In 1923, the Supreme Court Declared a Minimum Wage for Women and Children in the District of Columbia as Unconstitutional, and Ruling that it was a form of Price-Fixing and, as Such, an Abridgment of the Right of Contract.

Sayantani Barman logo

bySayantani Barman Experta en el extranjero

Question: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing and, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

(A) the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and
(B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and
(C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia,
(D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court,
(E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional,

“In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing and, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.” - is a GMAT sentence correction question. These types of questions contain grammatical errors in the underlined sentence and we have to choose the correct statement from the options. GMAT sentence correction is a part of GMAT verbal.

Answer: C

Explanation:

The given sentence correction question is tested by the given-below rules:

  • Parallelism
  • Comparison of two elements
  • Modifiers

In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing and, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

(A) This answer choice incorrectly uses the "comma + conjunction ("and" during this sentence)" construction to link the clause "the Supreme Court declared a salary for ladies and kids within the District of Columbia as unconstitutional" to the subordinate clause "ruling that it had been a sort of price-fixing"
(B) It fails to take care of the parallelism between "declared as unconstitutional...Columbia" and "ruling that it had been a style of price-fixing". Additionally, it uses the needlessly wordy phrase "declared as", resulting in awkwardness and redundancy.
(C) Correct. This answer choice acts upon the independent noun "the Supreme Court" with the active verb "declared" to make an entire thought, resulting in an entire sentence
(D) This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "a wage for girls and youngsters within the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court"; the utilisation of the passive ends up in the noun "a minimum wage" being acted upon by "ruling that it absolutely was a kind of price-fixing".
(E) This answer choice fails to make a whole sentence; "In 1923", "when the Supreme Court declared...unconstitutional", and "ruling that it absolutely was a way of price-fixing...contract" are all modifiers; thus there's no independent noun or clause for the modifier to work.

Suggested GMAT Critical Reasoning Questions

Fees Structure

CategoryState
General15556

In case of any inaccuracy, Notify Us! 

Comments


No Comments To Show