Sentence Correction

[quote']The British Admiralty and the War Office met in March 1892 to consider a possible Russian attempt to seize
Constantinople and how they would have to act militarily to deal with them.
(A) how they would have to act militarily to deal with them
(B) how to deal with them if military action would be necessary
(C) what would be necessary militarily for dealing with such an event
(D) what military action would be necessary in order to deal with such an event
(E) the necessity of what kind of military action in order to take for dealing with it[/quote]

as per the OG explanation ::

• 'them' in (A) & (B) has no antecedent - can it possibly refer to the Russian?

• 'would' in option (B) needs to be 'should' - why?

• kindly comment on the usage - 'necessary militarily' in option (C)...

thanks in advance,

sharkin wrote:[quote']The British Admiralty and the War Office met in March 1892 to consider a possible Russian attempt to seize
Constantinople and how they would have to act militarily to deal with them.
(A) how they would have to act militarily to deal with them
(B) how to deal with them if military action would be necessary
(C) what would be necessary militarily for dealing with such an event
(D) what military action would be necessary in order to deal with such an event
(E) the necessity of what kind of military action in order to take for dealing with it

as per the OG explanation ::

• 'them' in (A) & (B) has no antecedent - can it possibly refer to the Russian?

• 'would' in option (B) needs to be 'should' - why?

• kindly comment on the usage - 'necessary militarily' in option (C)...

thanks in advance,[/quote]
The only plural entity present in the sentence is "The British Admiralty and the War Office "
Now "they should refer to "The British Admiralty and the War Office "
Apart from this plural entity there is no other plular entity present.
"Russians " word is not there in the sentence.Only attempt which is singular.
So A & B are out.
E) The necessity changes the meaning of the sentence.
C also changes the meaning of the sentence because of the word necessary.
So D .What is the OA?Kindly reveal the OA

hi,

I don't understand the use of should inplace of would in B , i rejected it because of 'them'.
In option C 'neccessary militry for deaaling' is awkward.

IMO D , can you please tell us the OA.

Thanks

puneetdua wrote:hi,

I don't understand the use of should inplace of would in B , i rejected it because of 'them'.
In option C 'neccessary militry for deaaling' is awkward.

IMO D , can you please tell us the OA.

Thanks

awkardness is a not a good reason for rejecting an option

In C , dealing is not parallel to seize. So C out.

"a possible Russian attempt" is a noun. Cannot be referred by them. And B out.
The British Admiralty and the War Office met to consider x and y

Hence D

The main culprit in C is 'for dealing'. We need 'in order to deal'.
Also, as someone pointed out, 'necessary militarily' is awkward (I am not sure if it is grammatically incorrect)

D looks correct.

Apart from C and D others can be ruled out.

in D ..in order to ..is redundant so..C

Can any expert help us here.

Please I could not find a thorough analysis of options on any of the Forums.

Please if any of the experts can attend this question.

sharkin wrote:[quote']The British Admiralty and the War Office met in March 1892 to consider a possible Russian attempt to seize
Constantinople and how they would have to act militarily to deal with them.
(A) how they would have to act militarily to deal with them
(B) how to deal with them if military action would be necessary
(C) what would be necessary militarily for dealing with such an event
(D) what military action would be necessary in order to deal with such an event
(E) the necessity of what kind of military action in order to take for dealing with it

as per the OG explanation ::

• 'them' in (A) & (B) has no antecedent - can it possibly refer to the Russian?

• 'would' in option (B) needs to be 'should' - why?

• kindly comment on the usage - 'necessary militarily' in option (C)...

thanks in advance,[/quote]

only what in choice C and D are paralel logically to attempt.
neccesary militarily is unclear in C though we will see that it is hard to realize this unclearness

I can not refuse "neccessary for doing" because in the dictionary, "neccessary for +noun" is presented.

sharkin wrote:The British Admiralty and the War Office met in March 1892 to consider a possible Russian attempt to seize Constantinople and how they would have to act militarily to deal with them.

(A) how they would have to act militarily to deal with them
(B) how to deal with them if military action would be necessary
(C) what would be necessary militarily for dealing with such an event
(D) what military action would be necessary in order to deal with such an event
(E) the necessity of what kind of military action in order to take for dealing with it

In A and B, them (pronoun) cannot serve to refer to Russian (adjective).
Eliminate A and B.

C: what would be necessary militarily
The WAR OFFICE is likely to decide that MILITARY ACTION is what would be necessary.
As a result, C seems to imply that MILITARY ACTION would be MILITARILY necessary -- an error of redundancy.
Eliminate C.

in order to must serve to modify a VERB.
E: military action in order to
Here, in order to cannot serve to modify action (noun).
Eliminate E.

The correct answer is D.

B: if military action would be necessary
if + SUBJECT + would is always wrong.
Eliminate B.