At Tuesday's press conference Ms. Franco who headed her country's anti

Question

At Tuesday's press conference Ms. Franco,  who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating  the means of future attempts.

A. who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating

B. the former head of her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines that had banned items simply used in prior attempts at hijacking and had not made a significant effort to anticipate

C. the former eight-year head of her country's antiterrorism committee, criticized airlines simply for banning items that had already been used in hijacking attempts and made no significant effort in anticipating

D. who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items used in prior hijacking attempts and making no significant effort to anticipate

E. who had for eight years headed her country's antiterrorism committee, criticizing airlines that had simply banned items already used in previous hijacking attempts, made no significant effort at anticipating

pqhai · Accepted Answer

At Tuesday's press conference Ms. Franco,  who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating  the means of future attempts.

A.who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been  used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating 
 Wrong.  
- Meaning problem. It seems  items used  in prior hijacking attempts  without making  significant effort...... <== "without significant effort" modifies verb "used". That does not make sense.
- A correct parallel structure should be "criticized  for banning ..... and (for) making  no significant effort. But that is not the case here.

B.the former head of her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years,  criticized  airlines  that had banned  items simply used in prior attempts at hijacking  and had not made  a significant effort to anticipate
 Wrong.  
- Because there is no  second "that"  before "and had not made" ==> It's not clear that "criticized || had not made" OR "had banned || had not made".

C.the former eight-year head of her country's antiterrorism committee,  criticized  airlines simply for banning items that had already been used in hijacking attempts  and made  no significant effort in anticipating
 Wrong. 
- Parallelism problem: criticized || made <== Wrong.

D.who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines  for simply banning  items used in prior hijacking attempts  and making  no significant effort to anticipate
  CORRECT.

E.who had for eight years headed her country's antiterrorism committee,  criticizing  airlines that had simply banned items already used in previous hijacking attempts,  made  no significant effort at anticipating 
 Wrong.  
- Criticizing <== Wrong verb-ing modifier. It should be a main verb - criticized.
- "made" is wrong because if we omit the verb-ing modifier part, it seems Ms. Franco made no effort. That's wrong.

Hope it helps.

arnabs · Answer

Wrong.  
- Criticizing <== Wrong verb-ing modifier. It should be a main verb - criticized.
- "made" is wrong because if we omit the verb-ing modifier part, it seems Ms. Franco made no effort. That's wrong.

Hope it helps.

"simply banning" is that correct??
simply - adverb
banning - gerund or a noun (verb + ing)
how can an adverb describe a noun ??

sananoor · Answer

"simply banning" is that correct??
simply - adverb
banning - gerund or a noun (verb + ing)
how can an adverb describe a noun ??

Your question made me curious and i try finding answer, here is the explanation
"you can also modify a gerund from within the gerundial construction, where it functions as a verb, so you use an adverb: She left by quickly crossing the street and hailing a cab"

avocado310 · Answer

Would you say there is a logical / correct way to attack this problem? I tried to look at the split first "who headed" vs "the former head" and both seemed possible at first. I then had to read through each problem choice to narrow down my answer. Just curious if there was another tactic / major call out that I might have missed?

globaldesi · Answer

I think even before looking at the reference part, you can spot fr parallelism errors in the subordinate section.
According to me both are ok. Its the second part that has real problems

Timebomb · Answer

Hi. 
To me the use of past perfect continuous 'had been' in option A looks correct. Would be helpful, if some one can validate this. I understand other reasons for which option A is incorrect.

Posted from my mobile device

Drb89 · Answer

Skywalker18 · Answer

At Tuesday's press conference Ms. Franco,  who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating  the means of future attempts.

A. who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating - illogical meaning- without making a significant effort or anticipating-- these are two separate actions -- what the sentence intends to say is that without making a significant effort to anticipate;
 usage of past perfect seems incorrect

B. the former head of her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines that had banned items simply used in prior attempts at hijacking and had not made a significant effort to anticipate - 'former head for eight years' has a meaning problem - It's unclear whether she's spent eight years as the former head - that is, it's been 8 years since she quit - or whether, instead, she was the head for eight years before quitting ;

C. the former eight-year head of her country's antiterrorism committee, criticized airlines simply for banning items that had already been used in hijacking attempts and made no significant effort in anticipating- parallelism issue - criticized and made -- illogical meaning ; the former eight-year head seems awkward

D. who headed her country's antiterrorism committee for eight years, criticized airlines for simply banning items used in prior hijacking attempts and making no significant effort to anticipate - Correct

E. who had for eight years headed her country's antiterrorism committee, criticizing airlines that had simply banned items already used in previous hijacking attempts, made no significant effort at anticipating - illogical meaning - Ms. Franco made no significant effort is illogical;

1.  Isn't the usage of past perfect tense in A,B,C and E redundant?  In A,B and E, prior and previous have been used as a time marker and even in case of C(without any such marker) is clear.

2. Also, in B "airlines that had banned items" or in E "airlines that had simply banned items" 
is the meaning change acceptable?  The original sentence talks about airlines in general, whereas these sentences talk about only those airlines that banned items?

AjiteshArun  ,  GMATNinja  ,  MagooshExpert  ,  GMATGuruNY  ,  VeritasPrepBrian  ,  MartyMurray  ,  DmitryFarber  ,  daagh  ,  generis  , other experts - please enlighten

Answer D

daagh · Answer

skywalker

The use of past perfect vis-à-vis simple is a slippery issue even for natives as elucidated by our Reference Manual RON.

I think you are correct in asking why the use of 'already and prior' cannot be considered redundant along with past perfect. 
But A has several other issues also.

1. It simply uses a simple past for the verb 'headed". However, it doesn't use any other time reference such as earlier or previous. 
 Why should we not use a present perfect for 'headed' since her tenure was deeper in the past than when she addressed the conference? 
This point holds good for A through D.

2. What does the prepositional modifier 'without making a significant effort or anticipating" modify? You may see that it is not set off by a comma. Therefore if might modify the noun in front ,namely, 'the hijacking attempts', which doesn't make any sense. If somebody suggests that the modifier could modify the previous clause namely "items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts" then also it makes no sense. It is the airlines that is the modifies noun and it is far away and theree is a verb in between to reckon with.

In any case, I think A is a dead issue, because the author doesn't claim it isthe OA.

In other choices also we can go on picking holes if we delve deeper.

However, D is significantly different from the rest in the use of the word 'prior" You may see that 'prior' does not refer to the used items but to the hijacking attempts. By leaving out the words 'had and already', one can say that "used" now means ' that were used', a simple past.

We must wait for the OE.

sanjayparihar16 · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The intended purpose of the sentence is to convey two different grounds on which Ms. Franco criticized airlines. First, the airlines had simply banned items used in previous hijacking attempts; second, they had made no significant effort to anticipate the particulars of future attempts. For the sentence to be effective, it should place these two criticisms in parallel, avoiding constructions that mistakenly attribute the airlines' actions to Ms. Franco herself. In addition, the sentence should be worded so as to avoid redundancy.

(A) The use of both "already" and "prior" is redundant. In addition, "anticipating the means" is placed in parallel with "making a significant effort," illogically suggesting that those two constructions represent independent ideas. The airlines didn't make a significant effort to do what? They didn't make a significant effort to anticipate the means of future attempts.

(B) The combination of "former" and "for eight years" is illogical; the original sentence indicated that Ms. Franco was the head of the committee for 8 years. "The former head for eight years" would refer to the period of time after she ceased to be the head of the committee; in other words, she was the head for some unspecified period of time, but she left the job eight years ago. This information was included to demonstrate her credentials in criticizing the airlines, but knowing how long ago she left the job does not establish her credentials. In addition, the adverb "simply" is inappropriately placed; it is meant to describe the airlines' act of banning previously used items, and so should be placed in front of "banned."

(C) This version of the sentence places "criticized" and "made" in parallel – thus illogically suggesting that Ms. Franco herself (the subject of both verbs) "made no significant effort." The sentence must be structured so as to make clear that the airlines, not Ms. Franco, failed to make such an effort. The adverb "simply" is inappropriately placed; it is meant to describe the airlines' act of banning previously used items, and so should be placed in front of "banning." Finally, "former eight-year head" is awkward and unclear.

(D) CORRECT. The first modifier provides additional description of Ms. Franco's background; the past tense is appropriately used to describe a state that prevailed during a definite interval in the past. The two grounds on which Ms. Franco criticized the airlines – banning and making – are expressed properly in parallel. Finally, the adverb "simply" is appropriately placed in front of banning, the act that it is intended to describe.

(E) "Criticizing" is written as a modifier, illogically suggesting that Ms. Franco had spent her entire eight-year term criticizing the airlines. Moreover, if the modifiers are removed from the sentence, the remaining subject and verb are "Ms. Franco" and "made" – thus illogically suggesting that Ms. Franco herself, rather than the airlines, "made no significant effort."

silverprince · Answer

I would like to offer a suggestion on how one can approach this question. I found it much easier to solve this question by analysing the original sentence's main clause. This approach helps because it conveys the intended meaning and simplifies the task at hand by removing the waffle of subordinate clause. In this manner, we can eliminate all but one answer choice - D.

"Ms. Franco...criticized airlines for simply banning items that had already been used in prior hijacking attempts without making a significant effort or anticipating the means of future attempts.

We can clearly see the issues with this main clause. The task has now been made much simpler. No answer choice, except for D, corrects the main clause. This approach saves a lot of time.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

At Tuesday's press conference Ms. Franco who headed her country's anti

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

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

At Tuesday's press conference Ms. Franco who headed her country's anti

Prep Toolkit

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