For protection from the Sun, the Mojave...

[RonPurewal]

each dwelling was a roof ... supported by stuff.

to see an analogous structure, look at SC #19 in the OG verbal supplement 2nd edition (#22 the most recent 2016 edition).
just replace 'each character' with 'each' (the sentence is still ok with this change).
you'll get a sentence that works in pretty much exactly the same way as this one, with 'inside its...' playing the same role as 'supported by...' here.

[DiJ92]

I am still not clear on why E is incorrect. The sentence refers to 'shades' and naturally, roofs has to follow, else it might mean that several 'shades' had only a single roof.

Will be grateful if MGMAT instructors care to clear my confusion. Thanks in advance...!!!

the main problem with (e) is the fact that "are" is in the present tense; that's illogical, considering that the mojave "lived" (past tense) in those homes.
taken literally, then, this sentence is describing the current conditions of the houses, even though the mojave don't live in them anymore.
that doesn't fly.

Dear Ron, even though I read this post, i still do not understand why we should use past tense (were) to replace (are). The context is that Mojave do not live in these dwellings any more. It is possible that these dwellings still exist and still are being a roof. Therefore I think that the present tense is reasonable. Could you please correct my understanding? Thanks

[Chelsey Cooley]

Rule of thumb: only change tense mid-sentence if there's a clear reason to do so. If it seems like they're doing it illogically (or if you need a stretch of logic like the one you describe in your post), it's probably bad.

That said, 'roofs' instead of 'roof' is a problem as well, and if you're more comfortable with it, you can use that to eliminate (E) instead.

[NehaM981]

hi

Sorry for bumping the post .

But c , d ,e are wrong because with is a prepositional phrase and it modifies the clause which is not making sense her .

Am i correct ??

Thanks
Neha

[NehaM981]

hi

Becuse comma + prepositional phrase modify the clause

Am I correct ??

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

hi

Becuse comma + prepositional phrase modify the clause

Am I correct ??

Thanks

that's a valid observation, yes.