conqueror98
hiii
GMATNinjawould love to know your approach for this question.
I tried but couldn't get what's the main idea for this sentence.
i got stucked on A, B and D .
(A) and (D) are awfully similar. The only differences are the word order and the article ("the") before "three".
Let's start with the article ("Columbia, Victor, and OKeh were three most prominent" vs. "
the three most prominent were Columbia, Victor, and OKeh").
The difference is subtle but significant. Without the article, "most prominent" could be interpreted as "
very prominent" -- as in, "a
most convincing argument" or "a most delicious plate of bhindi masala".
So is the sentence trying to tell us that those three companies were simply three that were
very prominent? Or that those were
the three most prominent -- in other words, more prominent than all of the others? Given the "of all..." part, the latter seems to make more sense. So it's better to include the article "the" here.
As for the word order in (A) and (D): neither is necessarily WRONG, exactly. But having the "of all" part at the beginning immediately tells the reader what's being discussed, and that makes the meaning clearer and easier to follow.
Is (D) wrong in a vacuum? Maybe not, but (A) is a better choice.
(B) has the same "missing article" issue. Also, the meaning of "the ones" isn't clear. Does this mean, "of all the
record companies that were involved in early jazz..."? Or "of all the
prominent record companies that were involved in early jazz..."? Or even "of all the
most prominent record companies that were involved in early jazz..."??
(B) isn't terrible, but, like (D), it doesn't have any advantages over (A). So (A) is the best option of the bunch.
I hope that helps!