It was the loss of revenue from declines in tourism that in 1935 led

The use of Present participle is incorrect in A,B,C as the grant has already been given in 1935.
In D,generally use of "being" is avoided and it's awkward too.
So,Choice E fits the case perfectly.

Posted from my mobile device

Is there a typo in the answer choices? (A) and (C) are identical



EDIT: answer choices fixed.

It was the loss of revenue from declines in tourism that in 1935 led the Saudi authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of Aramco.

(A) authorities' granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of

(B) authorities' granting a concession for oil exploration to the company later to be known as named

(C) authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of

(D) authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company that later will be known as being

(E) authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company later to be known as

The loss of revenue led to something
(A), (B), and (C) are out for the reason above.
(D) is awkward construction with the use of "known as being"
(E) is the best one

I think a better construction is, led authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company "that would later be known as ...
I have a question regarding "later to be known" in option (E)

Ans: (E)

Official Explanation :

In this sentence, the verb led requires that a person or persons perform an action indicated by the infinitive, or "to ____" form, of the verb, and so choices A, B, and C can be faulted because led is completed by granting.

Choice B is also faulty because the phrase known as here requires a noun, and named is a past participle.

Choice D has to grant but inappropriately uses will rather than would and employs being unidiomatically.

The best choice is E because it supplies authorities for led, the infinitive to grant, and an idiomatic use of known as.

It was the loss of revenue from declines in tourism that in 1935 led the Saudi authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of Aramco.

(A) authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of

(B) authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company later to be known as named

(C) authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of

(D) authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company that later will be known as being

(E) authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company later to be known as

A gerund construction is not grammatically correct here. "to grant" must be used in this instance. Hence A,B,C are all out. Between D and E, the correct form is "to be known as x". "Known as being x" is awkward and not correct. E is the right answer.

I suppose E is right. It correlates with grammar rules

It was the loss of revenue from declines in tourism that in 1935 led the Saudi authorities' granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of Aramco.

Approach-1: led X to Y -> A, B, C out -> "known as being" in (D) awkward --> E is the answer
Approach -2: --> In "known by the name", known & named are redundant, so A, B, C out -> "known as being" in (D) awkward --> E is the answer

(A) authorities' granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of

(B) authorities' granting a concession for oil exploration to the company later to be known as named

(C) authorities granting a concession for oil exploration to the company that would later be known by the name of

(D) authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company that later will be known as being

(E) authorities to grant a concession for oil exploration to the company later to be known as --> correct

In E later to be is a bit awkward. Can someone clarify this.

Posted from my mobile device

Hello Varane,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, it is important to keep in mind that awkwardness and redundancy are demerits on the GMAT but are not deal-breakers.

An answer choice can produce an awkward or needlessly wordy sentence but still be the best answer choice; the question of awkwardness should only be taken into account to choose between otherwise error-free answer choices.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Hi folks,

Isn't it a cause effect question?

something HAPPENED , RESULTING in something.

HAPPENED - Cause in past tense
Resulting: Effect in V+ing form.
So, I marked C for that reason, please ignore known form at the end of sentence as I am confused about C&E form in this Q.

Thnks

Hello Alka10,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the present participle ("verb+ing" - "granting" in this case) conveys a cause-effect relationship as part of the "comma + present participle" construction; without a comma before "granting", it cannot convey cause and effect.

Further, even if there were a comma, such a construction would produce an illogical meaning; consider the clause "It was the loss of revenue from declines in tourism that in 1935 led the Saudi authorities"; the action referred to in this sentence is the action of leading the Saudi authorities, an action done by "the loss of revenue", so if the "comma + present participle" construction were applied here, it would imply that the loss of revenue led the Saudi authorities, in general, and as a result, the loss granted a concession for oil exploration.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team