ashishd wrote:Framed by traitorous colleagues, Alfred Dreyfus was imprisoned for twelve years before there was exoneration and his freedom.
(A) there was exoneration and his freedom
(B) he was to be exonerated with freedom
(C) being exonerated and freed
(D) exoneration and his freedom
(E) being freed, having been exonerated[/size][/size]

IMO D

[spoiler]IMO: C[/spoiler]

A: there was exoneration and his freedom
Underlined portion is wordy and can be replaced with exonerated(simple past)

Also who was exonerated is not clear

B: Wrong conjunction WITH used. There needs to an AND

C: Short and error free

D: Same error as in the original sentence. Who was exonerated is not clear

E: Wordy and wrong tense used. Having +past participle of a verb is used to show that 1 causes the other/ 1st action has finished/ both actions are happening at different times.

From the original sentence, it seems that both exoneration and freedom happened at the same time. So HAVING BEEN unnecessary changes the sequence of events from the original sentence.

Also in the non underlined portion, simple past tense(framed, imprisoned) is used. Therefore we should not choose present perfect continuous (Having been) in the underlined portion




Cheers
TJ
[/u]

I agree with C. But not able to eliminate E.

IMHO - C