High inflationif not followed by correspondingly increasing of lending...
A) "if not followed by correspondingly increasing of lending rates lead" This option has a subject-verb disagreement. The phrase "if not followed by correspondingly increasing of lending rates" should be followed by "leads" instead of "lead." Additionally, the phrase "correspondingly increasing of lending rates" could be rephrased more concisely as "corresponding increase in lending rates."
B) "when not followed by increase in lending rates can correspondingly lead" This option introduces the word "when" instead of "if," which slightly alters the conditional statement. It also uses "can correspondingly lead" to express the potential outcome. While grammatically correct, the wording could be more concise.
C) "if it is not correspondingly followed by increase in lending rates leads" This option adds the pronoun "it" before "is" but lacks parallelism in the verb form. The phrase "if it is not correspondingly followed by increase in lending rates" should be followed by "leads" instead of "lead."
D) "if not followed by corresponding increase in lending rates can lead" This option maintains the conditional statement and corrects the subject-verb agreement. The phrase "corresponding increase in lending rates" is more concise than the wording in option A. This option effectively conveys the intended meaning.
E) "not being followed by increase in corresponding lending rates can lead" This option introduces the phrase "not being followed by increase in corresponding lending rates" but lacks parallelism in the verb form. The phrase should be followed by "can lead" instead of "can lead."
Overall, option D is the most grammatically correct and effectively conveys the intended meaning. It maintains the conditional statement, corrects the subject-verb agreement, and uses concise wording.