Because an oversupply of computer chips has sent prices

lheiannie07 wrote:Because an oversupply of computer chips has sent prices plunging, the manufacturer has announced that it will cut production by closing its factories for two days a month.

(A) Because an oversupply of computer chips has sent prices plunging
(B) Because of plunging prices for computer chips, which is due to an oversupply
(C) Because computer chip prices have been sent plunging, which resulted from an oversupply
(D) Due to plunging computer chip prices from an oversupply
(E) Due to an oversupply, with the result that computer chip prices have been sent plunging

In D and E, due to seems to refer to the manufacturer, implying that THE MANUFACTURER was DUE to plunging computer chip prices (in D) or to an oversupply (in E).
These meanings are nonsensical.
Eliminate D and E.

which + SINGULAR VERB must serve to refer to a singular antecedent.
In B, which is lacks a clear singular antecedent.
Eliminate B.

C: Because computer chip prices...which resulted from an oversupply
Here, which seems to refer to prices, implying that PRICES resulted from an oversupply.
Not the intended meaning.
The intended meaning is that the PLUNGING of the prices resulted from an oversupply.
Eliminate C.

The correct answer is A.

Option A is the correct answer because it correctly expresses the subordinate clause with the fewest possible words.

Option B is wrong because "...prices of..." should been used in place of "...prices for..."
Option C is wrong because the subordinate clause is followed by another clause before the introduction of the main clause.
Option D is wrong because the statement draws an unclear relationship between the plunging computer chip prices and an oversupply
Option E is also wrong because similar to Option C, another clause follows the subordinate clause before the introduction of the main clause