Sentence Correction

The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.

A.that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

B.that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously with but also

C.having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously but

D. cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arising simultaneously but also

E. cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but

Please explain your answers?

i think its E.

eliminate B and D coz yields is singular vs. the plural trenches

eliminate C coz the have been changes the meaning of the stem

i'm dicey on A.

IMO E.

B/D do not have a subject-verb agreement (Yields(V) Vs Trenches(S))

"Having Been" is incorrect tense used in the option C.

A states that "The first trenches......., have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered socieities ........ ".

"Evidence that ... " in E is correct rather than "Evidence for ..... " in A.

yes it is E.
Thanks for explanations.

Usage of "that" is redundant in this sentence.. we don't need a relative pronoun here.. because the sentence after "the first trenches" is not a subordinate clause..
so u can straightaway remove a and b
c is as such wrong for using having..
between d and e.. d is wrong because it uses "yields"..

good explanation thanks

dumb.doofus wrote:Usage of "that" is redundant in this sentence.. we don't need a relative pronoun here.. because the sentence after "the first trenches" is not a subordinate clause..
so u can straightaway remove a and b
c is as such wrong for using having..
between d and e.. d is wrong because it uses "yields"..

can you explain when "that" is necessary and when it is not? thanks!

dumb.doofus wrote:Usage of "that" is redundant in this sentence.. we don't need a relative pronoun here.. because the sentence after "the first trenches" is not a subordinate clause..
so u can straightaway remove a and b
c is as such wrong for using having..
between d and e.. d is wrong because it uses "yields"..

Can someone please tell why "that" can't act as relative pronoun i.e. telling more about trenches here ?

goelmohit2002 wrote:

dumb.doofus wrote:Usage of "that" is redundant in this sentence.. we don't need a relative pronoun here.. because the sentence after "the first trenches" is not a subordinate clause..
so u can straightaway remove a and b
c is as such wrong for using having..
between d and e.. d is wrong because it uses "yields"..

Can someone please tell why "that" can't act as relative pronoun i.e. telling more about trenches here ?

sure, "that" can be used as a relative pronoun, but that is not the main difference we are looking for here. I think were arising makes option A less appealing coz there is no need to change the tense when without doing so makes the sentence and meaning clear.

Hi,
I am again opening this thread just to clarify a doubt.

E.cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but

How you guys feel about WITH BUT . To me it looks awkward.

Thanks

Is that an idiom ? or a correct usage as per the GMAT ?

gmat740 wrote:Hi,
I am again opening this thread just to clarify a doubt.

E.cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but

How you guys feel about WITH BUT . To me it looks awkward.

Thanks

WITH BUT i am also confused. and in B and D but also is unidiomatic right ? As it is a comparison used like not only ...but also.. ? Or only but also can exist too ?
Can anyone please clarify