Sentence Correction

Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper crops, sugar beet and walnut in the region, but in the 1880s, more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry.

a) Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper crops, sugar beet and walnut in the region, but in the 1880s, more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry.

b) Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but in the 1880s, more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry.

c) Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but more effective pest-control methods that were introduced in the 1880s saved the citrus industry.

d) In the 1880s, pests destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region and more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry.

e) In the 1880s, more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry from what was destroying grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region.

OA is : B But i dont understand what's wrong with C

easily came down to B or C
my reasoning for choosing B over C ...

Pests had destroyed xx, yy, zz..., but more effective pest-control methods

here they r trying to parallel "had destroyed" and "effective pest control" .... which sounds awkward to me
BUT should refer time frame to make it clearer that "destroyed" occured earlier in time hence justifying,

Pests had destroyed xx, yy, zz..., but in 1880s ...

anyone agrees or disagrees ?
BTW .. whats the source of ques ??

Hi,

I also got stuck b/w B and C. C seems to be more descriptive than required.. As per the past perfect rule, two actions are taking place in the past.

First action: Crops are destroyed ( Action previous to another action in past ) - had + past participle
Second action: but in 1880s implies that another action happened - pest controls saved the industry - simple past ( saved).

I also get confused in these sentences. Careful reading may help to understand the sentence better.

What is the source?

Regards,
Viju

I think its C.

A and B are run-on sentences.

Wat's the source

This is from Manhattan GMAT CAT , and B is the answer ...

@ Giorgio

C is in passive tone(-- that were introduced ---) so B is preferable over C

I think "introduced in the 1880's" in the option C is at fault here and adding to the meaning of the sentence which is not necessary.

vijay_venky wrote:I think "introduced in the 1880's" in the option C is at fault here and adding to the meaning of the sentence which is not necessary.

i agree.. that + the fact that it is unnecessarily wordy

C would have been perfect if 'that were' is not present. So, passive construction is making it a weaker choice.
B is correct.

according to the original sentence, we do not have information as to when the pest control methods were introduced. in 1880's these methods saved the citrus industry. thats all the info we know. The pest control methods could have been introduced earlier also.
Answer option C seems to suggest that the pest control methods were introduced in 1880's. but do we have info about when they were introduced?? NO. hence wrong and eliminated.

B is the answer.

Nevertheless i would love to dissect each answer choice:

a) Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper crops, sugar beet and walnut in the region, but in the 1880s, more effective pest- control methods saved the citrus industry.[ crops is lying somewhere in the middle. then what are walnut and others?? Eliminated!]


b) Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but in the 1880s, more effective pest- control methods saved the citrus industry. [My answer]

c) Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but more effective pest-control methods that were introduced in the 1880s saved the citrus industry.[ do we know when the methods were introduced? they could have been introduced before that too. 1880's modifies saving the citrus industry and not methods introduced]

d) In the 1880s, pests destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region and more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry. [ makes it look as if both the events happened at the same time. in 1880's.Eliminated!]

e) In the 1880s, more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry from what was destroying grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region [ what is the purpose of 'what'?? i mean what is 'what' (i know this sounds funny. couldnt resist typing it) Eliminated!]

Hope this helps!

IMO B. C somewhat changes the meaning by saying that the pest control methods were introduced in 1880. From the original sentence we only know that the methods states were effective in controlling pests with no information on when it was introduced.

thanks moderator...even though my choice was B (after little vacillation between B and C) but my reasoning to reject C was more based on "doesn't sound good" approach...you gave a solid reasoning to eliminate it...thanks

one qq:
I am trying to rephrase C below...can you let me know your view if this could be correct, if not then, why? (without looking at it in the context of this question):

Pests has destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but more effective pest-control methods had saved the citrus industry in the 1880s.

I think, as a sentence, above should be correct...

too many errors in your sentence-
Pests has destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but more effective pest-control methods had saved the citrus industry in the 1880s.

Pests is a plural form. we need a plural verb in order to match.
has is a singular verb. Thus subject verb mismatch.

it should have been worded - Pests have.

second error: Usage of past perfect (had)

when you have 2 events that have occurred in the past, of the 2 events, the earlier event is represented by a past perfect and the later event by a simple past.
For eg: The King of England had built a huge empire that later got converted into a fort.

here there are 2 events- king building an empire and the empire getting converted into a fort.
of the 2 events the first event is "the king building the empire". thus it is tagged with past perfect "had" and the later event is in past tense.

In your sentence one event is in present perfect(has destroyed) and the other event is in past perfect. unnecessary tense shift which is wrong.

thanks fibbonnaci, for putting your time and helping out... appreciate it...


"has vs have" was an overlook..


For second error: to apply the rule, do you mean we need to write this:
Pests had destroyed grape, celery, chili pepper, sugar beet and walnut crops in the region, but more effective pest-control methods saved the citrus industry in the 1880s.

I of course agree with the rule for two events....but here is the context for the sentence and events - pests destroying the grape has just happened and while talking about that, we are giving reference to the old past event of 1880s....so, "Pests had" doesn't fit, IMO....in this context, how would you phrase...

I know I may be asking basic question here....but will help me...thanks again

Hey i guess u got the meaning mixed up. u design effective techniques to solve a problem rite?
The problem has to appear first in order to design a solution. do u mean to say the problem of pests destroying happens even now but effective techniques to eradicate it was available in 1880's? how can this occur?

u need to show the proper tense by mentioning that pests destroying the crops occured before the effective techniques were introduced. since both are in the past, u need to tag the first sentence with 'had' and the second sentence in simple past.

Hope this clears ur doubt!