound predicate.
-- Compound predicates that are joined by conjunctions such as and or but must have parallel verb phrases.
Option A: would encourage and to protect are not parallel
Option B: would encourage and protecting are not parallel
We can eliminate on the parallelism issue alone. What about the conjunction "but" in (B)?
Not logical. Hamilton wanted two things that worked in concert (that complemented one another):
(1) to encourage U.S. manufacturing (through subsidies, if Hamilton's 1791 Report on Manufactures is the source), and
(2) to protect U.S. manufacturing from British competition (through tariffs).
Both policies were designed to help U.S. manufacturing.
Using BUT rather than AND makes it sound as though encouraging manufacturing was in opposition to protecting manufacturing. There is no such opposition or contrast. The word "but" is illogical.
Eliminate A and B
By POE, option C is correct.
In the United States one of the earliest challengers of the economic principle of free trade was Alexander Hamilton, who in 1792 advocated government policies that would encourage indigenous manufacturing while protecting it from competition from British exports.
-- while protecting [it = indigenous manufacturing] from competition from British exports is a phrase in which
-- while protecting (indigenous manufacturing) . . . captures the idea that Hamilton advocated policies that simultaneously protected manufacturing and encouraged it.
Answer C
28 Jul 2022, 23:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
PyjamaScientist
"while" is a subordinating conjunction used with a gerund here. When the subject is the same, we can use just a gerund instead of the usual 'subject + verb' in the subordinate clause. So the adverbial clause is reduced to an adverbial phrase in this case.
For example,
I usually read while travelling. (no comma needed)
While travelling, I usually read. (we often use a comma here)
Option (C) has the same structure:
... policies would encourage A while protecting it from B ...
) 
