Actually D and E are not complete sentences, since they do not have a "main verb".

An easier example might help understanding this:

A win by the home team against the opponent, helping the home team to reach the finals.

As you would appreciate, this is not a complete sentence, since it does not have a main verb.

sinmk2 wrote:A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought.

(A) claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought

Please, can somebody show me the complete version of all the above sentences? especially the part after "as weak as"

ELLIPSIS is the omission of words whose presence is understood.
The OA implies the following:
THE ECONOMY MIGHT NOT BE AS WEAK as some analysts previously thought [THAT THE ECONOMY WAS WEAK].
The words in bracket are omitted, but their presence is understood.

GMATGuruNY wrote:
ELLIPSIS is the omission of words whose presence is understood.
The OA implies the following:
THE ECONOMY MIGHT NOT BE AS WEAK as some analysts previously thought [THAT THE ECONOMY WOULD BE WEAK].
The words in bracket are omitted, but their presence is understood.

A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought.

(A) claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought
(B) claims suggests that the economy might not be so weak as some analysts have previously thought
(C) claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as have been previously thought by some analysts
(D) claims, suggesting about the economy that it might not be so weak as previously thought by some analysts
(E) claims, suggesting the economy might not be as weak as previously thought to be by some analysts

I know exactly what you are talking. Take C for an example, the version with no omission of words should be:
The economy might not be as weak as [THE ECONOMY] have been previously thought by some analyss.
As "have" does not agree with the singular "economy", which is understood, the clause is ungrammatical.

But I am not quite clear about why the subordinate clause parts in both D and E are GRAMMATICAL. From my understanding, regardless the sentence fragment issue, option D implies the following:
...it might not be so weak as [THAT THE ECONOMY WOULD BE WEAK] previously thought by some analysts.
Is the term "previously thought by some analysts" a participial in this case?

Also, option E probably implies that:
...the economy might not be as weak as [THAT THE ECONOMY WOULD BE WEAK] previously thought to be by some analysts.

The part omitted makes it unclear to me the "Subject - Verb" construction in the clause. Please help. Thanks.

Tommy Wallach wrote:
A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought.

(D) claims, suggesting about the economy that it might not be so weak as previously thought by some analysts

In (D), there is no main clause. The subject of the sentence "A surge..." has no verb. Also, the participle "thought" (modified by the adverb "previously") can't function this way. It needs "as it was previously thought to be". -t

Tommy,

Could you explain why would THOUGHT TO BE better in D. I was thinking, PREVIOUSLY suggests past thoughts and TO BE suggests FUTURE thoughts. Do PREVIOUSLY and THOUGHTS TO BE go together.

Thanks
Patanjali

Hi Tommy,

Could you please explain the role that "Suggesting" is playing in this sentence.
Is it playing the role of present participle modifying Noun phrases - "A surge in .." and "drop in...".

Kindly help