Salsa Dancers- A good one !

[imhimanshu]

Salsa Dancers warm up before every performance by doing a series of warmup and stretching exercises, and it reduces the chance of injury.

a) exercises, and it reduces

b) exercises, which reduces

c) exercises, reducing

d) exercises, the routine reduces

e) exercises, so the routine reduces

Guys please post your answers with explanations
[spoiler]IMO (C)[/spoiler]
Thanks

[niraj_a]

i believe this would be C himanshu. 'it' needs a valid reference and the stem fails in that sense.

C comes close, but in order for C t obe correct, the comma needs to be a semicolon, because a comma can't join two independent clauses.

[pandeyvineet24]

I think the answer should be D.

In C, what is reducing the chances of injury, the Salsa dancers or the warmup and stretching exercises ?

[mbadreams]

I go with C too..

In D the routine reduces can follow exercises only if there was a semi colon after exercises, as they are 2 independent clauses.

B is wrong, because which is used to introduce a non essential modifier..but "...the cause of injury" is essential to complete sentence.

In A, the "it" is ambiguous as we don't know what it references.

In E, "so the routine reduces" is awkward..and incorrect...

So that comes down to C. reducing is parallel to doing too.This is what I feel.

[Stacey Koprince]

Received a PM asking me to respond. This isn't a great question.

First, it uses the exact same opening in every single answer choice ("exercises,"). The real test does not do this.

Second, one of the major issues (apparently) being tested is whether the information is properly two generally separate pieces of information (meriting two independent clauses, as shown in the original sentence) or whether the information is properly connected, with the later info subordinate to the earlier info.

So which is it? From a logical standpoint, could the two pieces of info be separate? Sure. From a logical standpoint, could the second piece be subordinate to the first? Sure. If both interpretations are possible, we're supposed to go with the original meaning... but the original sentence is clearly wrong because there's no appropriate noun reference for the singular pronoun "it." Okay, so A can't be right.

B and C make the second piece of info subordinate. So they're apparently both wrong? (See below.)

D has two independent clauses... but connects those two independent clauses with only a comma, which is not allowed.

E changes the meaning unacceptably: E makes it seem that the fact that the dancers warm up then causes the routine (the warm-up) to reduce injury. But that's circular: the warm-up itself reduces injury; the warm-up doesn't cause the warm-up to reduce injury.

If we go just by grammar errors, then it has to be C because it doesn't contain any grammatical errors, and the others all do. But the real test wouldn't present a question to me in quite this way, for the two reasons I listed above.