A stock market crash is an aburpt

[madhur_ahuja]

A stock market crash is an aburpt and unexpected drop in market prices that leads to franatic selling of stocks ,which corresponds with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.


A.
B.to franatic selling of stocks ,which corresponds to a downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
C.to selling stock franatically ,which corresponds with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
D.to franatic selling of stocks , corresponding with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
E.to franatic selling of stocks by corresponding to a downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.

[rahulg83]

A stock market crash is an aburpt and unexpected drop in market prices that leads to franatic selling of stocks ,which corresponds with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.


A.
B.to franatic selling of stocks ,which corresponds to a downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
C.to selling stock franatically ,which corresponds with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
D.to franatic selling of stocks , corresponding with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
E.to franatic selling of stocks by corresponding to a downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.

IMO D

[sakimono]

Hi,

I'd like to give this a shot:

The correct idiom is "corresponds to", not "corresponds with". Eliminate A, C, D.

Eliminate E: The "franatic selling" isn't caused by the downward cycle. Rather, the "franatic selling" causes this cycle.

Choice B is correct: It properly modifies the sellof and uses the proper idiom "corresponds to".

(Also came across same question at https://www.urch.com/forums/gmat-sentenc ... arket.html)

HTH

-sakimono

[rahulg83]

Hi,

I'd like to give this a shot:

The correct idiom is "corresponds to", not "corresponds with". Eliminate A, C, D.

Eliminate E: The "franatic selling" isn't caused by the downward cycle. Rather, the "franatic selling" causes this cycle.

Choice B is correct: It properly modifies the sellof and uses the proper idiom "corresponds to".

(Also came across same question at https://www.urch.com/forums/gmat-sentenc ... arket.html)


HTH

-sakimono

In A, B and C 'which' can't refer to to franatic selling of stocks or to selling stock franatically, so they are out...
between D and E, D is concise, part after comma correctly modifies selling of stocks..
Are you sure that 'corresponding with' is wrong idiom??
BTW https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/correspond+with

[sakimono]

Can we have the OA please? Or is there anybody else who can shed light on this?

Thanks!

[madhur_ahuja]

OA is B.

Very well discussed here too:
https://www.urch.com/forums/gmat-sentenc ... ket-3.html

[rahulg83]

In B, which refer to frantic selling of stocks..
I agree that which can refer to nouns only and frantic selling is a gerund - but from my grammer book - Gerund is an -ing form of verb that acts as noun..

That guy is accepting that which refers to noun, but neglecting the point that which refers to the noun IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING it...Ok, frantic selling is a gerund, but i am 100% sure that 'which' can't refer to this gerund. Period.

[madhur_ahuja]

In B, which refer to frantic selling of stocks..
I agree that which can refer to nouns only and frantic selling is a gerund - but from my grammer book - Gerund is an -ing form of verb that acts as noun..

That guy is accepting that which refers to noun, but neglecting the point that which refers to the noun IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING it...Ok, frantic selling is a gerund, but i am 100% sure that 'which' can't refer to this gerund. Period.

The reasoning given later is that Gerund can act as nouns and hence which can refer to frantic selling.

Is there something wrong in it ?

[rahulg83]

In B, which refer to frantic selling of stocks..
I agree that which can refer to nouns only and frantic selling is a gerund - but from my grammer book - Gerund is an -ing form of verb that acts as noun..

That guy is accepting that which refers to noun, but neglecting the point that which refers to the noun IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING it...Ok, frantic selling is a gerund, but i am 100% sure that 'which' can't refer to this gerund. Period.

The reasoning given later is that Gerund can act as nouns and hence which can refer to frantic selling.

Is there something wrong in it ?

the term which sentence uses is not 'frantic selling' but 'frantic selling of stocks, which'. Now which should ideally refer back to stocks. But this is nonsensical as not stocks but their selling corresponds with downward prices...
Moreover, corresponding with is correct to use and using -ing form after the comma (corresponding with) suggests that frantic selling is similar/analogous to drop in prices and this is exactly what author intends to say in the first sentence.

[thetrystero]

A stock market crash is an aburpt and unexpected drop in market prices that leads to franatic selling of stocks ,which corresponds with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.


My answer: B

A. "corresponds with"
B.to franatic selling of stocks ,which corresponds to a downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
C.to selling stock franatically ,which corresponds with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
no subject for "selling". "which corresponds with" sounds odd.
D.to franatic selling of stocks , corresponding with the downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out.
E.to franatic selling of stocks by corresponding to a downward cycle of prices untill the economy bottoms out. correspondence to downward cycle is not agent for selling stocks.

[thetrystero]

BTW, "franatic" is not a word (not in the English language at least)

https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/franatic