Hi,
I think the answer is A
'that' refers to depression and it strains the society rather than it being a strain for the society

Cheers!

Frankenstein wrote:Hi,
I think the answer is A
'that' refers to depression and it strains the society rather than it being a strain for the society

Cheers!

I also think that answer has to be Op A.....i drop other choices apart from Op C in one go...but i want to know what's exactly wrong with Op C...

Why i pick Op A is the structure looks good to put NON-ESSENTIAL MODIFIER "with double-digit unemployment" Separately in COMMA's rather than making it a part of the main clause...

Do u think, Op C is incorrect because IT can refer to JAPAN or Depression, hence ambiguous????

A is correct. There is nothing wrong with the sentence as written.

(C) does have the ambiguous "it" - "it" could logically refer to either the "depression" or to "unemployment."

VivianKerr wrote:A is correct. There is nothing wrong with the sentence as written.

(C) does have the ambiguous "it" - "it" could logically refer to either the "depression" or to "unemployment."

Thanks a lot Vivian,

I missed this word "unemployment"....i thought that logically IT cannot refer to JAPAN so in Op C IT is not ambiguous and thats why find Op C is a good contender...but you spot the right word "unemployment."....yes logically pronoun "IT" can refer to "unemployment" or "depression" both and hence ambiguous.

Thanks a lot!!!

Hi Vivian,
Can you please explain what's wrong with choice E?


Thanks,
B

boazkhan wrote:Hi Vivian,
Can you please explain what's wrong with choice E?


Thanks,
B

If u elaborate the structure of Op E, Op E will be read as,

Japan is in danger of plunging into a depression with double-digit unemployment and [Japan] could severely strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right of citizenship.

Its not Japan which could severely strain, its the depression that could strain. So, in Op E the sub of the verb "could" is Japan...hence incorrect.

Hi Vivian could you tell us the difference between A and B ?

In my opinion, the original sentence is saying:
Japan is in danger of plunging into a double digit depression
that could strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right
of citizenship.

However, "B" says:
(i) depression is a strain because of double-digit unemployment and that
(ii)depression could be a severe strain for a society. "depression
could severely strain a society" is more compact and idiomatic.

gmatdriller wrote:In my opinion, the original sentence is saying:
Japan is in danger of plunging into a double digit depression
that could strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right
of citizenship.

However, "B" says:
(i) depression is a strain because of double-digit unemployment and that
(ii)depression could be a severe strain for a society. "depression
could severely strain a society" is more compact and idiomatic.

Could you interpret A with respect to the figures for Unemployment

mundasingh123 wrote:

gmatdriller wrote:In my opinion, the original sentence is saying:
Japan is in danger of plunging into a double digit depression
that could strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right
of citizenship.

However, "B" says:
(i) depression is a strain because of double-digit unemployment and that
(ii)depression could be a severe strain for a society. "depression
could severely strain a society" is more compact and idiomatic.

Could you interpret A with respect to the figures for Unemployment

A: means Japan is in danger of plunging into economic turmoil (depression)
characterized by double-digit unemployment.

Consider an excerpt from www.shmoop.com

Unemployment During the Great Depression

Average rate of unemployment
in 1929: 3.2%
in 1930: 8.9%
in 1931: 16.3%
in 1932: 24.1%
in 1933: 24.9%
in 1934: 21.7%
in 1935: 20.1%
in 1936: 16.9%
in 1937: 14.3%
in 1938: 19.0%
in 1939: 17.2%3

Full and healthy employment in 1929 at 3.2% abruptly shifted with
the crash on Wall Street and ensuing global depression. Rising
unemployment reached double-digits in late 1930, and the situation
continued to deteriorate through the bleak winter of 1932-33, when
well over a quarter of all workers were unable to find jobs. The
New Deal helped to reduce unemployment from 1933 through 1937, when
another economic recession briefly caused a resurgence in joblessness.
Full employment did not return until the war years of the early 1940s.

How about now...hope you got a better understanding of the question?

In my opinion, the original sentence is saying:
Japan is in danger of plunging into a double digit depression
that could strain a society that regards lifetime employment as a virtual right
of citizenship.

However, "B" says:
(i) depression is a strain because of double-digit unemployment and that
(ii)depression could be a severe strain for a society. "depression
could severely strain a society" is more compact and idiomatic.

What i asked is what does with double digit unemployment in A mean ?
Does it mean depression with double digit enemployment
or depression because of DD Unemployment or ...
did the effects of depression get supplemented by the result of Double digit enemployment

mundasingh123 wrote:
What i asked is what does with double digit unemployment in A mean ?
Does it mean depression with double digit enemployment
or depression because of DD Unemployment or ...
did the effects of depression get supplemented by the result of Double digit enemployment

Depression is not caused by double digit unemployment. However, depression is often characterized by this phenomenon. We will not have double digit unemployment followed by a depression. It will be the other way round. Some fiasco, like the stock market crash of 1929, the Asian financial crisis of 1997 or the housing bubble/sub prime mortgage crisis of 2008, sets off a chain of events that lead to negative growth rate, aka depression. Negative growth means less jobs, increasing unemployment to higher and higher levels until the governmental measures to reign in the depression take effect.

niksworth wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:
What i asked is what does with double digit unemployment in A mean ?
Does it mean depression with double digit enemployment
or depression because of DD Unemployment or ...
did the effects of depression get supplemented by the result of Double digit enemployment

Depression is not caused by double digit unemployment. However, depression is often characterized by this phenomenon. We will not have double digit unemployment followed by a depression. It will be the other way round. Some fiasco, like the stock market crash of 1929, the Asian financial crisis of 1997 or the housing bubble/sub prime mortgage crisis of 2008, sets off a chain of events that lead to negative growth rate, aka depression. Negative growth means less jobs, increasing unemployment to higher and higher levels until the governmental measures to reign in the depression take effect.

In the context of this question