This book is no longer published, so I will discuss it briefly - it's kind of in a grey zone as far as copyright is concerned.
There are two problems with D. First, "and" does not show a contrast between two things, no. "And" is either neutral or indicates that the two things go together in some way.
Second, the biggest thing "and" indicates is parallelism, and D isn't parallel. A similarly-constructed sentence:
<The Menomini crafted a canoe> <about 20 ft long and 2 ft wide>, <with S>, <which could carry A or B>, and <so light that Y>.
The "and" at the end indicates parallelism ("and" always indicates some form of parallelism). The stuff after the "and" is one of the two items that need to be made parallel. What's the other? There are potentially two different ways to interpret this (and both are wrong):
<The M crafted a canoe> <
about 20 ft long AND
2 ft wide AND
so light that Y>. In this example, the "so light that Y" part is parallel to the other prepositional phrase descriptor that comes after "canoe." One problem with this is that the double "and" construction is awkward. The other problem is that the meaning of the sentence is now changed / obscured. The point is to make a contrast between how much weight it can carry and how light it is. We've lost that meaning.
<The M crafted a canoe> <about 20 ft long and 2 ft wide>, <with S>, <which> <
could carry A or B>, AND <
so light that Y>. In this example, the two items after "which" are parallel, and both apply to the "which." So we have "which could carry A or B, and (which) so light that Y." In the first item, "which" is followed by a verb. In the second, it isn't. Not parallel.
