skim wrote:
In the remote western province of China, the prevailing price for a large bowl of noodles, which are a staple in the region, rose from 27 cents to 31 cents overnight, prompting allegations that noodle shop owners had colluded to fix their prices.
(A) rose from 27 cents to 31 cents overnight, prompting allegations that noodle shop owners had
(B) rose from 27 cents to 31 cents overnight, and prompts allegations that noodle shop owners had
(C) had risen from 27 cents to 31 cents overnight, prompting allegations that noodle shop owners
(D) had risen from 27 cents to 31 cents overnight, prompting allegations that noodle shop owners had
(E) raised from 27 cents to 31 cents overnight, prompting allegations that noodle shop owners had
I'm always horrible with verb tenses, but I'm really not sure about this, but I hope I get a clearer view as I type this out.
So we have two events: a rise in prices (which occurred first), and allegations (which logically followed the rise in prices). So I guess according to the rules the earlier event would have to take the past perfect? So (C)... I guess?
On the other hand, we may interpret this as 3 different events: the collusion (which came first), followed by a rise in prices, which in turn prompted allegations. If that order must be expressed in the correct sequence through grammar, then perhaps (A) does the best job of this?
I'm really not sure. Is there an official explanation?