The original building and loan associations were organized as limited

The original building and loan associations were organized as limited life funds, whose members made monthly payments on their share subscriptions, then taking turns drawing on the funds for home mortgages.

(A) subscriptions, then taking turns drawing

(B) subscriptions, and then taking turns drawing

(C) subscriptions and then took turns drawing

(D) subscriptions and then took turns, they drew

(E) subscriptions and then drew, taking turns

Hi GMATNinja, egmat,
Could you please help tackle this question, I was lost while tracing down
issues.

Looking forward learning from you
Regards,

IMO C.

took is parallel to made ( part of the previous clause)

KarishmaB
(E) subscriptions and then drew, taking turns

"Taking turns" describes "how" they drew from the funds.
Participle is used to show how aspect of the action "drew". Why E is incorrect?

2)When there are 2 action verb "made" & "drew", participle will modify which verb?

(C) subscriptions and then took turns drawing
In C, how can drawing modifies "turns"? It means they are taking turns, how-drawing on the funds.
Can you please explain how meaning-wise "then took turns drawing is correct??

Consider a simple sentence: We took turns reading.
It means we read one after the other as per our turn. We took turns doing what? Reading

In option (C), 'and' is connecting the two verb phrases 'made monthly payments' and 'took turns drawing on the funds'
So they took turns to withdraw money from the fund. Everyone did not withdraw at the same time. One withdrew in one time period and another withdrew in the next time period etc.

(E) subscriptions and then drew, taking turns
It is unclear what 'drew' means. comma + verb-ing at the end will modify the entire previous clause or the previous subject. But what does 'taking turns on the fund' mean? What were they doing on their turn? We need to specify that the were taking turns drawing from the funds.

In this question, "whose...." modifier is closer to "limited life funds" than "The original building and loan associations".
Then, how come it is acceptable by GMAT standards for whose to modify previous clause subject. This is especially puzzling considering whose can modify both people and things.
GMATNinja egmat

Hello glan2023,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, here "whose" does refer to "limited life funds"; the intended meaning is that the original building and loan associations were organized as limited life funds, specifically as limited life funds whose members made monthly payments on their share subscriptions and then took turns drawing on the fund for mortgages.

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

Hey glan2023

Happy to help.


It's good that you're aware that 'whose' can refer to people or things. But does this question contain any such conflict? Let's discuss.


The thing to learn from this question is a bit of financial jargon. Adding to what ExpertsGlobal5 has said above, I'd like to bring to your attention a secondary meaning of the word 'fund'. The word 'fund' is not just used for 'a sum of money' but also for 'an organization administering a special fund'. And the members of such a "fund" are called 'fund members' or sometimes even 'plan members'.

References: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fund

So, when the author says "the original building and loan associations were organized as limited life funds", she means that these Financial Institutions (Building and Loan Associations) were organized as companies administering a special fund. And the members of these funds made monthly payments on their share subscriptions and then took turns drawing on the funds for home mortgages.


So, there's nothing unusual with the grammar of this sentence and the meaning stays coherent throughout.


I hope this improves your understanding. Please feel free to revert if you have further questions.


Happy Learning!

Abhishek

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.