tough one!! what is the source of this question
_________________

(A) With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating their reduced numbers easily - Incorrect - Usage of with is inappropriate in this context.

(B) When the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt, with the English longbowmen being able to inflict significant damage on them, their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily was able to eliminate them - Incorrect - Awkward structure

(C) The muddy field delayed the advance of the French infantrymen at the battle of Agincourt, allowing the English longbowmen to inflict significant damage on them, and as the number of the French infantrymen was reduced, the English infantry easily could eliminate these remaining few - Correct - The only doubt I had here was the usage of 'these'

(D) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt tried to advance but had been delayed by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen inflicted significant damage on them, and the English infantry eventually would eliminate their reduced numbers with ease - Incorrect - Tense error. The French tried to advance but were delayed by the muddy field. Usage of 'had been' is not appropriate.

(E) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt were delayed in their advance by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt inflicted significant damage on them, so their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily could eliminate those left - Incorrect - Wordy and sentence is in Passive Voice.

Between C and E, C is a better option.

Its from Magoosh. Please see the tags

It would be good to know the following w.r.t. SCs like this one:

1. What to do when such a questions appears
2. what should be a general approach for such questions
3. Such a SC question looks time consuming so how to tackle it in a faster way
_________________

Hi @HKD171,

The Q is not so tough as it may seem to be..
It is normal tendency to believe a Q to be tough when it is fully underlined, but it is not the case always..
Here you will find all choices EXCEPT C glaringly wrong.
Do not lose focus because it is completely underlined..
lets analuse the immediate thing that should strike us..

With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating off their reduced numbers easily.

(A) With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating their reduced numbers easily
.. the construction of three clause is not done properly
And the biggest Flaw is Preposition+Noun+Participle is almost always dicey in GMAT. we have an OG Q to on this issue

(B) When the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt, with the English longbowmen being able to inflict significant damage on them, their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily was able to eliminate them
'delaying' should be a reason to eliminate it immediately as in A. Can be eliminated for the wordy and awkward construction

(C) The muddy field delayed the advance of the French infantrymen at the battle of Agincourt, allowing the English longbowmen to inflict significant damage on them, and as the number of the French infantrymen was reduced, the English infantry easily could eliminate these remaining few
usage of AND has cleared the wordiness that existed, joining different clauses correctly and 'modifier' with 'allowing ' correctly modifies preceding claause..

(D) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt tried to advance but had been delayed by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen inflicted significant damage on them, and the English infantry eventually would eliminate their reduced numbers with ease
usage of HAD BEEN and conditional WOULD is not appropriate..
Also BY muddy field should be DUE TO muddy field

(E) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt were delayed in their advance by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt inflicted significant damage on them, so their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily could eliminate those left
the FRENCH INFANTRYMEN has also become subject and thus 'THEM and THEIR' can be ambiguous.
The construction on them, so their.. reduced, and the English.. left does not follow the proper construction

EDITING- forgot to put down the main point for A

With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating off their reduced numbers easily.




(A) With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating their reduced numbers easily --- The use of a preposition along with a noun followed by a participle, in the given context is wrong, because it involves two different agents doing two different things, and because the first part, essentially a modifier, cannot modify the agent of the second part namely the English longbowmen.

(B) When the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt, with the English longbowmen being able to inflict significant damage on them, their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily was able to eliminate them ---Combination of a subordinate conjunction ‘when’ with a noun and a participle is grammatically wrong for the same reason as in A.

(C) The muddy field delayed the advance of the French infantrymen at the battle of Agincourt, allowing the English longbowmen to inflict significant damage on them, and as the number of the French infantrymen was reduced, the English infantry easily could eliminate these remaining few --- the best in the given context, of course with the small pinprick of the demonstrative pronoun ‘these’, as Vyshak pointed out.

(D) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt tried to advance but had been delayed by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen inflicted significant damage on them, and the English infantry eventually would eliminate their reduced numbers with ease --- varying widely with the intent of the original; use of ‘would' is particularly wrong.

(E) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt were delayed in their advance by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt inflicted significant damage on them, so their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily could eliminate those left --- so their numbers were reduced implies a cause and effect, which is not there in the context, and then the unnecessary passive voice
_________________

Let me try this one!

(A) With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating their reduced numbers easily.

The first part of the sentence "With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen" presents the reason ( contributory cause) why the English were able to inflict damage .However, " with" does not convey the reason. We generally use words such as since/because for presenting the reason.Hence, the use of with is wrong.

The second part of the sentence " the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them" looks grammatically correct.The only issue that may bother is the use of passive voice when active voice could have been used.

The third part of the sentence "with the English infantry eventually eliminating off their reduced numbers easily" is used to describe the result of the previous clause.Use of verbing modifier would have been better. With does not do justice when we need to present the result of the previous clause.Also " eliminating off their reduced numbers" is clumsy.


(B) When the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt, with the English longbowmen being able to inflict significant damage on them, their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily was able to eliminate them

Use of multiple phrases .What is the phrase with " with" describing".

The followingpost by mike garry may help to explain the use of with.

maxwell-s-theory-of-electromagnetism-in-1865-was-the-first-163428.html#p1294666


(C) The muddy field delayed the advance of the French infantrymen at the battle of Agincourt, allowing the English longbowmen to inflict significant damage on them, and as the number of the French infantrymen was reduced, the English infantry easily could eliminate these remaining few

Correct. Usage of these is correct. These is followed by noun few.The sentence corrects the meaning and construction issues in A.

(D) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt tried to advance but had been delayed by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen inflicted significant damage on them, and the English infantry eventually would eliminate their reduced numbers with ease


The French tried to advance but were delayed by the muddy field. Usage of 'had been' is not appropriate.


(E) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt were delayed in their advance by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt inflicted significant damage on them, so their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily could eliminate those left

The sentence is divided uselessly into three independent clauses .The meaning of the sentence is lost when the the reason ( contributory cause) why the English were able to inflict damage is presented in a separate and unrelated clause to "the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt inflicted significant damage on them".



i hope the above analysis is helpful and correct.


Do press Kudos if you find the above helpful.


_________________

The following post from mikemcgarry may be relevant to the above.

maxwell-s-theory-of-electromagnetism-in-1865-was-the-first-163428.html#p1294666






I donot mind Kudos.


_________________

Official explanation for why D is incorrect:

(D) This choice has a combination of small problems. The tense mismatch in the first part, "tried … but had been delayed," doesn't make sense. Presumably, the "trying" and the "being delayed" would be more or less simultaneous. Also, that first part is very wordy. The overall sentence is just connect with a string of and's, and this gives no sense of the logical interconnection of these events, what cause what. The antecedent of "their" is ambiguous. The hypothetical tense, "would eliminate," is strange and awkward for a factual historical event. This choice is incorrect.

Official Explanation

A question about the Henry V's victory at the Battle of Agincourt in 1415.

Split #1: As explained in this blog, this question contains a "Case I" use of the "with" + [noun] + [participle] structure, action by a different actor. In the main clause, the English longbowmen are the actors, and in the "with" phrase, the muddy field is another actor. This is wrong. One way to see this, as discussed above, is to examine the sentence without the participle:

With the muddy field, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage …

This makes no sense. The English longbowmen weren't doing anything with the muddy field. An essential piece of the action has been lost in dropping that participle. For a separate actor performing a separate action, we need a whole new clause. (A) is wrong because of this.

The sentence is radically reorganized on each choice, so we have to analyze each choice separately.

(A) In addition to the problematic structure at the beginning, this choice repeats the Case I mistake at the end, a double whammy! This is completely incorrect.

(B) This choice has the Case I mistake after the word "Agincourt": an "with" + [noun] + [participle] used incorrectly. Also, the antecedent of "their" is exceptionally unclear and ambiguous. This choice is incorrect.

(C) This choice makes no mistakes. All the pronouns have clear relationships with their antecedents. The logical connections are clear. This is promising.

(D) This choice has a combination of small problems. The tense mismatch in the first part, "tried … but had been delayed," doesn't make sense. Presumably, the "trying" and the "being delayed" would be more or less simultaneous. Also, that first part is very wordy. The overall sentence is just connect with a string of and's, and this gives no sense of the logical interconnection of these events, what cause what. The antecedent of "their" is ambiguous. The hypothetical tense, "would eliminate," is strange and awkward for a factual historical event. This choice is incorrect.

(E) This choice also links the information with "and" statements, which make the logical sequence less obvious. The antecedent of "them" is not perfectly clear. The passive structure at the beginning is weak. This choice is grammatically correct but far from ideal.

The best answer is (C).
_________________

"(C) The muddy field delayed the advance of the French infantrymen at the battle of Agincourt, allowing the English longbowmen to inflict significant damage on them, and as the number of the French infantrymen was reduced, the English infantry easily could eliminate these remaining few"

In option C, I'm not able to comprehend why "could eliminate" is correct. Since the whole sentence is talking about a past event, I expected "the English infantry easily eliminated these remaining few".

Posted from my mobile device

With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating off their reduced numbers easily.

(A) With the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen, the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt were able to inflict significant damage on them, with the English infantry eventually eliminating their reduced numbers easily
Error in sentence structure

(B) When the muddy field delaying the advance of the French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt, with the English longbowmen being able to inflict significant damage on them, their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily was able to eliminate them
Error in sentence structure

(C) The muddy field delayed the advance of the French infantrymen at the battle of Agincourt, allowing the English longbowmen to inflict significant damage on them, and as the number of the French infantrymen was reduced, the English infantry easily could eliminate these remaining few
No Remarks

(D) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt tried to advance but had been delayed by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen inflicted significant damage on them, and the English infantry eventually would eliminate their reduced numbers with ease
Tense error and conjuction error

(E) The French infantrymen at the Battle of Agincourt were delayed in their advance by the muddy field, and the English longbowmen at the Battle of Agincourt inflicted significant damage on them, so their numbers were reduced, and the English infantry easily could eliminate those left
Error in sentence structre and pronoun
_________________