Gone are the sharp edges and jutting planes of styles from former eras

Here two things are to be noted. A verb+ing word is called a present participle; it is a verbal and never a verb, when not proceeded by an auxiliary verb, such as is / are.

What is the role if verb+ ing word generally and especially in the case. A present participle is an adjectival, when placed at the start of the sentence modifying the noun, immediately after the modification is over, and an adverbial modifier, when placed elsewhere in the sentence, modifying the entire clause lying before or in effect, the gist of it. Here, therefore, the present participles conforming and flaunting are participle.
That the ing word has yet another role of a gerund, is another matter

The second point here is that about comparison: The comparator word ‘than’ is followed flaunting; it is clear, therefore, that the comparison is between flaunting and another similar participle, which in this case, is conforming; We can then see that the participle parallelism is well in place, because ergonomics is more x than y, where x is conforming and y is flaunting
_________________

I found this explanation by RonPurewal on ManhattanPrep forum.

first, examine the split between 'more ergonomic' and just 'ergonomic'. in this case, we must preserve the meaning of the original statement: the new design is more ergonomic than the old design. if we change this to just 'ergonomic', we're attaching an implication that the old design simply wasn't ergonomic (and that the new design, by contrast, is) - an unacceptable implication. that gets rid of answer choices c, d, and e right there.

another item to examine is parallelism. in this case, in the construction 'X rather than Y' (or its analogues, 'X and not Y' and 'more X than Y'), items X and Y must be parallel.
choice a: conforming... rather than flaunting... <-- good parallelism!
choice b: to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape <-- logically nonparallel and also awkward
choice c: can't use 'more' together with 'and not to' (these are exclusive constructions, sort of like 'both' and 'as well as': if you use one, then you can't use the other), so we don't need to consider the parallelism in the first place.
choice d: can't use 'more' together with 'rather than'; also, bad parallelism between to the body's shape and shape flaunted...
choice e: more to the shape... than flaunting... <-- nonparallel

in fact, the winning choice (a) is the ONLY choice that properly compares 'conforming' and 'flaunting' in parallel. all of the other constructions also change the meaning of the sentence via their alterations of the words.

I think its E - it uses the participle "flaunting" and the "more ... than" properly.

A for me.

Tricky one. There is an idiom being tested here I believe. You have "rather than" or you have "more X than Y".

A. "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flauting shape..." sounds clear/clean. And correct usage of "rather than" in my opinion.
B. Altered intent. "conformed" is odd and "not to flaunting shape" is also weird
C. "and not to shape flaunted" is awkward
D. "More TO... than shape flaunted" sounds awkward.
E. "more TO the shape of the body than flaunting shape..." sounds awkward.

To me, both D and E would sound better if it was "more TO....than TO..." this seems consistent and concise.

Yeah on second thought A does look better. D changes the meaning ever so subtly by removing the "more" at the beginning.

For me,More Ergonomic is required thus between A&B and conformed in B is the spoiler and A sounds the best

i will go with 'E'.Morever i have a doubts Is it right to say 'more ergonomic' or 'less ergonomic' ? i think we don't say more scientific or less scientific likewise we can't say more ergonomic.

I think E will change the meaning. Besides, I think it does have comparison issues: shape of the body vs flaunting shape
I was left with A on this.

Good catch, Racon. OA is A. I have just seen the NOT-Parallelism in E! thanks you and all

I am able to see now how e is correct logically and grammatically. But there is one doubt :isn't the construction in D, a more X than Y construction. As per this construction, body's shape and shape flaunted are both nouns and hence parallel to each other.

Gone are the sharp edges and jutting planes of styles from former eras; instead, designers of everything from cars to computer monitors have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape for its own sake.

A. more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape

B. more ergonomic, conformed to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape awkward + parallelism issue

C. ergonomic, more conformed to the shape of the body and not to shape flaunted
1. awkward 2. parallelism issue 3. incorrect usage of MORE...THAN idiom

D. ergonomic, conforming more to the body's shape rather than shape flaunted incorrect usage of MORE...THAN idiom

E. ergonomic, conforming more to the shape of the body than flaunting shape comparison issue

D would have been parallel if it were to be: ergonomic, conforming more to the body's shape rather than to the shape flaunted: Then the template would be more to x rather than to y.

Another tangle to this: We say it is ergonomic, and hence the shape is already conforming to the body’s shape. In that case, there cannot be another shape (that is) flaunted; Thus the meaning gets digressed, as if the thing has two shapes, one that is ergonomic and another that is flaunted. This is something that is untenable
_________________

Can someone explain why E is wrong? I feel like A is wrong because the more isn't there.

two reasons why E is wrong:
1. Unidiomatic: correct idiom is More to X than to Y or More X than Y

2. X and Y are comparable parts. option E says,

conforming more to the X (shape of the body) than Y(flaunting shape)

That's why E has a comparison issue as well.

I understand that A is the best answer, however since I've started studying modifiers they really went under my skin. So the question I have here is: doesn't "confirming" act as a participle here and therefore modify the whole sentence prior to comma? If true, then the antecedent isn't so clear and could also be "designers", which of course wouldn't make any sense.

Asking just for the sake of understanding the underlying issue.

Thank you in advance for your explanation.

because sc test meaning , if the meaning is hard or time consuming to understand, we have to spend more time for it. this sentence is an example. the meaning is hard to understand and the sentence is a little long and so, we have to spend more time.

it takes me 2 minutes and half to get correct. I am not happy with this because normally I get it right for under 2 minutes.

Gone are the sharp edges and jutting planes of styles from former eras
instead, designers of everything from cars to computer monitors have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape for its own sake.

(A) more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape
(B) more ergonomic, conformed to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape
(C) ergonomic, more conformed to the shape of the body and not to shape flaunted
(D) ergonomic, conforming more to the body's shape rather than shape flaunted
(E) ergonomic, conforming more to the shape of the body than flaunting shape => more x, than y. X and Y should be parallel.

meaning :- designers of everything from cars to computer monitors have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is more ergonomic so we want more ergonomic in correct sentence and not "ergonomic" so E,D<E out. Ing modifier in A, modifies closest action, in this case "is more ergonomic."

IMO A.

When we try to make something better for human comfort (a chair, a car seat, a remote control, a cellular phone etc.), we can make it only „more ergonomic‟ as it must have been ergonomic to some degree even before. So, first, examine the split between 'more ergonomic' and just 'ergonomic'. The new design is more ergonomic than the old design. If we change this to just 'ergonomic', we're attaching an implication that the old design simply wasn't ergonomic (and that the new design, by contrast, is) - an unacceptable implication.
So C, D, and E are out because of this meaning clarity issue.

B: to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape <-- logically nonparallel and also awkward

Clear A. The argument is comparing the two styles and therefore "more ergonomic" fits, so C, D and E are out. Between A and B, A defines how the latter style is more ergonomic using the ing modifier. "Conforming to the shape" and "flaunting shape" are parallel to each other.