Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress

Hi AndrewN
I am working on tenses currently and in this question If we had option E with "was" instead of "has been", would that make it wrong? Because if has never been applied is used, then it was never applied must be correct too. So, the question is does the use of "has never been applied" is superior to "was never applied " in E?

Hello, pk6969. If was were used in place of has been in (E), then that would present a problem. The simple past would make it seem as if the Constitution was no longer utilized, and we would have trouble reconciling the tense with is required subsequently. I would expect to see Congress would have been required or something similar. But that does not address the original meaning issue. To convey that the Constitution is still in effect, has been should be used instead. It is a seemingly innocuous issue, but the verb tense makes a huge difference.

I would not, I did not, look to the verb tense first thing to start eliminating. Rather, I would pick off the easy stuff, such as the it at the end of answer choices (A), (B), and (C), an it that apparently refers to the action of calling a convention. The same three answers then fall on a simple technicality, not on a nuanced understanding of the sentence. Between (D) and (E), the former is not even a sentence, so (E) wins, hands down. Keep matters as simple as you can. I love reading for meaning, but when it comes to SC, I enjoy narrowing the answer pool by putting in the least amount of effort and then working with whatever is left.

I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew

Eliminate A, B, and C
- pronoun "it" has not referrenace
- was is past tense, has is present tense
- Option C - Wrong usage of "whereby", this word is defined as in agreement with which, by which or through which
- Option B, phrase "there has been a requirement" -(wordy)
- the legislatures of two-thirds of the states formally asked Congress - is correct

Original Sentence A:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied,
Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document
when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

(B) was never applied,
there has been a requirement that -(wordy)
Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document
when asked to do it formally

(C) was never applied,
whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document
when asked to do it formally

(D) has never been applied,
whereby - Error
Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document
when formally asked to do so

(E) has never been applied,
Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document
when formally asked to do so - Correct

egmat
i have a question reqarding the tense in the correct answer option-
(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

How can Congress be required to do something in the present , when the provision is not even applied [since has never applied means- effect is still is in the present ]

I ask this because we used the same reasoning to eliminate option A by saying that when something was never applied , so how can congress be required to something in the present.
Basically in the correct option , the provision is still not applied right?

Will really appreciate the help on this! thanks in advance

Taulark1


The present tense in E is describing an ongoing conditional relationship: WHEN 2/3 of states ask for a Constitutional convention, Congress IS REQUIRED to convene one. For instance, I might say, "As a Federal employee, Jackie is required to return any gifts she receives from clients." We might say this even if Jackie has never received a gift from a client. The requirement is still in place. We might also say this if she hasn't followed the requirement. She's required to return gifts, but has not complied.

In the case of the US, the condition has yet to be fulfilled. 2/3 of states have never asked for a Constitutional convention, but Congress IS required to make it happen if such a request occurs. Of course, we don't need to know this outside fact to get the question right. It works just as well if we assume that Congress has not fulfilled its duty. All we need to know is that the sentence is describing a current conditional that has never been triggered.
_________________

Hey Taulark1

Hope you're doing well.

Building on what DmitryFarber has said, let's take a closer look at choice E.

Choice E: Under a provision of the Constitution that has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.


Aspects of Meaning:

1. The topic of discussion is the process of making changes to the US Constitution.
2. The Congress refers to the legislative body of the USA (Federal Government).
3. If the legislative bodies of two-thirds of the states (or more) (i.e. State governments of a minimum of 34 of 50 states) formally ask the Congress (Federal Government) to amend the Constitution, the Congress must call (or is required to call) a convention (meeting/conference) to consider those amendments.
4. This requirement/procedure/provision/law is written in the Constitution itself.
5. However, this provision has never been applied as yet. In other words, two-thirds of the states (or more) have never formally asked the Congress to amend the Constitution till today.

So, the simple present tense "is required" has been used to convey a Universal Truth/Law mentioned in the US Constitution. The present perfect tense "has never been applied" is just a separate fact that says that this Law/Provision has not been applied till date.


Choice A: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

1. The Simple Past Tense "that was never applied" implies that this provision no longer exists and that this provision was never applied even when it existed.
2. The Present Perfect Tense "has been required" implies this requirement has been enforced every time attempts were made to change the constitution in the Past.
3. This creates a conflict/contradiction between the two highlighted portions of 1 and 2 above.

This is why choice A makes no sense and can be eliminated.

I hope this helps improve your understanding.


Happy Learning!

Abhishek
_________________

egmat , DmitryFarber , thanks for the awesome explanations!!