Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is

Question

Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide  and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but  probably not cause planetwide destruction.

A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but
B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous
amount of damage but it would
C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the
planet but would
D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would
E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but

subjunctive usage..
please help me with this..

vksunder · Answer

Is it C.

Pronoun it does not have a clear referrent in rest of the choices.

sumanamba · Answer

A. if strikes, then would/could(future tense), no proper pronoun reference(it here refers to Earth)
B. would will never come in the if part of the condition, no proper pronoun reference(it refers to Earth)
C. if stikes, then could...but would(parallelism and tense match)
D. is stuck by it...passive, no proper pronoun reference(it here refers to Earth)
E. if strikes, then could (use is correct)...but lacks parallelism, no proper pronoun reference(it here refers to Earth)

Go with C.

Can someone tell me if i'm wrong, in the way i'm eliminating the answer choices.

jallenmorris · Answer

What about the way the pronoun "it" is used in C makes it clearer than the other choices? I agree that the answer is C, but for a different reason. I think the use of "were to strike" is proper in C and no other choice uses it.

vksunder

Is it C.

Pronoun it does not have a clear referrent in rest of the choices.

gmatcrook · Answer

Going with A by the POE ..

C,D,E - I somehow feel that "that" is not needed and is redundant here. However, i must agree that the tone of C is correct because it speaks of an unreal situation.

B - "if it would (then) could or would..." is incorrect.

Sunny143 · Answer

Would go with C for the subjunctive....If it were to strike ...

hams7uc · Answer

I'll go for A.

I think the mood expressed here is "indicative" and not "subjuctive", thereby not requiring "were" in the sentence. The content of the "If" clause here is not presupposed to be false.

Choices B, C, D, E have either subjuctive or passive/wordy constructions.

chan4312 · Answer

I dont know the answer. found it online in some wesite.

I vote between A and C.

But with option C

"and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would"

It does not seem a doubtful,hopeful statement , so can not be subjunctive mood. So were is not justified here. 'that' is also not needed.Since that in the first statement refers earth. Does not need to be parallel.

This is actullay giving a fact.It says that if asteroid strikes earth ..so and so happens..so it should be indicative mood statment.

Option A should be a better fit. 
I believe answer is A.

But i am not sure.

raven678 · Answer

The OA is c. Check asteroids-75349.html Also cos C is subjunctive and is a ? on parallelism so 'that' is reqd.

Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards