Avoiding split-brain syndrome may be possible in patients undergoing split-brain surgery if the corpus collusum is not severed entirely, but instead is left partially intact
A. Avoiding split-brain syndrome may be possible
B. Avoiding split-brain syndrome may be a possibility
C. It may be possible to avoid split-brain syndrome
D. It may be possible that split-brain syndrome is avoided
E. Avoiding split-brain syndrome is possible
Source: 800score.com
I eliminated A, B, C, D because, may be and possible convey redundant information.
Additionally, C, D has the construction of "it" as a place-holder subject. Though this is not incorrect, it is unnecessarily wordy.
Chose E as the answer.
But the OA is C. The explantion given is,
The answer corrects the modifier error in the original sentence. Because the phrase "in patients undergoing split-brain surgery" is intended to modify the noun "split-brain syndrome", they should be placed next to each other in the sentence.
I dont understand why the phrases "split-brain syndrome" and "in patients undergoing split-brain surgery" should be placed next to each other. Split-brain syndrome cannot possibly happen anywhere else, but in the patient undergoing the split-brain surgery.
Is this a correct analysis ?
My second question, is the construction "it acting as a place-holder subject" preferable to the costruction "an -ing form acting as a noun" or "an infinitive construction to + verb" ?
which one of these is preferred as a general rule
1. Playing basketball in the rain is not advisable.
2. To play basketball in the rain is not advisable.
3. It is not advisable to play basketball in the rain.