OG 13 ques

anksm22 wrote:That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault: Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock, published in 1970.

(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault
(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault
(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology
(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology
(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said

GMATGuruNY wrote:

anksm22 wrote:That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault: Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock, published in 1970.

(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault
(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault
(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology
(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology
(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said

The correct answer is D.

OA: It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology.
Here, it is an EXPLETIVE: a placeholder pronoun serving to DELAY THE SUBJECT.
In most cases, the delayed subject will be either an INFINITIVE PHRASE (to + verb + other words) or a THAT-CLAUSE.
In the OA, it is standing in for that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology.
Conveyed meaning:
That educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technologies can hardly be said.
In other words:
We cannot fault educators for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology.
Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even MENTION microcomputers.

RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi GMATGuruNY - Apart from the ERRORS you've already mentioned in your post, could you please let me know whether I'm correct in identifying the FOLLOWINGS as potential ERRORS in the INCORRECT answer choices ?

Option A : That educators...can hardly be said that -- UNGRAMMATICAL and nonsensical construction.

Option B : That educators....can hardly be said to be at fault -- it's NOT clear who is/are at fault actually!

GMATGuruNY wrote:

Option B : That educators....can hardly be said to be at fault -- it's NOT clear who is/are at fault actually!

B: That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault.
Here, the subject of can be said is the that-clause in red, implying that the THAT-CLAUSE can hardly be said to be at fault.
This meaning is nonsensical.

RBBmba@2014 wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote:

Option B : That educators....can hardly be said to be at fault -- it's NOT clear who is/are at fault actually!

B: That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault.
Here, the subject of can be said is the that-clause in red, implying that the THAT-CLAUSE can hardly be said to be at fault.
This meaning is nonsensical.

Yes, exactly so...

I actually wanted to mean that from the context we can understand that the intended meaning is EDUCATORS are at FAULT -- NOT "THAT EDUCATORS (THAT-CLAUSE) are at FAULT" (which is obviously nonsensical). Right ?