Experts, your generous opinion please...

D and E change the meaning of the sentence
B - sounds like the power will set the record not the cyclist
C - 'this' is ambiguous

An unusually strong cyclist can, it is hoped, provide enough power to set a new distance record for human-powered aircraft in MIT's diaphanous construction of graphite fiber and plastic.

(A) can, it is hoped, provide enough power to set
(B) it is hoped, can provide enough power that will set
(C) hopefully can provide enough power, this will set
(D) is hopeful to set
(E) hopes setting

B - "provide enough power that will set" is unidiomatic. Better to say "enough power to set"
C - You have two independent clauses here: "An unusually strong...enough power" and "this will set a...fiber and plastic". Yet, only a comma connects the two. No good! You must have a conjunction or semicolon there to "glue" the two clauses together. A comma alone is never enough.
D - This is unidiomatic, too. Better to say "hopes to set." Also, this construction changes the meaning of the sentence -- the focus now is on a particular cyclist setting a record, whereas in the original sentence the issue was about enough power being generated by a cyclist in order to set the record.
E - Change in meaning as in D. Also, "hopes to set" over "hopes setting".

The correct answer is A.

Rey

I was confused about the usage of IT in A. IT does not seem to have any antecedent.

I agree with the above. Who is "it" referring to in A?"

linfongyu wrote:I agree with the above. Who is "it" referring to in A?"

It does not always have an antecedent.
[/b]It is raining outside.[/b] is absolutely correct.