Adjective clause

[venmic]

American writer Donald Barthelme, who is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs.

(A) American writer Donald Barthelme, who is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs
(B) American writer Donald Barthelme, who is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories that combine stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs into a characterization
(C) American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs into a characterization
(D) American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories that are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs
(E) American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which, characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs


D

please explain

[rohit_gmat]

American writer Donald Barthelme, who is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs.

(A) American writer Donald Barthelme, who is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs
(B) American writer Donald Barthelme, who is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories that combine stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs into a characterization
(C) American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs into a characterization
(D) American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories that are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs
(E) American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which, characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs


D

please explain

A, B - are missing a verb.. its just saying "Donald Barthelme....."

C,E - fix the first part.. "Donald is renowned..." .. but in the second half they don't really mention what is it really about the epiphanic short stories.. (no verb)

D- fixes the problem by using "that are characterized"

hope my explanation helps... :S

[GmatKiss]

IMO:D Parallel!!

[e-GMAT]

Let us start by getting the meaning of the sentence.

It means that American writer American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories. His short stories are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs. The sentence does use some not-so-common literary terms but do not let them bother you. Let us just concentrate on the broad meaning and the grammatical structure of the sentence.

Error Analysis: There are two relative pronoun modifiers in the sentences, "who is..." and "which are...". Since the relative pronoun clauses are always dependent clauses, this sentence lacks the main clause with a proper subject-verb pair. As you can see the subject -Donald Barthelme does not have a verb.

Choice A: The sentence is not grammatically correct because it has a fragment as discussed above.

Choice B: Same as Choice A

Choice C: Relative pronoun clause "which combining... characterization" again lacks a definite verb. "Combining" alone without any is/are/was/were/am cannot be a verb.

Choice D: Correct choice. "American writer... short stories" is the main clause with proper subject-verb pair Donald Barthelme - is renowned. Noun modifier "that are... playful non-sequiturs" correctly modifies "short stories". The sentence is clear and the meaning is effectively conveyed.

Choice E: Relative pronoun clause "which, characterized... non-sequiturs" lacks a definite verb. This choice is a fragment again.

Hope this helps.

[venmic]

Thankyou all

[vishal.pathak]

Let us start by getting the meaning of the sentence.

It means that American writer American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories. His short stories are characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs. The sentence does use some not-so-common literary terms but do not let them bother you. Let us just concentrate on the broad meaning and the grammatical structure of the sentence.

Error Analysis: There are two relative pronoun modifiers in the sentences, "who is..." and "which are...". Since the relative pronoun clauses are always dependent clauses, this sentence lacks the main clause with a proper subject-verb pair. As you can see the subject -Donald Barthelme does not have a verb.

Choice A: The sentence is not grammatically correct because it has a fragment as discussed above.

Choice B: Same as Choice A

Choice C: Relative pronoun clause "which combining... characterization" again lacks a definite verb. "Combining" alone without any is/are/was/were/am cannot be a verb.

Choice D: Correct choice. "American writer... short stories" is the main clause with proper subject-verb pair Donald Barthelme - is renowned. Noun modifier "that are... playful non-sequiturs" correctly modifies "short stories". The sentence is clear and the meaning is effectively conveyed.

Choice E: Relative pronoun clause "which, characterized... non-sequiturs" lacks a definite verb. This choice is a fragment again.

Hope this helps.

why is E a fragment. Cant we consider "is renowned" as the verb

Regards,
Vishal