Source: eGMAT
The inmates of Arizona state prison who are selected by the state forest department to work as wilderness firefighters eat in the same cafeterias, sleep in the same campsites, and wear the same uniforms as their professional counterparts do, defying the rigid relationship barriers enforced inside prison walls.
A. defying the rigid relationship barriers enforced
B. defying the relationship barriers enforced rigidly
C. they defy the rigid relationship barriers enforced
D. an arrangement to defy the relationship barriers that are enforced rigidly
E. an arrangement that defies the rigid relationship barriers enforced
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
The inmates of Arizona state prison who are selected by the
This topic has expert replies
-
fabiocafarelli
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 3:40 am
- Thanked: 57 times
- Followed by:2 members
1. If you choose either option A or option B, the subject of the initial DEFYING is THE INMATES. This does not make any sense, as it is not the inmates themselves who defy the rigid relationship barriers in question: rather, it is the situation created by the state forest department that does so. Discard A and B.
2. Much the same applies in option C, but perhaps the simplest basis on which to eliminate this one is the comma splice: the use of a comma to join two independent clauses, which occurs here between DO and THEY.
3. The choice is therefore between D and E, but D has two problems. First, AN ARRANGEMENT TO DEFY implies that the intention of the arrangement is to defy those relationship barriers. This is not the intended meaning and in fact would make little sense. Second, and perhaps worse, is the clause that are enforced rigidly. How exactly does one enforce something RIGIDLY? This is a case of ineffective diction. And even if it were acceptable, it would involve a meaning change: the idea is that the relationship barriers are rigid, not that somebody enforces them RIGIDLY.
4. This leaves only option E, which begins logically with AN ARRANGEMENT in order to refer to the situation created by the selection carried out by the state forest department. The subsequent clause uses THAT DEFIES to describe the effect (rather than the intention) of the arrangement, and talks logically about RIGID RELATIONSHIP BARRIERS.
(I assume that in your source this option is given as the correct answer.)
If you like this post, please click on the THANK icon.
You can also visit us at https://www.xgmat.com/
2. Much the same applies in option C, but perhaps the simplest basis on which to eliminate this one is the comma splice: the use of a comma to join two independent clauses, which occurs here between DO and THEY.
3. The choice is therefore between D and E, but D has two problems. First, AN ARRANGEMENT TO DEFY implies that the intention of the arrangement is to defy those relationship barriers. This is not the intended meaning and in fact would make little sense. Second, and perhaps worse, is the clause that are enforced rigidly. How exactly does one enforce something RIGIDLY? This is a case of ineffective diction. And even if it were acceptable, it would involve a meaning change: the idea is that the relationship barriers are rigid, not that somebody enforces them RIGIDLY.
4. This leaves only option E, which begins logically with AN ARRANGEMENT in order to refer to the situation created by the selection carried out by the state forest department. The subsequent clause uses THAT DEFIES to describe the effect (rather than the intention) of the arrangement, and talks logically about RIGID RELATIONSHIP BARRIERS.
(I assume that in your source this option is given as the correct answer.)
If you like this post, please click on the THANK icon.
You can also visit us at https://www.xgmat.com/
