As a result of Benito Mussolini's rise to power ...

Question

As a result of Benito Mussolini's rise to power, Eritreans were demoted to menial positions in the public sector in 1938; soon after,  Italian forces were defeated by the British, who then relocated Eritrian industry and  dismantled part of the railroad.

(A) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who then relocated Eritrian industry and
(B) the British, who defeated Italian forces, who then relocated Eritrian industry and which
(C) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who relocated Eritrian industry and which
(D) the British relocated Eritrean industry, who defeated Italian forces, and who
(E) the British relocated Eritrean industry, defeating Italian forces, and

GH-12.20.12 - OE to follow

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear avohden , I'm happy to help with this. :-)

As a result of Benito Mussolini's rise to power, Eritreans were demoted to menial positions in the public sector in 1938; soon after, Italian forces were defeated by the British, who then relocated Eritrian industry and dismantled part of the railroad. Notice, there are no obvious mistakes with the original prompt sentence. That, in an of itself, is notable. (A) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who then relocated Eritrian industry and No obvious mistakes. This is a promising choice. (B) the British, who defeated Italian forces, who then relocated Eritrian industry and which In this choice, after the semi-colon, the subject " the British " has no bonafide main verb, only modifiers. This commits the famous "missing verb" mistake. See: https://gmat.magoosh.com/lessons/914-the ... rb-mistake This one is clearly incorrect. (C) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who relocated Eritrian industry and which This is awkward phrasing, and it's unclear why we refer to the British (people) by both " who " and " which " --- something's funky about having two different relative pronouns in parallel for the same object. This one would never be correct on the real GMAT, so we can count it as incorrect. (D) the British relocated Eritrean industry, who defeated Italian forces, and who Hmm. This makes it sound as if the " Eritrean industry " defeated the Italians. That substantially changes the meaning to something that is historically false. This is incorrect. (E) the British relocated Eritrean industry, defeating Italian forces, and This one is funny. The participial phrase " defeating Italian forces " can modify the subject or the entire phrase, but what's funny is that if I say P did X, doing Y , then it implies an essential logical relationship between actions X & Y, as if by doing X, one also in the same stroke accomplished Y, or as if Y were an accessory action that supported the main action X. Neither one of these fits the logic of what we are trying to communicate here. Defeating the Italians was the big action, and relocating Eritrian industry was, by comparison, a footnote, a detail that followed this big action. The phrasing in (E) does not make that clear at all. Choice (E) must be incorrect. The answer is clearly (A) . This is a very interesting question ---- interesting and subtle mistakes that clearly eliminate each of the other four answer choices. Mike :-)

avohden · Answer

Official Explanation

Answer: A The sentence is correct as written. There are two issues evident from the original sentence. First, what follows the semi-colon must be a complete sentence in its own right. Choice (B) is wrong because the second half of the sentence is missing a verb that matches the subject "the British." Second, the question is testing your awareness of modifiers, as in "the British, who then relocated...." In the original sentence, this is correct.

Choice (C) is incorrect because without the word "then," the sentence loses the sense that the relocation of industry came as a result of the defeat. (D) is wrong because, while the word "who" follows the comma, there is nothing immediately before the comma (such as "the British") for the word "who" to refer to. Finally, (E) should be eliminated because "defeating" and "dismantled" are not parallel, while the structure of the sentence requires that they have the same form. Choice (A) is correct.

Hope it helps. :lol:

https://www.gmathacks.com/images/logo.gif

seabhi · Answer

IMO A

(A) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who then relocated Eritrian industry and --  Correct --

(B)the British, who defeated Italian forces, who then relocated Eritrian industry and which -- incorrect-- The british,modifier,who then relocated .. --

(C) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who relocated Eritrian industry and which --  Incorrect -- and which, seems which is referring back to industry..

(D) the British relocated Eritrean industry, who defeated Italian forces, and who --  incorrect -- seems industry defeated the italian forces...

(E) the British relocated Eritrean industry, defeating Italian forces, and --  incorrect -- means by relocating the industry the british defeated the Italian forces..

KyleWiddison · Answer

This is a great example of how incorrect modifiers change the meaning of the sentence. Modifying the wrong word/phrase leads to illogical meaning - i.e. industry defeating the Italian forces.

Get good at modifiers and you'll improve your ability to answer meaning-based questions.

KW

believer700 · Answer

Hi Mike,

Isn't WHO in (A) creating an ambiguity?

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear believer700 I'm happy to respond. :-)

The short answer: no . The reason: the modifier touch rule . Here's the relevant section of (A): . . . Italian forces were defeated by the British, who then relocated Eritrian industry and . . . The word " who " begins a relative clause, which is a kind of noun-modifying clause. It "touches" " the British ," and this makes it overwhelmingly clear and unambiguous that this noun-modifying clause targets " the British ." No ambiguity at all. In general, if there are several nouns in a sentence, and after the final noun there's a comma and a " who ..." clause, then 99.9% of the time that "who" clause is modifying the final noun before the comma. If there's no noun before the comma, or if there's a noun followed by a vital noun modifier , then there could be some space between the target noun and the noun-modifying clause. Does all this make sense? Mike :-)

KanishkM · Answer

The intent of the sentence begins after the ";".

British defeated the Italian forces, They even relocated and dismantled part of the railroad

Only A matches this intent.

(B) the British, who defeated Italian forces, who then relocated Eritrian industry and which
Not the correct intent, Italian forces did not relocate

(C) Italian forces were defeated by the British, who relocated Eritrian industry and which
which ??

(D) the British relocated Eritrean industry, who defeated Italian forces, and who
Not the correct intent,Eritrean industry did not defeat the Italian forces.

(E) the British relocated Eritrean industry, defeating Italian forces, and
Not the correct intent,Eritrean industry is still not defeating the Italian forces

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.

As a result of Benito Mussolini's rise to power ...

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

As a result of Benito Mussolini's rise to power ...

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