GMAT Club Forum
https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/

As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv
https://gmatclub.com/forum/as-xenophobia-reached-new-highs-right-before-the-start-of-american-inv-312419.html
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Kinshook [ 12 Dec 2019, 15:56 ]
Post subject:  As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States, formally the exclusion was ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.


A. States, formally the exclusion was ended by

B. States, formally ending the exclusion by

C. States, the exclusion formally ended by

D. States by ending the exclusion formally using

E. States and the exclusion was formally being ended by

Author:  arvind910619 [ 13 Dec 2019, 06:41 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

Kinshook wrote:
As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States, formally the exclusion was ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.


A. States, formally the exclusion was ended by

B. States, formally ending the exclusion by

C. States, the exclusion formally ended by

D. States by ending the exclusion formally using

E. States and the exclusion was formally being ended by


Though question as always from egamt.

Lets us delve deeper into this question.

Structure of the sentence

As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I. This clause is a modifier modifying the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United.

Another clause formally the exclusion was ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.

Error in original sentence.
The way the underlined clause is attached to the remaining sentence raises doubt. Is it absolute phrase. On a casual look it does seem to look like an absolute phrase but upon reading carefully we can see that this is a full Independent clause and it is incorrectly joint to the another independent clause by comma. So we have comma splice error. The two sentences should have been joined by semicolon.

Now let us evaluate each choice.

A incorrect per above reasoning.

B This is interesting we now do not have independent clause rather we have a verb-ing modifier. We now have meaning error and a modifier error. Verb-ing modifier is now modifying previous clause the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United.
The meaning thus derived form this is that the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United led to McCarran-Walter Act in 1954. The meaning here is not good leave B.

C Correct. Absolute phrase is correct we have a noun + noun modifier.

D Meaning here is nonsensical. Per this they halted immigration by having immigration by McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.

E There is no need to use past progressive. Being is wrong. Per this sentence the exclusion was ended over a lengthy period of time by the Act. Not correct. A law is in place the moment it is enacted.

Author:  gandharvm [ 22 Dec 2019, 23:37 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

arvind910619 in (C), doesn't the part after the comma result in an independent clause being joined incorrectly?
"the exclusion formally ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954." seems like a complete sentence. Why doesn't it warrant the use of FANBOYS conjunction or a semicolon?

Author:  strepanier [ 23 Dec 2019, 08:49 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

While I agree that the sentence should be properly punctuated with a semi-colon or a comma + conjunction per the FANBOYS conjunction or a semicolon rule. However, is improper punctuation enough of a reason to reject an answer?

I am thinking the best two answers are A or C. However, I am not sold that the punctuation error in A is enough to discount it.

Author:  gandharvm [ 23 Dec 2019, 11:10 ]
Post subject:  As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

strepanier thanks for your reply. However, I feel (D) is the best answer:
As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.

My reasons:
1. No run on sentence
2. The meaning is correctly conveyed. Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration; how? by ending the exclusion formally; how did it end the exclusion formally? using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954. Do note the years. In 1917 Immigration Act caused exclusion. In 1954 the McCarran-Walter Act stopped exclusion.

Why I am against OA (C)
-leads to a run on sentence; joins two independent clauses, incorrectly, using a comma.


Happy to hear your views.

Author:  strepanier [ 23 Dec 2019, 11:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

@gandharvm-

If we look at the sentence with D plugged in we run in to several issues- Let's start with the meaning, which is distorted here.

"As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954."

1. As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I,
2. the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States

How did they halt immigration? the author clearly states with the immigration act of 1917 but if we use choice D it states "by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954." - this is illogical- and distorts the author's intended meaning- which is that the the 1954 McCarran-Walter Act ended the exclusion.

I am also wondering where you are seeing two independent clauses? For there to be two independent clauses we would need two subjects, right? In this sentence we only have one subject which is the immigration act. Therefore the comma and semi colon are not a necessity per grammar rules, and the ;lack of them is not a reason to rule out a choice.

More food for thought ;)

Author:  gandharvm [ 23 Dec 2019, 23:40 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

Dear strepanier,


In OA (C), the two independent clauses are:
1) As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States ----The subject is The Immigration Act
2)the exclusion formally ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954. ---The subject is The exclusion

This is why I feel option C results in a run on sentence as the two independent clauses aren't joined by a semicolon/ , + FANBOYS

..

For option (D), wanted to understand what is the meaning being conveyed in (D) that makes it incorrect/illogical?

Author:  strepanier [ 24 Dec 2019, 07:57 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

gandharvm
answer choice d=States by ending the exclusion formally using

so here the whole sentence reads:

"As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I, the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States by ending the exclusion formally using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954."

The meaning here is not logical. Per this they halted immigration by having immigration by McCarran-Walter Act in 1954.

Using pause points to get to the meaning we can interpret:

As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American involvement in World War I= this independent clause tells us that Xenophobia hit an all time high prior to WWI

the Immigration Act of 1917 halted immigration from most Asian countries into the United States= this independent clause tells us that the Immigration act of 1917 stopped immigration from most Asian countries.

by ending the exclusion formally = a prepositional phrase, which as we know, prepositional phrases serve as an adjective modifying a noun, as an adverb modifying a verb, or as a nominal when used in conjunction with the verb form to be. We can rule out the use of the nominal since there is no conjunction. S owe are left with either adjective or adverb. So what is by ending the exclusion formally modifying? Either immigration act or halted? But that does not make sense.

using the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954= what used the the McCarran Warren Act? this verb phrase can only modify the Immigration act of 1917, which is illogical.

Hope this break down helps to clarify the meaning choice D brings.

Author:  Kritisood [ 15 May 2020, 07:16 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

experts, could you please help with the diff between B and C?

Author:  vipulgoel [ 15 May 2020, 09:34 ]
Post subject:  As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

gandharvm wrote:
arvind910619 in (C), doesn't the part after the comma result in an independent clause being joined incorrectly?
"the exclusion formally ended by the McCarran-Walter Act in 1954." seems like a complete sentence. Why doesn't it warrant the use of FANBOYS conjunction or a semicolon?



"the exclusion" is noun and "formally ended" is noun modifier ,( which makes the underlined segment in said option a noun phrase, not an independent clause) if it would have verb as "was" in option A , then it would have called Independent clause and we would have needed either fanboys or semicolon

Author:  junii [ 20 Jul 2021, 22:31 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

egmat pls explaon why B is incorrect and C is correct?

Author:  ninad8 [ 29 Sep 2022, 03:56 ]
Post subject:  Re: As xenophobia reached new highs right before the start of American inv

junii

Option B begins "formally ending the exclusion by" which means that the Immigration Act of 1917 itself was responsible for formally ending the exclusion which is not true.

Option C says "the exclusion formally ended by" which means that the McCarran-Walter Act ended the exclusion, which is the correct meaning.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/