SC question-Last week local shrimpers held a news conference

[aolas14]

Hi,
Please help me with following question from the GMAT Official Guide.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

I am lost between answer choices B and E; however, the correct answer is B. What is wrong with choice E? Please help. Thanks.

[bubbliiiiiiii]

Hi,
Please help me with following question from the GMAT Official Guide.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

I am lost between answer choices B and E; however, the correct answer is B. What is wrong with choice E? Please help. Thanks.

In B, ing form is used as a modifier to describe law and the singular 'is' correctly agrees with singular compliance.

In E, the 'to' changes the meaning of sentence. Instead of describing law, the 'to' states that compliance is purposefully done to require devices, making meaning ambigous.

Hope it helps.

[Tommy Wallach]

Hey Guys,

I'll weigh in on this one:

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

(A) Subject-verb agreement: "compliance" doesn't match with "protect". Also "requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets" is highly awkward. Would prefer something without the "be".

(B) CORRECT!

(C) Same subject-verb agreement error as (A).

(D) "to require" is idiomatically incorrect as a modifier of "laws". Again, "compliance" doesn't match with "are protecting".

(E) "to require" error again.

Hope that helps!

-t

[GMATGuruNY]

Hi,
Please help me with following question from the GMAT Official Guide.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

I am lost between answer choices B and E; however, the correct answer is B. What is wrong with choice E? Please help. Thanks.

Aside from the idiomatic error in E, there is a meaning issue.

An infinitive modifier implies INTENDED ACTION: an action that MIGHT happen in the future.
SC18 in the OG13: an organization TO TAKE CHARGE of computer security planning.
Here, the organization is intended TO TAKE CHARGE.
The organization is NOT taking charge right now.
In fact, it is entirely possible that the organization might NEVER take charge.

In the SC above, the laws are ALREADY requiring turtle-excluder devices.
It for this reason that the shrimpers' compliance IS PROTECTING adult sea-turtles.
Thus, the infinitive modifier in E (to require) does not convey the intended meaning.

[RBBmba@2014]

Aside from the idiomatic error in E, there is a meaning issue.

@ GMATGuruNY - Could you please clarify what this idiomatic error is ?

Can we say that the SC at hand actually describes the LAWS, hence requiring -- the VERB-ing Modifier following the NOUN LAWS -- is correct ?

But when we need to express the INTENT/PURPOSE of any LAWS, we'd have to use An infinitive modifier -- "to + verb".

Is the above interpretation correct ? And did you mean the same by idiomatic error in E ?

An infinitive modifier implies INTENDED ACTION: an action that MIGHT happen in the future.

I'm BIT confused here.

Is it ALWAYS TRUE on GMAT ? Can't there be any VALID usage of infinitive modifier associated with past tense (of the MAIN Verb in the sentence) ?

[RBBmba@2014]

Hi Verbal Experts - could any of you please share your feedback to clarify my concerns above ?

Look forward to your thoughts. Much thanks in advance!

[GMATGuruNY]

Aside from the idiomatic error in E

@ GMATGuruNY - Could you please clarify what this idiomatic error is ?

Consider law + to + VERB unidiomatic -- sufficient reason to eliminate D and E.

Can't there be any VALID usage of infinitive modifier associated with past tense (of the MAIN Verb in the sentence) ?

Generally, an infinitive that follows a past tense clause will serve to express an action that happens or is intended to happen AFTER the past tense verb.
SC70 in the OG12:
His studies of ice-polished rocks led Louis Agassiz to propose the concept.
Here, the action expressed by the infinitive (to propose) happens AFTER the past tense verb (led).

[[email protected]]

Hello Everyone!

Let's tackle this question, one issue at a time, and narrow it down to the correct choice! To start, here is the original question with any major differences between the options highlighted in orange:

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

After a quick glance over the options, there are a couple places we can focus on:

1. requiring / require (Idioms)
2. protect / is protecting / are protecting (Subject-Verb Agreement)

Let's start off with #2 on our list: subject-verb agreement. No matter which way we go with this, it will eliminate at least 2 options rather quickly. The first thing we need to do is figure out what the subject is:

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

Now that we know the verb needs to work with the singular subject "compliance," we can rule out any options that don't agree:

(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

We can eliminate options A, C, & D because their verbs are plural, and they don't agree with their singular subject! See - how easy was that?

Now let's go back to #1 on our list: to require / requiring. This is an issue of idioms! By using the wrong idiom here, it actually changes the overall meaning:

(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

This is CORRECT! It's idiomatically correct to say that "laws requiring X" here. It's clear that the law currently requires these changes to be made already. It also uses proper subject-verb agreement (compliance / is protecting).

(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

This is INCORRECT because the phrase "laws to require X" isn't idiomatically correct in English. It also changes the meaning somewhat - the law that exists today will require people to use turtle-excluder devices in the future? That doesn't really make sense with how laws work. Laws require actions to be taken immediately - not in the future.


There you have it - option B is the correct choice! If we focus on the major differences between the options, we can eliminate the wrong options quickly to get to the right one!


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

[vietnam47]

Hi,
Please help me with following question from the GMAT Official Guide.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

I am lost between answer choices B and E; however, the correct answer is B. What is wrong with choice E? Please help. Thanks.

Aside from the idiomatic error in E, there is a meaning issue.

An infinitive modifier implies INTENDED ACTION: an action that MIGHT happen in the future.
SC18 in the OG13: an organization TO TAKE CHARGE of computer security planning.
Here, the organization is intended TO TAKE CHARGE.
The organization is NOT taking charge right now.
In fact, it is entirely possible that the organization might NEVER take charge.

In the SC above, the laws are ALREADY requiring turtle-excluder devices.
It for this reason that the shrimpers' compliance IS PROTECTING adult sea-turtles.
Thus, the infinitive modifier in E (to require) does not convey the intended meaning.

thank you Hunt, your explanation of "to do" in this problem is great.
could you tell me the difference between "to do' and "for doing" when they modify a noun. for example, can you give us examples of
"law for doing" and " law to do".
"law for learning english in socialist countries require that everybody report their study".
"law to learn english in socialist countries requires that everybody report their study"
in the first sentence, the learning has happened. in the second , the learning has not happened.
am i right?, pls explain more. thank you very much.

[tinku143]

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying
that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

requiring that… protect - is a modifier modifying laws.
Subject is compliance hence compliance … protects is correct and not compliance … protect.

(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect

(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
Compliance with laws … is protecting This is a correct choice

(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
This distorts the meaning of the sentence.

(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
Compliance… are protecting is incorrect 'compliance' is singular. Hence we need 'is protecting'...'are' is incorrect. 'to require' is incorrect here.

(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
Compliance with laws to require is unidiomatic.