Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes the

Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes the eater ill, but only recently has it been established that the illness is caused by a toxin present in the quail’s body only under certain conditions.

(A) Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes( no error,correct)

(B) Europeans have long known quail eating is sometimes able to make(awkward)

(C) Eating quail has long been known to Europeans to sometimes make( passive construction with change in intended meaning)

(D) It has long been known to Europeans that quail eating will sometimes make(quail eating seems awkward,simple future tense is not necessary,simple present would be a better choice)

(E) It has long been known to Europeans that quail, when it is eaten, has sometimes made ( when is used to refer to time,use of when and sometimes makes the meaning ambiguous)

Will go with choice A

Thanks

(A) Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes

Here first of all we can look for subject verb agreement and proper usage.
'Europeans' is Plural therefore 'have' - correct verb
'eating quail' is Singular - correct verb
eating quail is a better usage than quail eating. Best choice......Correct Option


(B) Europeans have long known quail eating is sometimes able to make

Subject verb agreement is present in this option. But able to is an unwarranted usage. Also the use of quail eating.
Sentence construction is akward here.....incorrect option

(C) Eating quail has long been known to Europeans to sometimes make

issue with subject verb agreement. Should have been 'makes' since eating quail is singular.....incorrect option

(D) It has long been known to Europeans that quail eating will sometimes make

will sometimes make.. indicates possibility of getting the illness ..changes the meaning of the sentence....incorrect
option

(E) It has long been known to Europeans that quail, when it is eaten, has sometimes made

Has sometimes made ....wrong usage and changes the intended meaning of the sentence...incorrect option

IMO Ans A

IMHO A should be the correct choice.

Option B --> Europeans have long known quail eating

Changes the intended meaning

Option C--> to Europeans to sometimes make

this structure is awkwardly constructed

Option D--> quail eating will sometimes make

As per the intended meaning, there is no need for future tense. Hence Incorrect

Option E--> that quail, when it is eaten, has sometimes made

Again it changes the intended meaning

Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes the eater ill, but only recently has it been established that the illness is caused by a toxin present in the quail’s body only under certain conditions.

(A) Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes - Correct

(B) Europeans have long known quail eating is sometimes able to make -awkward - the phrase quail eating is unclear; are the quail eating something or they are being eaten

(C) Eating quail has long been known to Europeans to sometimes make - illogical meaning - What has long been known is not the eating but the result of the eating: that the eater can become ill

(D) It has long been known to Europeans that quail eating will sometimes make -awkward - the phrase quail eating is unclear; are the quail eating something or they are being eaten

(E) It has long been known to Europeans that quail, when it is eaten, has sometimes made- Tense issue - has made should be in the simple present tense to match the simple present tense verb is; the phrase "when it is eaten" is redundant

Answer A

Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes the eater ill, but only recently has it been established that the illness is caused by a toxin present in the quail’s body only under certain conditions.

(A) Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes

(B) Europeans have long known quail eating is sometimes able to make

(C) Eating quail has long been known to Europeans to sometimes make

(D) It has long been known to Europeans that quail eating will sometimes make

(E) It has long been known to Europeans that quail, when it is eaten, has sometimes made

Quail eating is lousy. Eating quail is the standard expression. Therefore, let's first remove B and D. In E, the past perfect 'has made' is the culprit, which spoils the general nature of a scientific fact.
Between A and C, The passive structure of C is its undoing. A remains as the correct choice.

Do we have a subject verb issue in this sentence? Make and makes?

Posted from my mobile device

saurabh
No. 'Europeans' is not the subject. The gerund 'eating' is the subject. Therefore 'makes' is correct.

isnt A a bit ambiguous??

eating quail sometimes .... makes ....

eating quail... someetimes makes...
aragonn please respond daagh

Official Explanation:

Choice A is best. Choice B is awkward: that is preferable after known to introduce the clause describing what Europeans have long known, and quail eating is . . . able is unidiomatic. Choices C, D, and E are also awkward; more-over, will. . .make in D and has. . .made in E are inappropri-ate to describe a condition that holds true in the present as well as in the future or the past.

AdityaHongunti - As daagh sir mentioned

eating something - this suppose to be a singular noun. that is why 'makes' is used. Perhaps this post can help you.

https://e-gmat.com/blogs/functions-verbing-gmat-verbal/

Got A. But i do not understand “but only recently has it been established that ....”. Why “has it been” not “it has been”?
can someone explain, thanks

Posted from my mobile device

Can someone explain what the referent of "it" (but only recently has *it* been established ...) is in this sentence?

"it" is referring to "that the illness is caused by a toxin present in the quail’s body only under certain conditions".

This represents a case when the pronoun ("it") is used "before" the antecedent. For example:

It is said that hard-work pays.

Again, "it" is referring to "that hard-work pays". This is equivalent to:

"that hard-work pays" is said.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses cases when pronoun is used "before" the antecedent, its application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.

Considering Meaning Clarity ....Eating Quail Sometimes in the Option (A) ...will it not distort the meaning ...Since it says "Eating Quail Sometimes" However the Option (C) avoids this error.. daagh Sir , GMATNinja Sir ...Pls Explain

It's important to recognize the difference between a concrete error that's always wrong, and a potential source of confusion that should only be considered after you've eliminated all concrete errors.

So you aren't wrong that (A) could be interpreted in two ways: it could mean that occasionally eating quail makes you sick -- maybe you don't eat it very often, but when you do, it reliably makes you sick. It could also mean that eating quail will occasionally make you sick, even if you eat it frequently. But both interpretations seem perfectly logical to me, so I don't want to eliminate it on this basis.

Now look at the opening phrase in (C): "Eating quail has long been known to Europeans." This makes it sound as though Europeans have known about the phenomenon of eating quail. That's clearly not right. What they've known is that eating this bird can make you sick. Can you figure that out if you reread the sentence a few times? Sure. But it's confusing, and the default interpretation was illogical.

So in a side-by-side comparison, (A) is just clearer and better, even if it isn't perfect.

For what it's worth, this question is really old (like me? ), and sometimes in these older questions you see subtler distinctions than you're likely to see in newer ones, so I wouldn't worry too much about this example.

I hope that helps a bit!

This is what we have with Option (A):
"Europeans have long known that eating quail sometimes makes the eater ill"

Is it likely that if you eat quail occasionally you will fall ill, but if you eat it often you won't? Is that likely to be true for any edible item?

The question setters probably thought that this alternative meaning is illogical and unrealistic. Option (A) has just one realistic meaning -- and they probably expected test takers to realise that.

Posted from my mobile device

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.