Sentence Correction

Although the fear last year that the trade zone might break apart had receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation of the kind that has plagued Argentina for the past two decades.

A.had receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation of the kind that has plagued Argentina for the past two decades

B.had receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation as it has plagued Argentina for the past two decades

C.receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, just as it has plagued Argentina for the past two decades

D.has receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, like it has plagued Argentina for the past two decades

E.has receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, like that which has plagued Argentina for the past two decades

A and B have tense issues(past perfect is unnecessary here).
Similarly, C has past tense, which is again unnecessary.

D corrects the verb tense issue but pronoun reference is ambiguous(As per D, 'it' can refer either to 'fear' or to 'prolonged stagnation')
Moreover, D is wrong because it uses a bonafide clause(it has plagued) after 'like'. 'Like' can't be used to compare clauses.

E alone remains. I'm confused with the construction 'that which'. Whether official GMAT SCs can have this construction or it depends solely on the context ? I've heard a test prep company saying the contruction'that which' is incorrect on GMAT

Please let me know if there are other ways of eliminating choices in this question.

Regarding "that which," the GMAT certainly uses that construction. Check out this Verbal Official Guide RC question:

"The author implies that which of the following was true of most feminist thinkers in England and the United States after 1920?"

You're correct to start by focusing on the Verb Tense issues. We are given two strong clues: "last year", "now" and "for the past two decades."

In order for the meaning of this sentence to make sense, we need verbs that could logically describe something that occurred "last year...break," "now," and "for the past two decades."

My guess would be present perfect for "last year...break," since we are discussing how a "fear" has changed from last year to the present. I'd use a simple present for "now," and present perfect for "for the past two decades."

The reason I would not choose past perfect for ANY of these tenses, is because we would need TWO past tense events in order to use past perfect, and the 3rd tense is describing something that is STILL happening, or is ongoing into the present, just as the 1st verb tense is.

Therefore, I'd start with the first verb. "Had receded" is out, so I would eliminate (A) and (B). All the remaining choices have the present hypothetical "could be," and all three have the present perfect "has plagued."

I would possible be open to "receded," but "has receded" is much more parallel with "has plagued," therefore (C) is out.

As you stated, "like" can only compare nouns, not clauses/actions, so (D) is firmly out.

In (E), if we replace the pronoun "that" with "prolonged stagnation," the sentence makes complete sense.

Although the fear last year that the trade zone might break apart has receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, like [the prolonged stagnation] which has plagued Argentina for the past two decades.

It may seem unusual to have a "which" without a comma preceding it, but notice how weird it would be to have another comma so soon:

Although the fear last year that the trade zone might break apart has receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, like that, which has plagued Argentina for the past two decades.

We would not precede the "which" with a comma, because the information that follows "which" is essential information (required for the meaning of the sentence). As an essential modifier, it should not be separated from the rest of the sentence with a comma. It would be like saying the sentence should end after the "that."

Check out this Magoosh blog on essential/non-essential modifiers. A solid refresh: https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... modifiers/

Hope this helps!

Best,
Vivian

The meanings conveyed by by C and D do not make sense, as they both include faulty comparisons.

In C and D, "prolonged stagnation" is compared to a an action, "it has plagued".

E makes sense in that it compares the potential "prolonged stagnation" to "that which has plagued Argentina".

The meaning conveyed by B is more plausible, but still questionable, as it seems to imply that the risk now could be prolonged stagnation as, i.e. because, it has plagued Argentina for the past two decades. Meanwhile, for that reading to make sense, really you need a comma before "as".

Vivian, does the use of "like" in letter "E" is correct? Tks!

VivianKerr wrote:Regarding "that which," the GMAT certainly uses that construction. Check out this Verbal Official Guide RC question:

"The author implies that which of the following was true of most feminist thinkers in England and the United States after 1920?"

You're correct to start by focusing on the Verb Tense issues. We are given two strong clues: "last year", "now" and "for the past two decades."

In order for the meaning of this sentence to make sense, we need verbs that could logically describe something that occurred "last year...break," "now," and "for the past two decades."

My guess would be present perfect for "last year...break," since we are discussing how a "fear" has changed from last year to the present. I'd use a simple present for "now," and present perfect for "for the past two decades."

The reason I would not choose past perfect for ANY of these tenses, is because we would need TWO past tense events in order to use past perfect, and the 3rd tense is describing something that is STILL happening, or is ongoing into the present, just as the 1st verb tense is.

Therefore, I'd start with the first verb. "Had receded" is out, so I would eliminate (A) and (B). All the remaining choices have the present hypothetical "could be," and all three have the present perfect "has plagued."

I would possible be open to "receded," but "has receded" is much more parallel with "has plagued," therefore (C) is out.

As you stated, "like" can only compare nouns, not clauses/actions, so (D) is firmly out.

In (E), if we replace the pronoun "that" with "prolonged stagnation," the sentence makes complete sense.

Although the fear last year that the trade zone might break apart has receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, like [the prolonged stagnation] which has plagued Argentina for the past two decades.

It may seem unusual to have a "which" without a comma preceding it, but notice how weird it would be to have another comma so soon:

Although the fear last year that the trade zone might break apart has receded, the risk now could be prolonged stagnation, like that, which has plagued Argentina for the past two decades.

We would not precede the "which" with a comma, because the information that follows "which" is essential information (required for the meaning of the sentence). As an essential modifier, it should not be separated from the rest of the sentence with a comma. It would be like saying the sentence should end after the "that."

Check out this Magoosh blog on essential/non-essential modifiers. A solid refresh: https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... modifiers/

Hope this helps!

Best,
Vivian