Sentence Correction

Although modern science has essentially eradicated the bubonic plague from the industrialized word, the occasional patient should be diagnosed every few years with the disease.

A. the occasional patient should be diagnosed every few years with the disease
B. an occasional patient should be diagnosed with the disease once in every few years
C. the disease will be diagnosed in the occasional patient once in every few years
D. every few years the occasional patient will be diagnosed with the disease
E. every few years the occasional patient should be diagnosed with the disease


















___________________________________________________________________________________________________
I chose C instead of D, why I cannot use" the disease will be diagnosed" here?

Answer:D

The incorrect usage of "should" is sufficient to eliminate all but C and D.

However, I am not quite clear on your question.

uwhusky wrote:The incorrect usage of "should" is sufficient to eliminate all but C and D.

However, I am not quite clear on your question.

I am sorry that I might confused you, my question is why C doesn't work here? Why can't I use" the disease will be diagnosed" here?

C is very wordy and awkward.

You can't really tell which one below is the intended meaning of C, and even if you could, it is still awkward to understand.

"the disease will be diagnosed in the occasional patient once in every few years"

"the disease will be diagnosed in the occasional patient once in every few years"

Whats diagnosed the disease or the Patient?? of coz "the Patient" so C is out.

E is a general idea, while D is the actual plan.

D clarifies the contradiction to what is mentioned in the dependent sentence.

So D

Hi uwhusky,

Can you elaborate this?

The incorrect usage of "should" is sufficient

and share some knowledge on usage of should?

Nevermind what I said earlier, I confused usage of should in CR with SC.

SHOULD wouldn't make sense here because it expresses obligation -- as if doctors have some (strange) responsibility to diagnose somebody with bubonic plague according to a schedule.

Thanks Jim for responding.

Could you please explain this with the help of some examples.

I understood that, should conveys some kind of binding on the doctor.

occasional patient should be diagnosed ..

Why can't we interpret that the aim of diagnosis (synonymus to should) is to find the disease?

The best way to solve this is by replacing 'diagnosed' with 'found'

A: We are trying to convey that there is still a rare patient found with plague, not to discuss about the mandatory treatment to him
C: "disease will be found in occasional patient" -If you are irregular to hospital then you have plague

D: every few years an occasional patient was found having plague.

bubbliiiiiiii wrote:Thanks Jim for responding.

Could you please explain this with the help of some examples.

I understood that, should conveys some kind of binding on the doctor.

occasional patient should be diagnosed ..

Why can't we interpret that the aim of diagnosis (synonymus to should) is to find the disease?

This might sound like kind of a small difference, but the point of diagnosis is not to find the disease, but to look for it -- to determine whether it is present. If I think I hear a noise outside my window, I go to the window to see whether there is something there, not in order to find something there -- do you see the difference?