Agencies studying discrimination in housing have

Question

Agencies studying discrimination in housing have experimentally proved that minority clients are often discouraged as prospective buyers of residential real estate and that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

with option D i agree that discouraged,mitigated should be parallel. But i feel rather than abolished is wrong.

(A) the antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades were only mitigating, rather than abolishing, inequity in housing practices

(B) in recent decades, the antidiscrimination legislation only mitigated, rather than abolishing, inequity in housing practices

(C) that antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades has only mitigated, rather than abolished, inequity in housing practices

(D) that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

(E) that recent decades' antidiscrimination legislation only were mitigating, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

RaviChandra · Answer

Agencies studying discrimination in housing have experimentally proved that minority clients are often discouraged as prospective buyers of residential real estate and that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

with option D i agree that discouraged,mitigated should be parallel. But i feel rather than abolished is wrong.

with option D i agree that discouraged,mitigated should be parallel. But i feel rather than abolished is wrong.

daagh · Answer

Kaplan’s way of making every answer not very precise forces us to choose the best among the worst. It looks as though Kaplan wants to stress that //lism of verb is very important and the active voice ‘mitigated’ should match another active verb ‘abolished. IMO, that the use of ‘rather than’ in the place of ‘instead of’ does not make a clean sense even in the official answer. The choice would have been better this way

Choice C original

C) that antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades has only mitigated, rather than abolished, inequity in housing practices

Better one:

that antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades has only mitigated, but not abolished inequity in housing practices

Still we have to go with C because the other choices bubble with serious grammar and diction problems.

A misses the ‘ that ’ parallelism. In addition, it has SV disagreement
 
B like A misses the ‘ that ’ parallelism and uses a wrong past tense.

D housing practices' inequity: What is this special kind of inequity?

E the choice has SV problem. Plus the awkward possessives –  decides’ and practices’

Therefore, C is the lesser evil

shikhar · Answer

IMO , C should be the answer y ??

That is required in the beginning to ensure parallelism.
so A and B wrong.
E wrong because anidiscrmination ... is singular
D wrong because mitigated should modify inequity and not housing practice's..

Please correct me if i am wrong

Agencies studying discrimination in housing have experimentally proved that minority clients are often discouraged as prospective buyers of residential real estate and that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

with option D i agree that discouraged,mitigated should be parallel. But i feel rather than abolished is wrong.

(A) the antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades were only mitigating, rather than abolishing, inequity in housing practices

(B) in recent decades, the antidiscrimination legislation only mitigated, rather than abolishing, inequity in housing practices

(C) that antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades has only mitigated, rather than abolished, inequity in housing practices

(D) that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

(E) that recent decades' antidiscrimination legislation only were mitigating, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

RaviChandra · Answer

daagh your explanations looks convincing thankyou.

i have one more doubt on option D i mean the error u spotted in it.

legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing,  housing practices' inequity

"housing practices` inequity" is this not a simple passive voice of "inequity in housing practices."

Mr X has addressed the problems of the Canada citizens.
 &
Canada citizens` problems were addressed by Mr X.

I feel the later is a passive form. All i know is Passive form should be avoided in GMAT but it is not a Grammatical Error.

Please Explain.

daagh · Answer

Yes, I agree that  “housing practices’ inequity”  is not so much of a grammar problem as a diction problem. I only meant that that it is not elegant. I have seen the apostrophe possessive form being more used for animate things and human beings whereas the ‘of’ possessive form is preferred for inanimate things.

However, D has more serious error I believe.

The phrase -  in recent decades-  that is modifying ‘antidiscrimination legislation' has been set off in parenthesis, rendering it inessential. However, if you ignore that modifier, then the meaning of the text substantially changes. It is the antidiscrimination law in recent times that is under question and not the antidiscrimination law in general This is a fatal flaw.

ydmuley · Answer

Agencies studying discrimination in housing have experimentally proved that minority clients are often discouraged as prospective buyers of residential real estate and that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

with option D i agree that discouraged,mitigated should be parallel. But i feel rather than abolished is wrong.

(A) the antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades were only mitigating, rather than abolishing, inequity in housing practices

(B) in recent decades, the antidiscrimination legislation only mitigated, rather than abolishing, inequity in housing practices

(C) that antidiscrimination legislation of recent decades has only mitigated, rather than abolished, inequity in housing practices

(D) that, in recent decades, antidiscrimination legislation has only mitigated, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

(E) that recent decades' antidiscrimination legislation only were mitigating, rather than abolishing, housing practices' inequity

Going for C

C establishes the parallel structure - both with the word "that" and the "tense" of the sentence.

Hence, C

aaba · Answer

This is OA from Kaplan 800. It is C.
parallel structure "that...and that..."
"mitigated...rather than abolished..."

Bunuel · Answer

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

When you're dealing with long sentences and large underlined portions like this, it's even more important to isolate specific problems to help you weed out choices. The sentence describes the agencies as proving two things: one, that minority clients are discouraged, and two, that past legislation hasn't made the problem any better. The two things that are proven need to be in grammatically parallel forms and, since the first isn't underlined, the second will have to borrow the original structure. You can eliminate (A) and (B) for failing to do so right from the beginning. The underlined section needs to begin with that in order to recall the initial proved that and make it clear where this information fits into the sentence. Next, mitigated and abolished need to be in the same tense since they're in parallel positions, so eliminate (D). Finally, only were mitigating in (E) is not idiomatic word order, plus were mitigating is wordier than mitigated. (C) is the best choice.

Helium · Answer

Step 1: "Legislation" is singular, but the stem sentence pairs it with the plural verb "were". The action of the sentence may also be more concisely phrased by using the simple past — "legislation mitigated".

Step 2: Eliminate (E).

Step 3: Choice (B) uses "mitigated", but fails to maintain parallel structure in its use of "abolishing". (C) uses the correct tenses and is parallel. (D), like (B), fails to maintain parallel structure. (C) is correct.

Sanchitdd · Answer

Than you all for the explanation. But could anyone tell why not repeating "that" in option B is a problem. I thought parallelism would account for "that".

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.

Agencies studying discrimination in housing have

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

Agencies studying discrimination in housing have

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