The interior minister explained that one of the village planning

Hi
Could you throw some light why E is wrong. Although I could correctly choose C but cannot find a reason to eliminate E apart from thinking that "one was" is between commas and can be struck off therby rendering the sentence meaningless. Some posts talk about a missing "that", I cannot make much sense of it.
Thanks in advance!

Hi

daagh
Are D and E fragments because they lack a subordinator connecting the dependent and main clause ?

Also in option A if their is replaced by its, will it be correct ? If no then what is the logic behind the verb-Ing being wrong here.

Posted from my mobile device

Hi

daagh
Are D and E fragments because they lack a subordinator connecting the dependent and main clause ?

Also in option A if their is replaced by its, will it be correct ? If no then what is the logic behind the verb-Ing being wrong here.

Posted from my mobile device

Sid

If you miss a connector, it could become a run-on rather than a fragment.
In D, the clause 'it did not take'… is standing aloof separated by only a comma from the previous clause. Therefore, it is a run-on.

In the case of E, the clause 'it did not detract' is separated by only a comma, hence a run-on.


I do not see a technical problem in your proposal of 'its' in the place of 'their, except that it is somewhat less elegant than the format in C.

The interior minister -- subject/noun
explained -- -ed verb
that -- beginning of a subordinate clause
one of the best characteristics of
the village’s planning proposal -- noun phrase
was -- verb
that -- beginning of a subordinate clause
it -- pronoun referring to the village's planning proposal@
did not detract
from the project’s overall benefit by being a burden on the development budget.


although the pronoun, it, is referring to the village's planning proposal (possesive?) the option C cannot be ruled out as pronoun antecedent is not an absolute rule in GMAT GMATNinja can you please help?

(C) is the correct answer to this question, so you're right that it can't be ruled out .

You're also right that pronouns CAN sometimes refer to possessive nouns (check out this official question for an example). There is no ironclad rule saying that a pronoun can't refer back to a possessive -- it's just a bit rare for the correct answer to be constructed like that, so you can be on your guard when you see it in an answer choice.

However, the possessive noun/pronoun issue is not at play at all in answer choice (C) for this question.

Consider this example:

Chloe's car was a piece of junk, so she decided to walk to the party.

Here, the pronoun "she" clearly refers back to Chloe, NOT to the car (a car is not going to walk to a party!). This is an example of a pronoun referring back to a possessive noun because "Chloe" is the one WHO POSSESSES the car. The GMAT might frown on this construction, although as we said earlier, it's not always considered a definite error.

Compare that to this example:

Chloe's car was such a piece of junk that it was constantly falling apart.

In this sentence, we still have a possessive noun ("Chloe's"). However, the pronoun doesn't refer back to the Chloe -- instead, it refers back to the noun "car." "Car" is the thing that IS POSSESSED, and "Chloe's" is just providing us a description of the car. The GMAT would be 100% fine with this construction, because the pronoun isn't referring back to the actual possessive noun.

So, you have to determine whether the pronoun refers to a noun that possesses something (which is sometimes--but not always--an issue) or to a noun that is possessed (not an issue at all).

Here's (C):

In this sentence, the meaning and context clearly point to "planning proposal" as the antecedent for the pronoun "it" -- the "it" refers to the thing that is possessed ("planning proposal"), NOT the possessive noun ("village's"), and this construction is totally fine.

I hope that helps!

The interior minister explained one of the village. So the rest of the verb and pronoun will be singular.

(A) Their is plural. OUT

(B) Were should be was and taking should detract.

(C) one of the best characteristics of the village’s planning proposal was that it did not detract

(D) a best characteristic is wrong. This should be one the best idea and the take should be detrac.

(E) It has awkward construction with "one was and it didn't detract'

The answer is C

Hello experts, GMATNinja VeritasKarishma generis

official explaination of B
The plural verb were does not agree with the singular subject. Also, the verb takingshould be replaced by the verb detracting.

That means, following newer version is correct?
B-2. one of the village’s planning proposal’s best characteristics was its not detracting

Awaiting your views.

I do not understand your question. Please elaborate.

I am confused. Can their be more than one best Characteristics. In my humble understanding out of the set of characteristics one is the best (superlative). If that is correct then the phrase - one of the best characteristics itself seems to be flawed. Can someone guide please.

Hello satyamishra,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, a superlative adjective can, indeed, be used to refer to multiple nouns; such usage simply conveys that these nouns have more of the given quality than any other of their kind; in this case, the usage "one of the best characteristics" means one among an unspecified number of characteristics that are better than the other characteristics of the proposal.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Hi MartyTargetTestPrep

as far as I know "X's Y" can be translated as "Y of X" e.g. <Marty's power> or <power of Marty>

If applied to A & C we get;
(A) one of the village planning proposal’s best characteristics was their not detracting
one of the [best characteristics of village planning proposal] was...

(C) one of the best characteristics of the village’s planning proposal was that it did not detract
one of the best characteristics of the [planning proposal of village] was

So I believe A is more logical in this sense because one is village planning proposal it gives you that ministry is talking about a general proposal regarding villages where in C it seems that there is some random unnamed village and we have planning proposal for this very village

Doesn't it make C weird in terms of meaning?

A sentence could be about some random village. Thus, the meaning conveyed by the (C) version isn't illogical or implausible.

So, the (C) version is fine.

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.