Sentence Correction

That pollution harms the environment is self-evident; that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation is a matter of debate.

a) that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation
b) if the situation merits immediate action by the government is a matter of debate
c) whether to combat the situation is merited by immediate government action
d) that the situation merits immediate government action to combat it
e) whether the government should immediately combat it is merited by the situation

[spoiler]OA D , what does it refers to in option D?[/spoiler]

chaitanya.mehrotra wrote:That pollution harms the environment is self-evident; that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation is a matter of debate.

a) that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation
b) if the situation merits immediate action by the government is a matter of debate ----- wrong if usage, correct usage is if x than y
c) whether to combat the situation is merited by immediate government action -----> sentence can't stand independently
d) that the situation merits immediate government action to combat it -----> fragmented sentence can stand independently
e) whether the government should immediately combat it is merited by the situation-----> strong language

[spoiler]OA D , what does it refers to in option D?[/spoiler]

it in option D refers to situation

I think option E is incorrect because the rule says that the sentence after a semi-colon should be complete and independent. If we take the second part of the sentence " whether the government should immediately combat it is merited by the situation " -- the usage of 'it' is not clear.

Please let me know if my reasoning is correct.

E apart from strong usage of should has another problem i.e awkwardness of is merited by the situation is a matter of debate

aspirant2011 wrote:

chaitanya.mehrotra wrote:That pollution harms the environment is self-evident; that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation is a matter of debate.

a) that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation
b) if the situation merits immediate action by the government is a matter of debate ----- wrong if usage, correct usage is if x than y
c) whether to combat the situation is merited by immediate government action -----> sentence can't stand independently
d) that the situation merits immediate government action to combat it -----> fragmented sentence can stand independently
e) whether the government should immediately combat it is merited by the situation-----> strong language

[spoiler]OA D , what does it refers to in option D?[/spoiler]

it in option D refers to situation

It must refer to pollution.

Jim@Grockit wrote:

aspirant2011 wrote:

chaitanya.mehrotra wrote:That pollution harms the environment is self-evident; that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation is a matter of debate.

a) that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation
b) if the situation merits immediate action by the government is a matter of debate ----- wrong if usage, correct usage is if x than y
c) whether to combat the situation is merited by immediate government action -----> sentence can't stand independently
d) that the situation merits immediate government action to combat it -----> fragmented sentence can stand independently
e) whether the government should immediately combat it is merited by the situation-----> strong language

[spoiler]OA D , what does it refers to in option D?[/spoiler]

it in option D refers to situation

It must refer to pollution.

Hi Jim,

I have one basic doubt over here I.e

Initially I also thought that it should refer to pollution but I got confused with the semi colon part as after semi colon sentence should be an independent clause,therefore, I marked it to refer to situation rather than pollution.........please correct me where was I wrong

Pronouns can (and in fact usually do) replace nouns in earlier independent clauses; we rarely have more than one independent clause in SC to see it happen.

I drilled down to D but was confused with independent clause starting with "that".
I read that "That" triggers a dependent clause..
Can someone please explain?

Can someone explain VJ's doubt for me aswell.

vzzai wrote:I drilled down to D but was confused with independent clause starting with "that".
I read that "That" triggers a dependent clause..
Can someone please explain?

As far as I can recall, this is a kaplan Advance problem.

"That" do not always trigger a dependent clause. This happen only when "that" acts as a relative pronoun or as a subordinator.

Please refer the twin SC from OG where the correct OA is :

That some fraternal twins resemble each other greatly while others look quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely that they vary considerably.

Generally "that" can also be used to start a noun phrase, ( this is exactly what is happening here) :

That + noun/noun phrase + verb --- best construction

That the GMAT is hard cannot be denied.

I hope this helps

Jim@Grockit wrote:

aspirant2011 wrote:

chaitanya.mehrotra wrote:That pollution harms the environment is self-evident; that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation is a matter of debate.

a) that immediate government action to combat it is merited by the situation
b) if the situation merits immediate action by the government is a matter of debate ----- wrong if usage, correct usage is if x than y
c) whether to combat the situation is merited by immediate government action -----> sentence can't stand independently
d) that the situation merits immediate government action to combat it -----> fragmented sentence can stand independently
e) whether the government should immediately combat it is merited by the situation-----> strong language

[spoiler]OA D , what does it refers to in option D?[/spoiler]

it in option D refers to situation

It must refer to pollution.

Hi Jim,

Why should it must refer to pollution. There are many singular nouns in the sentence, for eg: action,situation. Whay cant it refer to any one of these. It will not make sense if it refers to these but why is it gramatically not possible

Regards,
Vishal