[quote="blueseas"]The emerging field of architectural climatology centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms.

A)systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms
B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming
C)systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming
D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming
E)systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms

A)systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms -> Question stem states that as-yet--undeveloped. But the given option means that Artificial Reefs are already preventing hurricanes from forming. Hence incorrect.
B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming -> Is it artificial "reefs" that prevent hurricanes or marine platforms. This should be artificial reefs hence incorrect.
C)systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming -> "such as" used for examples. Hurricanes is not the example of weather systems. Hence incorrect.
D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming -> "such as" used for examples. Artificial Reefs are not the example of weather systems. Hence incorrect.
E)systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms -> Correct. Option clearly mentions that second part is the example of the scenario present in first part. Also the option mentions the possibility by using "could".

Hope that helps.

The emerging field of architectural climatology centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms.

This is a "conditional" sentence: what it means is that this system does not exists yet ( as-yet-undeveloped ), so in the underlined portion when an example is presented the word "can" is not correct => "could" is better.
This eliminates D.
Also choices C and A have a similar error because it seems that this already happens
C)systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming
A)for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms

Now the sentence talks about "architecture that alter, redirect, or dissipate weather" and tries to give us an example, so sentence E that says "hurricanes (...)" is wrong because that is not an example of architecture.
for example, hurricanes could be prevented

IMO B
B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming

Waiting for the OA...

IMO answer is A

The 1st clause ends with talking about weather systems to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems - so the next phrase should start an example or clause with hurricanes.

B and D are wrong because they start of talking about artificial reefs
C - starts with hurricane but there is no verb following the which.
E - has the redundancy of could be when the main clause already says potential.

Agree with B

The example should show some architecture preventing the weather disturbance.
B is better than D because it uses could and not can

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 2

I go with B too.

First split: Meaning.
The sentence structure is: X centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems; for instance, .......................

After "for instance", we should use examples of "as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping" ==> Only B and D remain.
in A: "hurricanes" is not an example of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping
in C: Same as A.
in E: Same as B

Second split: "could prevent" vs "can prevent"
Because the sentence says: as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping ==> Because the technique has not been developed completely yet, so "could" is more precise than "can"

IMO, B is correct.

I chose D.

Why isnt reef referring to architecture and landscaping.
What follows architecture and landscaping in the question stem is describing their purpose.

It cannot be B because the sentence make no sense:

"artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming"

Since we have separated the sentence with a semicolon the second sentence needs to be independent and thus stand on its own. The only sentence that follows that principle is E

E is the correct answer.

Nice explanation. I found the use of Semi-Colon here a bit off-putting. Is it correctly used in option E. Can we have examples after the semi-colon because the sentence after the semi-colon should be capable to stand on its own. Any thoughts?

Can some one better explain this answer (OA is E). I understand there needs to be an independent sentence after the semi-colon (knock off A & B) and we need "from" in the "prevent from X-ing" idiom (knock off C). However, to eliminate D, it seems like a lot of extra items/concepts for one question/answer (can vs could and illogical meaning).

Also, for the illogical meaning, it seems pretty clear the reefs are modifying "as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping." Can I get a further explanation here?

Also, when using "such as" I often see a list (i.e. "...such as math, science and biology..."), is there a tendency we could/should look for when comparing "like", "as", and "such as"?

A)systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms--- The sentence after the semi-colon is not an IC.

B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming --- Same problem as in A. There is no IC after the semi-colon.

C) systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming ---- ‘could prevent’ is a better option than to say categorically that they prevent. The ending of the sentence with a gerund ‘forming’ isn’t also elegant, though grammatically passable.

(PS) The architectural climatology centers on the potential to alter, redirect and dissipate existing weather systems. It does not aim to alter ,redirect or dissipate future development of artificial reefs. So hurricanes modify the weather systems correctly.

D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming --- use of ‘artificial reefs’ is wrong in the context as they are not existing weather systems. The meaning is antithetical to what the text intends to convey.

E) systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms – may be the best by far.

But the expression ‘hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms’ in A and E gives room for a possible ambiguity, that the hurricanes themselves are formed by the reefs rather than from being prevented. Of course this depends upon the way one parses the sentence.
_________________

I chose letter E.

Only because after a semicolon you need to have an independent clause.
Letter A and B doesn't have an independent clause

Two things to pay attention to
1. Semi colon - After semi colon there should be a clause. For this reason, A and B are out.
2. Such as - It is used for listing examples, but C is listing Hurricane as an example, which is wrong.

Between D and E - In D, I am confused if THAT is referring to Artificial Reef or Platforms.
E is much more straight forward, so going with E as right answer.

ok, so the question is very complex, with a lot of fancy words..
the new field centers on smth and smth to:
1. alter
2. redirect
3. or dissipate
weather systems.

next, we have an example how this new field centers so that to do all these 3/or not all 3 actions.


A)systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms
semicolon means we need a new IC. we do not have an IC, so out.

B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming
same error as in A.

C)systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming
prevent forming - forming from what? from is actually needed. moreover, the meaning is changed.
which illogically refers to hurricanes. the whole sentence is completely a mess.

D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming
such as - this one provides example of weather systems, but we need example of how the something-something works. so out.

E)systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms
looks good. semicolon+IC.

E for me.

Hello Guys.

Did this question on Mahnattan Prep and here it is the explanation they provide. Hope this helps:

(A) The portion after the semi-colon (for instance, … platforms) is not a complete sentence.

(B) The portion after the semi-colon (for example, … forming) is not a complete sentence.

(C) Which ... "reefs" ... prevent forming is unidiomatic; from is needed between prevent and forming. Prevent appears in the present tense, illogically implying that the artificial reefs—which don't yet exist, according to the earlier part of the sentence—already prevent the formation of hurricanes.

(D) The construction such as artificial "reefs" illogically implies that artificial reefs are weather systems. Additionally, the use of can in the present tense (as opposed to could) illogically implies that the artificial reefs—which don't yet exist, according to the earlier part of the sentence—do already exist.

(E) CORRECT. The semicolon is properly used to separate two complete sentences. Could is correctly used to describe a hypothetical consequence.

In option E, how is the second clause after the semi-colon independent?

Hi TheMastermind ,

Here I go:

Using E, my sentence is:

The emerging field of architectural climatology centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms.

Here Hurricanes is the subject and "could be prevented" is the verb. The sentence "hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms." is providing the complete meaning and can stand on its own.

Hence, the sentence after semicolon is an Independent clause.
_________________

Explanation from Manhattan Prep:

"(A) The portion after the semi-colon (for instance, … platforms) is not a complete sentence.

(B) The portion after the semi-colon (for example, … forming) is not a complete sentence.

(C) Which ... "reefs" ... prevent forming is unidiomatic; from is needed between prevent and forming. Prevent appears in the present tense, illogically implying that the artificial reefs—which don't yet exist, according to the earlier part of the sentence—already prevent the formation of hurricanes.

(D) The construction such as artificial "reefs" illogically implies that artificial reefs are weather systems. Additionally, the use of can in the present tense (as opposed to could) illogically implies that the artificial reefs—which don't yet exist, according to the earlier part of the sentence—do already exist.

(E) CORRECT. The semicolon is properly used to separate two complete sentences. Could is correctly used to describe a hypothetical consequence."

ABOUT OPTION D:

The emerging field of architectural climatology centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather
D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming


D is wrong because the subject we are describing is "altering weather systems"...so after "SUCH AS/FOR EXAMPLE" must be some sort of process "using chemicals to stop the rain", "using explosives to stop earthquakes", "using a large dam to stop flooding" etc.

Alternate good example:

"The process of applying to graduate school includes many difficult steps, such as TAKING THE GMAT AND WRITING ESSAYS"

Alternate bad example:

"The process of applying to graduate school includes many difficult steps, such as ESSAYS."

Hi Guys,

I am failing to understand - how is "hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial" in Option E a complete sentence?
I understand that hurricane is the subject but it is not doing the action of "preventing".

Help would be much appreciated

Thanks.