Less than 35 years after the release of

[andrew1]

Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, their descendants, popularly known as killer bees, had migrated as far north as southern Texas.

A) Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,

B) In less than 35 years since releasing African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,

C) In less than the 35 years since African honeybees had been released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,

D) It took less than 35 years from the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, when

E) It took less than the 35 years after the time that African honeybees were released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, and then

Answer: A

Could you please explain why answer choices B and C are incorrect? Thanks!

[esledge]

Two main splits:

(1) "Less than 35 years after" vs. "In less than (the) 35 years since."

Not only is (A) 1 or 2 words shorter in this split, but the extra words in (B) and (C) don’t really serve a purpose. "In" is not necessary, as the meaning in all three is that within 35 years, the migration occurred. Likewise, the "the" is optional.

Also, there is a subtle meaning difference. "Since" is typically used for ongoing actions, implying that the bees were released 35 years ago and in the time "since" then the migration has occurred. I think this would require the non-underlined main verb to be "have migrated." On the other hand, "after" simply means that whenever the release happened, by 35 years later on the time-line, the migration had already occurred. This justifies the use of the past perfect "had migrated" in the main clause of the sentence.

(2) The form of the word "release"

(A) "the release": This is OK, as it is a noun. "...35 years after noun (the event, in this case the release of bees)

(B) "releasing": The -ing form makes the entire phrase a modifier. It forces us to ask and answer the question "WHO released the bees?" The answer must follow the comma after the modifying phrase, but instead of a logical bee releaser (people), we find the bee’s descendents after the comma.

(C) "had been released": passive voice, which could be OK, but we don’t really need it here. Generally, stick with active unless you need passive voice, or unless the other choices all have other errors.

[supshalu]

Emily,

But there is not ANTERIORITY shown here..
I mean.. HAD Past Participle.. should have a SIMPLE PAST to it right ??

PLS HELP

[supshalu]

Two main splits:

(1) "Less than 35 years after" vs. "In less than (the) 35 years since."

Not only is (A) 1 or 2 words shorter in this split, but the extra words in (B) and (C) don’t really serve a purpose. "In" is not necessary, as the meaning in all three is that within 35 years, the migration occurred. Likewise, the "the" is optional.

Also, there is a subtle meaning difference. "Since" is typically used for ongoing actions, implying that the bees were released 35 years ago and in the time "since" then the migration has occurred. I think this would require the non-underlined main verb to be "have migrated." On the other hand, "after" simply means that whenever the release happened, by 35 years later on the time-line, the migration had already occurred. This justifies the use of the past perfect "had migrated" in the main clause of the sentence.

(2) The form of the word "release"

(A) "the release": This is OK, as it is a noun. "...35 years after noun (the event, in this case the release of bees)

(B) "releasing": The -ing form makes the entire phrase a modifier. It forces us to ask and answer the question "WHO released the bees?" The answer must follow the comma after the modifying phrase, but instead of a logical bee releaser (people), we find the bee’s descendents after the comma.

(C) "had been released": passive voice, which could be OK, but we don’t really need it here. Generally, stick with active unless you need passive voice, or unless the other choices all have other errors.

There's no SIMPLE PAST Here... EMILY pls explain

[Ben Ku]

supshalu:
Often, the past perfect tense is used to describe the PREVIOUS past action and the simple past is used for the LATER past action. However, in some cases, a TIME REFERENCE (such as a date) can be used in place of a past action.

By 1985, he HAD BEEN living in the country for over ten years.

[fenruyun]

Two main splits:

(1) "Less than 35 years after" vs. "In less than (the) 35 years since."

Not only is (A) 1 or 2 words shorter in this split, but the extra words in (B) and (C) don’t really serve a purpose. "In" is not necessary, as the meaning in all three is that within 35 years, the migration occurred. Likewise, the "the" is optional.

But if we adjust the whole sentence into"their descendants, popularly known as killer bees, had migrated as far north as southern Texas, less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil", isn't it a little bit awkward? shouldn't we add an"in" before "less than..." so that it clearly means within sometime,something happened?

thank u

[RonPurewal]

i wrote a ton about this problem at this link:
gmatprep-question-need-help-t1864.html

[momo32]

Dear Ron,

May you explain E.

thx

[RonPurewal]

Dear Ron,

May you explain E.

thx

Please read the thread linked in the post above yours. There are currently 51 posts, so your question(s) is/are almost certainly answered somewhere in there.

If you still have questions, after reading the entire thread, please post specific questions. (On the big thread, please——let's try to keep this stuff in one place.)
I.e., "Explain E" doesn't really mean much. What part(s) of E are you actually having trouble with? What do you understand? What don't you understand? Etc.

Thanks.