mundasingh123 wrote:According to some analysts, whatever its merits, the proposal to tax away all capital gains on short-term investments would, if enacted, have a disastrous effect on Wall Street trading and employment.
(A) its merits, the proposal to tax
(B) its merits may be, the proposal of taxing
(C) its merits as a proposal, taxing
(D) the proposal's merits, to tax
(E) the proposal's merits are, taxing
OA A
Bamboozled by this question
Whatever signifies a subordinate clause , but in Option A which is the OA,it does not have any verb.

The " proposal to + verb " seems to be the correct idiom.
The only options with a verb in the subordinate whatever clause are B and E,
Since in E, taxing cannot be enacted so E is rejected.
So i went for B ,is the "proposal of taxing" really wrong?
Are my fundamentals on subordinate clause "whatever" right?

GMATGuruNY wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:Bamboozled by this question
Whatever signifies a subordinate clause , but in Option A which is the OA,it does not have any verb.

The " proposal to + verb " seems to be the correct idiom.
The only options with a verb in the subordinate whatever clause are B and E,
Since in E, taxing cannot be enacted so E is rejected.
So i went for B ,is the "proposal of taxing" really wrong?
Are my fundamentals on subordinate clause "whatever" right?

What would have a disastrous effect? The proposal. In C, D and E, the subject -- incorrectly -- is the merits. Eliminate C, D and E.
b]Proposal of new taxes.[/b] Proposal of + noun. Correct.
Proposal to create new taxes. Proposal to + verb. Correct.
Proposal of taxing. Proposal of + gerund. Incorrect.
Eliminate B. The correct answer is A.
In A, whatever its merits seems to be functioning as an absolute phrase: a noun phrase that modifies an entire clause. An absolute phrase provides context for the clause that it modifies. The absolute phrase whatever its merits tells us in what context the proposal...would have a disastrous effect.