SC question - how to read ; in the question?

[netigen]

Although World War II ended nearly a half century ago, Russia and Japan still have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been reticent to develop closer relations.

(A) have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been
(B) did not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been
(C) have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries being
(D) have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries are
(E) are not signing a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been

In the question above how should the ; in the question sentence be read. if we check on the rules of using a ; this sentence fails, doesn't it?

[dextar]

I'll go for option D here.

I think the use of ; is that two parts of the sentences should be independent of each other,means they should convey (Subject +verb) form. If you apply this rule, then the purpose of ; is fullfilled.

What is the OA?
Am I right?

[yxhh2008]

I will go for A, what is the OA?

[camitava]

Guys, I will also go for A. Let us know the OA...

[tar.goyal]

I will go for A. It correctly uses parallelism and the sentence after ; is can be used independently.

Also, A uses the correct tense as it talks about something which has been happening since some time in past and still continues.

What's the OA?

[netigen]

Answer is A because according to the author the two countries have not developed the closer relations in the past and are still not developing it so it becomes present perfect. He is completely ignoring the ; and he takes the two sentences as connected?

I originally went with D because I did not take the two sentences as connected or dependent.

[lunarpower]

Although World War II ended nearly a half century ago, Russia and Japan still have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been reticent to develop closer relations.

(A) have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been
(B) did not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been
(C) have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries being
(D) have not signed a formal peace treaty; and both countries are
(E) are not signing a formal peace treaty; and both countries have been

In the question above how should the ; in the question sentence be read. if we check on the rules of using a ; this sentence fails, doesn't it?

whoa whoa, kill that noise.

all of these sentences are just ... wrong. big fat wrong with a capital W.

in standard formal american english, a semicolon can only be used correctly when both the clause before it and the clause after it are complete sentences in their own right. in this problem, all five of the 'second clauses' begin with the word and, meaning that none of them is a complete sentence. therefore, the semicolon is used incorrectly in all five.

the OG makes it clear that it will only tolerate semicolons that stitch together two INDEPENDENT clauses (= clauses that are standalone sentences on their own). see the explanations for the answer choices in OG11th #26 and OG verbal supp #10 for confirmation.

--

i hereby brand the source of this question as An Unreliable Source. what is the source?

[camitava]

Ron,
U r great man! Ha ha ha! What a catch! Nop! Seriously speaking, I learned a new thing by ur post... Keep helping in this way, Ron ...

[resilient]

I always learn something when lunar power or camitava chime in. Thanks guys!

[simplyjat]

In this problem, all five of the 'second clauses' begin with the word and, meaning that none of them is a complete sentence. therefore, the semicolon is used incorrectly in all five.

Do you want to say that a sentence can not begin with word AND, thats plain wrong; a sentence can very well begin with and. e.g.
And here comes the champion....

The utmost important rule is do not fix something that is not broken. Even when the source of the question is doubtful, the question does not think that semicolon is broken, so why even want to fix it....

[resilient]

I dont see your point SimplyJat. Are you saying that one of the answer can be right? Lunarpower explained otherwise!

[yxhh2008]

I am totally confused now, each of your point looks make snese for me, what should I do?

[simplyjat]

So first things first....
do not solve somethings that is not broken or not asked

In the original question, and all the answer choices we do not see a punctuation other than semi-colon. This means that question assumes the usage to semi-colon to be correct. Even if the usage of semi-colon is incorrect, as might be argued by some, you end up with no correct choice.

Now coming to lunarpower's explanation, do not use the reasoning that any sentence starting with AND is incomplete. AND as the first word in a sentence is a perfectly valid grammar.

[lunarpower]

AND as the first word in a sentence is a perfectly valid grammar.

nope.

in formal written english, beginning sentences with coordinating conjunctions (and, but, ...) is a big, huge no-no.

this is one of those facts that is assumed to be so elementary that the gmat doesn't even bother to test it, but it's a cold, hard fact nonetheless.

--

incidentally, your supporting quote ('and here comes the champion...') is something that might come out of the mouth of a sports announcer. don't ever forget that there is a huge yawning gap between spoken language - especially the type that might be employed by an announcer, who probably isn't the most scholarly type - and written language.

[Whan]

I am with Lunarpower.

In formal written English, coordinating conjunctions are not located at the beginning.