SC: Several financial officers of the company spoke

[thanghnvn]

[quote="roller0081"]I came across this problem in GMATprep Practice Test 2:

Several financial officers of the company spoke on condition that they not be named in the press reports.

A. that they not be named
B. that their names will not be used
C. that their names are not used
D. of not having their names
E. of not naming them

condition of somthing
is idiom
condition of doing
is not idiom

is my thinking correct?

[tim]

It is not. You cannot unilaterally categorize a construction as an idiom or not an idiom. You also need to be careful not to be so quick to consider everything in terms of idioms (this is not the first post of yours I've come across today where you seem overly focused on idioms).

[cristyc401]

Hi Ron,

Can you please help me understand why option D - of not being named - is incorrect in this specific question. Is it because it uses passive voice and here we need active voice.

I understand the question posted above does not have this option. However, the question that I saw in my test had the option "of not being named"

Thanks

[akhilesh.makhena]

One more split, apart from subjunctive mood, I found is that the questionnaire is talking about some event in the past and options B) and C) are talking about events in the present(not the universal truth or habit, so this eliminates possibility of present tense usage) and future(can't be used with a past event) respectively. Options D) and E) are too awkward to be correct.

Ron, please confirm if my understanding of the problem is correct.

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

Can you please help me understand why option D - of not being named - is incorrect in this specific question. Is it because it uses passive voice and here we need active voice.

I understand the question posted above does not have this option. However, the question that I saw in my test had the option "of not being named"

Thanks

The correct answer is passive, too.

Do you have a screen shot?
If you saw that, then the only issue is idiomatic. But this is not a BASIC idiom. (The GMAT no longer tests "weird" or "obscure" idioms, and in fact hasn't tested them for years.)

A screen shot would be VERY helpful here. I've never seen a GMAT Prep SC problem with the same prompt, but with different answer choices.

[RonPurewal]

One more split, apart from subjunctive mood, I found is that the questionnaire is talking about some event in the past and options B) and C) are talking about events in the present(not the universal truth or habit, so this eliminates possibility of present tense usage) and future(can't be used with a past event) respectively. Options D) and E) are too awkward to be correct.

"On condition that xxxx" is equivalent to a demand. (In exchange for doing something, I'm demanding that xxxx.)

Demands/requests/statements of importance take this subjunctive thing.

This sentence actually DOES consider future events, so your statements about the future tense are inaccurate. The normal present and future are wrong only because they're incompatible with "that" + a demand (which requires the special form, "subjunctive" or whatever it's called).

[RonPurewal]

Similar sentences can very well be written with either of these 2 tenses——as long as it's written in a way that doesn't require the "subjunctive".

E.g.,
The financial officers were willing to speak to journalists only because they will not be named in any of those journalists' articles.
(correct if the articles haven't been written yet. "Will" ––> "would" if the articles have already been written.)

The financial officers will speak to journalists only if they are not named in any of those journalists' articles.
(In English, the future tense isn't used with "if"; the present tense is used instead, even if the meaning is future. No, GMAC will not test this——but you should [i]recognize it as "not wrong", at least, so that you don't mistakenly eliminate it.)

[RonPurewal]

Options D) and E) are too awkward to be correct.

"Awkward" is not an error.

Even if "awkwardness" were actually an error, it would clearly be an inappropriate criterion for a standardized test, since it's zero percent objective (and absolutely impossible for non-native speakers——and even native speakers, if they lack extensive experience with the written word——to grasp).

--

Worth knowing:

OG answer explanations are outsourced to writers with considerably less talent, presumably to cut costs. (The problems and answer choices, which are generally of impeccable quality, are NOT outsourced to cheap labor.)

If an OG explanation ever asserts that something is wrong because it's "awkward", that just means the writer couldn't figure out how to explain what's actually wrong.
Yes, seriously.

[mikalaisin]

Hi,
i have a question about B. Even though i understood that subjunctive is needed i picked B.

Subjunctive is formed with "That" + "Infinitive form of the verb"

(A) Condition that be named
(B)Condition that their will not be used.

Can you please explain me why can't we use construction B?

[RonPurewal]

Condition that their will not be used.

'will be' is a future form of a verb. it's no longer the correct form. the correct form for this construction has no tense at all; it's just 'to __' minus the 'to'.

but... this example confuses me.
are you trying to use 'will' as a noun?
where is the word 'names'? clearly you can't just leave that word out!