Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthqua

(A) Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were - Wrong: 1) Meaning 2) Verb

(B) Some buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake last year had been - Correct

(C) Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year have been - Wrong: 1) Meaning 2) Verb

(D) Last year the earthquake destroyed or heavily damaged some buildings that have been - Wrong: 1) Verb

(E) Last year some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake had been - Wrong: 1) Modifier

Request Expert Reply-->
So, can I say: choice A is wrong because of 'redundant issue' (apart from verb tense issue)?

Thanks__

I do not understand why option D is incorrect? Because if you see, if the buildings got constructed after the earthquake then they must be standing still in the present. And hence, use of have should be CORRECT.

Please some experts- can you help ? manhattan @e-gmat Magoosh

Those buildings have been destroyed or damaged. Their standing is not valid anymore.
We are talking of the buildings that have damaged which had been constructed

I hope it is clear.

mk96
If we wanted to say that the buildings had been reconstructed after the earthquake, we could say that, but there's no indication in any of the choices that this is the author's intent, and that would need to be made very clear. We can't construct buildings (for the first time) that have already been knocked down.

AjiteshArun GMATNinja MagooshExpert GMATGuruNY VeritasPrepBrian MartyTargetTestPrep DmitryFarber VeritasKarishma generis
@ jennpt Skywalker18 VeritasPrepErika abhimahna CrackVerbalGMAT
egmat
EducationAisle
abhimahna Abhishek009 CounterSniper
sayantanc2k
GMATBusters EMPOWERgmatVerbal

Hi ,
Kindly guide me with my query .


Main clause
Some buildings (s of main clause )

Sub clause
that(s of sub clause) were destroyed(v1)and heavily damaged(v1) in the earthquake last year

Main clause
have been(verb for main clause )
constructed in violation of the city's building code.



As per my understanding
IF (have been constructed in violation of the city's building code) falls under the Sub clause then the main clause will be devoid of verb .
IS my split of main and sub clause correct
How do i find were to stop with my sub clause

Some buildings(s)

At first i considered this entire () as my sub clause

( that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year have been)

constructed in violation of the city's building code.
ZIllions of thanks in advance
Suganya

Independent clause: Some buildings had been constructed in violation of the city's building code.

Dependent clause: that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake last year

You can watch our video on Independent & Dependent Clauses.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses Clauses, their application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.

suganyam
You can tell the modifier is over because a new verb is introduced. I can say "The book (that I read) was good," but not "The book (that I read was good) is on the table." If I wanted to extend the modifier, I'd need to add some structure: "The book, which I read thoroughly and found surprisingly good, is now a bestseller."

Similarly, I can't say "Some buildings (that were destroyed and damaged have been constructed)," because there's nothing to connect "damaged" to "have been." I could say "Some buildings (that were destroyed and damaged and that were subsequently reconstructed) are now worth millions."

GMATNinja

How we know that the passage tends to mean buildings were constructed or destroyed first?

Posted from my mobile device

I might be misunderstanding your question, but I think the simple answer is that it doesn't make sense for a building to be destroyed before it is even constructed!

A building could be destroyed WHILE it is being constructed or AFTER it has been constructed, but it can't actually be destroyed before construction. (Well, maybe it can in a metaphorical way. But in this case we are talking about an earthquake destroying actual buildings, so there's no need to overcomplicate things.)

I hope that helps a bit!

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.