Rallies organized in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic

hi iamdp

though E is correct, isn't E changing the meaning of sentence. I rejected i.

Option C : how is the structure Organizing Rallies is beginning to take shape awkward. Can you please clarify..

Took 2 mins...fight was between C and E.
Meaning : Organizing rallies are prohibited by CL and such rallies are again beginning to take a shape.

A)Rallies organized in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles which was once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders, are - there should be comma before which and if we have so which is modifying principles.
B)Rallies organized in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, a practice that Communist Chinese leaders once prohibited, is - need to have plural.
C)Organizing rallies in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, as once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders, is - There is no comparison needed here or the function to describe, here we have meaning error.
D) Communist Chinese leaders once prohibited organizing rallies in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, but they are - no proper antecedent.
E)Communist Chinese leaders once prohibited organizing rallies in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, but such principles are - Correct...

Great Question!!

At first after reading the sentence I thought that rallies are beginning to take shape (They were probably not organized before) and started searching for the answer choice. Realize later that it is a convoluted question

(A) Rallies organized in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles which was once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders, are. If 'which' refers to 'democratic principles', it must be followed by a plural verb 'were'

(B)Rallies organized in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, a practice that Communist Chinese leaders once prohibited, is. 'is' is a verb for 'rallies' and hence must be plural.

(C) Organizing rallies in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, as once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders, is. No comparison is stated in the sentence.

(D) Communist Chinese leaders once prohibited organizing rallies in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, but they are. What is 'they refering to? Chinese leaders?

(E) Communist Chinese leaders once prohibited organizing rallies in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles, but such principles are. Correct choice.
Complete sentence is followed after 'but'
usage of 'such principles' makes the intended meaning clear
Correct contrast is present.

I believe that all answers are wrong. You are right when you eliminate options A, B, C, and D.

While choice E is grammatically correct and its meaning is clear, it changes the meaning of the original sentence.

If we skip the modifier of rallies - “Rallies organized in conjunction with the dissemination of democratic principles which was once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders, are beginning to take shape at a grass roots level permitted by the new Chinese leadership”- we get - “Rallies are beginning to take shape …”, not –“such principles are beginning to take shape …”

This change in meaning makes answer E incorrect.

MANHATTAN REVIEW OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

Option A is incorrect as it is unclear to what “which” is referring. It should refer to organizing rallies but the placement means it is referring to the democratic principles. B is incorrect as the subject “Rallies” does not agree with the verb “is”. Option C states that organizing rallies is beginning to take shape. The democratic principles are beginning to take shape. Choice D has an ambiguity resulting from the pronoun ‘they’. It is unclear to whom ‘they’ is referring. Choice E is the correct answer.

AndrewN, I would love to hear your take on this question.

Sure, kntombat. This one took me 1:33 to work through, but I felt confident in my answer, for reasons I will outline below.

The restrictive which clause—i.e. without a comma—will typically modify the nearest preceding noun, although it can, on occasion, jump over the object of a preposition and modify an earlier noun. If we try either option here, we get an unsatisfactory line:

1) [principles] was once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders

2) [the dissemination of democratic principles] was once prohibited by Communist Chinese leaders

The first violates basic subject-verb agreement; the second not only opts for a suboptimal passive construct, but why use three words at the beginning instead of just one in disseminating? Moving on, in the original sentence, that comma that separates the subject of the main clause from the verb is unwarranted. A cleaner sentence would simply say, Rallies... are. So unusual is such a comma that I wonder whether the original sentence did, in fact, have a comma before the which (marking off what would then be a nonrestrictive clause). Altogether, this sentence is a tangled-up mess.

Here, we have another sentence that does not really make sense. To what does a practice refer? Rallies are not a practice—organizing rallies is—so I am led to believe that a practice reaches back to the dissemination of democratic principles. I guess that could work, but I should not have to labor over the expression of vital meaning. Regardless, the is is a clear violation of subject-verb agreement: rallies... is does not work. We can safely eliminate (B).

Okay, at least we have a clear action this time in organizing rallies. Still, I wish there were a comma after rallies to clearly separate one action from another. Moreover, what am I to make of as? If I am to take the entire phrase up to the first comma as a joint subject, then why could I not simply launch into once, without the as? Finally, we are still reading a sentence in the passive voice, which is okay, but not preferable. This is the best answer so far, but I have a few reasons to doubt it.

The sentence is now in the active voice and is much easier to follow, but there is no way to justify the ambiguous they at the end of the underlined portion. You cannot declare the correct interpretation the only logical one when they can also refer to the Chinese Communist leaders: Communist Chinese leaders... are beginning to take shape at a grass roots level. We could also make a case for rallies as a joint action: rallies are beginning to take shape at a grass roots level. In any case, I should not have to fish around for a logical referent to they (i.e. principles, according to the correct answer).

Now there is no confusion over what the sentence is driving at. We have a right-branching sentence with a clear subject, Communist Chinese leaders, and verb, prohibited, and rather than rely on some vague they, we get a straightforward ending to the underlined portion: such principles are. Does it make sense to say that principles take shape at a grassroots level? I prefer rallies as the location where such principles are shared, but I understand how democratic principles may be allowed by a new government. In terms of grammar, this is the cleanest answer; in terms of meaning, it is not any worse than the best of the rest. I like to say that the answer you should pick is the one you have the hardest time arguing against, so we have a winner from this lot.

I hope that helps. Thank you for seeking my opinion, and good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

I'm not really able to understand the meaning of E. Democratic principles are starting to take shape at a grass roots level? Or rallies with democtratic principles are starting to take shape?

The former doesn't make a whole lot of sense IMO. I understand that C is wrong because it essentially sections out the fact that they were prohibited as extra information (which is wrong because it's key information), but the meaning swap just isn't clicking for me.

As per the correct choice, the principles are starting to take shape. I think just about everybody would have expected the rallies to take shape, but the meaning here isn't terribly wrong. Principles CAN take shape (obviously, not literally).

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.