On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by im

A. On account of a law passed in 1933, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold ---- the use of command subjunctive" that US citizen" hold is unwarranted

B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold ---- it gives a feeling as if the immigrants passed the law ---distorted meaning.

C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding --- No connect between the first and the second part due to the lack of a proper connector.

D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold --- the correct choice.

E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold--- 'being passed' -- bad verb tense

_________________

THE SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD
So this is basically used in two special situations:
- Unlikely or unreal conditions (usually after 'if' or a similar word)
- Proposals, desires, and requests formed with certain verbs and the word that
These two uses correspond to two forms of the subjunctive mood: The Hypothetical Subjunctive and the Command Subjunctive, respectively

The Hypothetical Subjunctive
We use it in a few circumstances to indicate unlikely or unreal conditions. Principally, this form occurs after 'if', 'as if', or 'as though'
Now the basic form of the Hypothetical Subjuctive is equivalent to the Simple Past of every Verb, with one exception. For the verb 'to be' . For the verb 'to be' the form were is always used.
Eg. To overcome my fear of germs, I will think about disease as though it WERE harmless

The Command Subjunctive
The other form of the subjunctive mood is the Command Subjunctive, which is much more important on the GMAT than the Hypotethical Subjunctive
The command subjunctive is used with certain BOSSY VERBS such as require or propose. Bossy Verbs tell people to do things
This form is also known as the Bare Form of the verb: the infinitive without the 'to'.
The subjunctive construction with a Bossy Verb is always as follows: Bossy Verb + THAT + subject + Command Subjunctive
However, there are some common Bossy Verbs, such as WANT, you cannot use the Command Subjunctive with but rather an infinitive (to + the bare form)
- Common Verbs that take ONLY the Command Subjunctive when indicating desire: demand, dictate, insist, mandate, propose, recommend, request, stipulate, suggest

Note: Propose can take an infinitive when there's no second subject (Eg. The attorneys PROPOSED TO MEET the following day)
- Verbs that take ONLY the infinitive: advice, allow, forbid, persuade, want
- Verbs that take EITHER the Command Subjunctive OR the infitinive: ask, beg, intend, order, prefer, urge, require

Also, you should keep in mind that few bossy words, most notably prohibit, take other constructions alltogether (Prohibit FROM)
The Command subjunctive can also be used with nouns derived from Bossy Verbs, such as a demand or a request.
Also the Command subjunctive is possible with 'It is X', in which X is an adjective, such as essential, that conveys urgency. It is X is not commonly tested on the GMAT (Eg. It is essential THAT Gary BE ready before noon)

Other adjectives conveying urgency include: advisable, crucial, desirable, fitting, imperative, important, mandatory, necessary, preferable, urgent and vital.
Note also that you can use an infinitive in these constructions (Eg. It is essential for Gary to be ready before noon)
Avoid the use of the Command Subjunctive 'whether'. This usage is old fashioned (Eg. I like Ice cream, , whether it BE choclolate, vanilla, or any other flavor)

Oh and by the way, a few Bossy Verbs can be used in non-Bossy ways: Her presence SUGGESTS that she IS happy. In this context, suggests means "probably means"; it is not acting Bossy. As always, pay close attention to the meaning!

Hope it helps you out
Make some Kudos rain if you like it. I really need them for my GMAT tests

Take it easy ok?
Cheers
J

P.S. Oh, and BTW will some clarify what's wrong with Choice (B) in the question above? Let me know

Thanks

**************What is the importance of comma?****************
I really hate this question, Could someone explain me???
I will take D in the exam becaues of its concise, but only my doudt is......

On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them.

A. On account of a law passed in 1993, thus officers making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
In ETS---structure is " s+v, thus s+v " (cause-effect)
ex1 I would like to have a high Gmat score, so it makes me insane.
ex2 I would like to have a high Gmat score, thus it makes me insane.
ex3 I would like to have a high Gmat score, thus making me insane.
ex4 I would like to have a high Gmat score, making me insane.
ex1-ex4 is correct answer, reling on what your emotion is.
In very formal writting----you can eliminate "thus" that make many people confused, including me. So I really hate this type of question coz readers must be guessed what an auther dream. If you not exactly understand structure of "S+V, thus S+make", you might be confused with relative pronoun. I try to understand many hundred times, before get this insane rule.
(if the question is true, it must answer A)

B. With a law (which a law was)passed in 1933 (that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment) that a United States citizen hold
1.you have double relative pronoun,
2. what " that make it a crime...." modifies" in 1933"or "a law"(but subject is too far),
3.and "it " mean a law. so B is so confused,awkward and weird.

C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding
like answer B.

D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
"Mayur".... I agree with your answer that "for" should follow "making it a crime punishable by imprisonment"'. Only my missgiving is that is it double relative pronoun??like answer B. I would like to pick this awswer only if it has a comma behind "in 1933".it is unquestionable for me that choic D is more concise than A and look like the best answer. Finally, I think "nakib 77" must be fallen a comma, when she types this question.

E. Due to a law (which was)being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
Because of+ noun
due to + noun
on account of + noun
thanks to+noun
owing to +noun
all of these group are the same function, except "Due to" you must not put before clause. In toefl, it may be right, but not in GMAT
ex1 He succeed due to his indomitalbe will.
ex2 because of/ thanks to/on account of/owing to/ the height of the wall, the house con't be seen from the road.
ex3 It was due to the fog that the rain was delayed. 555

US citizen hold gold in the form of... --> incorrect
US citizen "to hold"/"holding" gold in the form of... --> correct

A, B are out.

C --> modifier problem.. rewrite the setence

immigrants,A law passed in 1993 that made , found that .. they had to surrender ..,
--> means immigrants -- are a law passed in 1993

Between D and E
D) immigrants,Because of a law passed in 1993 ..., found that .. they had to surrender .
--> LOOKS GOOD
E) immigrants,Due to a law being passed in 1993 ..., found that .. they had to surrender . --. No modifer problem but being passed ... always (most of the time) incorrect in GMAT.. strike out.

I guess its D,

Reverse the sentence to make more sense out of it

immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold gold in the form of bullion or coins.

Clearly because of seems to make more sense here. This SC looks weird because the orig. sentence is sort of reversed. The best way to attack is FLIP THE SENTENCE

BTW, I found out this method while I was solving this SC. I did not read this anywhere so don't follow it blindly. Use it at your discretion

option A and B are wrong because of meaning issue. A law is not hold be US citizen
C is wrong as two independent clauses should be linked by conjunction.
Between D and E...
E is wordy
D correct
_________________

On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them.

INCORRECT PORTIONS UNDERLINED......

A.On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonmentthat a United States citizen hold
B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding
D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold....CORRECT
E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold

On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them.

A. On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
Modifier,Modifier,Modified Noun(immigrants)
B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
Immigrants , with a law passed.., found that
C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding
Main Clause,Main Clause RUNON
D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
Shows stated cause and effect.
E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
Due to ...being

Option (D) has grammatical error:

D. Because of a law passed in 1993 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold

ing modifier modifies immediate noun but it is placed after 1993, further doer of the action is missing.. who is making ?

IMO only option B has no grammatical errors.

On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them.

A. On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
ambiguous, because "making" could refer to "immigrants"
B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
"makes" should be "made"
C. A law (passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding)
fragment
D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
correct usage
E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
awkward

Verb-ing modifier without a comma modifies the preceding noun or noun phrase. In option D making modifies the noun phrase "law passed in 1993". So it is grammatically correct.
Refer to this very useful post by e-GMAT https://gmatclub.com/forum/verb-ed-modifiers-vs-verb-ing-modifiers-125611.html?fl=similar

Option B has a number of grammatical errors.
B. With a law passed in 1993 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins
The word "With" requires a doer. Who passed the Law ? and Why did the person/entity passed the Law ?
In the absence of a doer the sentence is incomplete. If we cut through the fluff, this sentence is reduced to:
With a law passed that makes it a crime that a US citizen do something, immigrants found something. - Makes no sense. With and Because are not interchangeable.

Also the law itself is not stated clearly in B - Law that makes it a crime that a US citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins.
The Law is supposed to make it a crime for a US citizen to hold gold.
_________________

On account of a law passed in 1933, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them.

A. On account of a law passed in 1933, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding
D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold

HI GMATNinja, mikemcgarry, sayantanc2k,

IN option A there might be some other errors but could you please let me know what making is modifying

As per my knowledge comma + -ing modifies the preceding clause
_________________

Dear NandishSS,

I'm happy to respond.

My friend, any one-size-fits-all rule about participles is worse than useless. Participles have a bewildering array of uses and no one rule is going to capture it all.

In the bigger picture, your question is indicative of the wrong approach. Many students incorrectly imagine that they can get to GMAT SC mastery by memorizing all the rules: that is an entirely chimerical pursuit. Yes, there are some grammar rules one needs to learn, but even if one learns every conceivable rule, that's less than half the story. Mastery comes from developing intuition about the language, about how words and structures are used in the living flow. For a non-native speaker, the best way to develop this intuition is to cultivate a rigorous habit of reading. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

In this SC problem, version (A) is an awkward disaster. For a native speaker, it's obvious how awful it is. That would be the most important thing for a non-native speaker to learn to appreciate. The participle "making" here acts as a noun-modifier modifying "law." That's one of the few things that (A) gets correct.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

On account of a law passed in 1933, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them.

A. On account of a law passed in 1933, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold --- 1. This is defective in structure because of the comma after 1933. 2. The comma indicates that the present participle is not able to modify the law. It can neither modify the immigrants lest it should become improper modification. 3. the subjunctive bare infinitive 'hold' is not appropriate I the context. Hold should be changed to either 'holds', 'to hold', or 'holding'.

B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold-- This means that the immigrants were armed with a law.

C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding --The first part, being a modifier is not able to connect with the second part with a preposition. Nor does it have a verb and proper conjunction to make it a complex or compound sentence.

D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold---- 1. Now the present participle is able to modify the law because of the removal of the comma.2.'Because of' provides the much need conjugation with the second part. Correct choice

E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold --'Due to' cannot be used in the context owing to the lack of a noun such as 'passage' and 'being passed in 1933' makes no sense.
_________________

daagh - could you please help to understand which part of sentence is subjunctive ? Also what is mean my subjunctive is unwarranted ?

Avinash


Who said so?

I couldn't get what you meant by your subjunctive. Choice A contains the subjunctive bare infinitive 'hold,' (that a US citizen hold) which is inappropriate I said.

You are aware that the gist of the command subjunctive and the use of the bare infinitive are there to indicate a compulsion by X (the commander) who insists that Y, (the receiver of the command) do something. This mandating is sometimes stated explicitly by such words as order, required, etc. or even implicitly by such words as recommended, desired and so on.

Now in the given case, what is the law saying? It wants to say that it will punish if the citizen holds bullion on entry. However, the wording seems to be such that the law is exhorting the citizen to hold. This is a meaning fault.

HTH
_________________

What does "it" stands for in (D)?

"It" stands for "to hold gold coins etc..." here. We use "it" all the time in ways where the antecedent is not some earlier word in the sentence:

"It is sunny."
"It is difficult to choose between B and C in this question."
"The additional modifiers make it difficult to understand the sentence's meaning."

"For" is a word that has many, many usages. You can't hope to learn a "rule" about what "for" means and then apply it every time you see that word; it is used in too many different ways, and no one rule will apply every time. In this question "for a citizen to hold" could be replaced with something like "that a citizen hold".
_________________

From our Ask Me Anything About SC thread. Reposting here just in case it helps somebody:

In (D), "making" is just an adjective that modifies "law" (check out use #4 in this article).

As for (C), "passed" is actually a modifier (describing the "law"), not a verb. And if we do look at "passed" as a verb, we run into a couple issues:

First, if "passed" is a verb, that means that the noun modifier "that made it a crime" has to reach behind that verb to get to the noun in modifies ("law"). There are certainly exceptions to the touch rule (see usage #4 in this article), but reaching all the way behind a verb is a stretch. For example:

"My favorite restaurant is in Queens, which serves delicious Greek egg and lemon soup." - The "which..." clause has to reach behind the prepositional phrase and verb to get to the noun it should modify ("restaurant"). The structure in choice (C) is no better, if we assume "passed" is a verb.

Also, if "passed" is a verb, then we have two independent clauses inappropriately joined by a comma: "A law passed in 1993, immigrants found..." - If "passed" is a verb, then we need a conjunction with that comma.

And unfortunately (C) doesn't work even with "passed" as a modifier. Stripping out the modifiers, (C) can be boiled down to: "A law, immigrants found..." -- "A law..." now seems to modify "immigrants." In other contexts, it might be okay to use "a law" as modifier (i.e. "A law passed in 1964, the Civil Rights Act changed the course of American history."), but in this case it doesn't make any sense, since immigrants are certainly not "a law".

One final problem with (C) is that "holding" seems to modify "a United States citizen" (as if something is a crime only for US citizens who are holding gold!). The logical meaning is more clear in (D) with "to hold" instead of "holding".

I hope that helps!
_________________