Multi-national corporations that have tried to compete in China have faced intense competition from local firms
that have been able to infringe their designs because of the limited patent laws.
A. that have been able to infringe their designs
B. because the infringement of multi-national corporations’ designs was enabled
C. in that their designs were enabled to be infringed
D. because the designs were enabled and infringed
E. that have been able to infringe the designs of these multi-national corporations
Meaning:
There multi-national corporations that have tried to compete in China. These corps. have faced intense competition from local firms. This is so, because these local firms have been able to infringe these multi-corps' designs because of the limited patent laws.
Analysis: 3 clauses
1.
Multi-national corporations 2.
that have tried to compete {in China} - Dependent Clause
1 (cont)
have faced intense competition {from local firms} - IC
3.
that have been able to infringe their designs {because of the limited patent laws}. - Dependent Clause
A. Incorrect - because of a pronoun error. "their" in clause #3 is ambiguous. Logically, it can refer either to "multi-national corporations" and to "local firms".
B. Incorrect - 1) it is wordy - using noun 'enhancements" + unnecessary "was enabled"; 2) meaning change - infringement was enabled implies as if it a setting that can be turned on and off, which is not the case
C. Incorrect - 1) pronoun ambiguity - "their" (is it local firms' or multi-corps'?); 2) wordy - "enabled to be infringed" + 3) unnecessary change from active to passive voice construction
D. Incorrect - 1) meaning change from "multi-national corporations' designs" to "the designs" - what designs? it is not clear; 2) unnecessary passive voice "were enabled"; 3) unnecessary list introduced: "enabled" and "infringed" - meaning change and illogical meaning.
E. I'll put my "kudos" on this answer choice