In spite of discovering new sources of oil exploration in the Canadian...
Meaning Analysis
- In spite of discovering new sources of oil exploration in the Canadian oil sands and along the Norwegian coast,
- OPEC estimates oil companies,
- in order to conserve margins,
- to be more conservative in setting exploration targets than
- they have been in the past.
The sentence presents a contrast. It states that even though new sources of oil have been discovered, OPEC estimates oil companies to be more conservative in setting exploration targets than they have been in the past.
Error Analysis
SV – The subject verb pairs have been indicated below:
- OPEC - estimates
- Oil companies - to be more conservative
- They - have been
All the SV pairs agree in number.
Verbs – The verb tenses have been used correctly to communicate the intended meaning.
Pronouns – The pronoun “they” unambiguously refers to “oil companies”. Note that the meaning of the sentence is very clear. The author compares two things:
- In the future – oil companies will be more conservative
- In the past – oil companies have not been this conservative
Note that it does not make logical sense for “they” to refer to targets. Here is the sentence with “they” referring to “targets”.
- OPEC estimates oil companies to be more conservative in setting targets than targets have been in the past.
- In this version of the sentence, the comparison is no longer clear.
- The author intended to compare the oil companies action in the past and the estimated action in the future.
- This comparison structure instead compares action of oil companies in the future with the level of targets in the past.
- Thus, logically, “they” cannot refer to “targets”.
Parallelism – The construction in this sentence is absolutely parallel.
- OPEC estimates
- oil companies to be more conservative in doing something
- than the oil companies have been in the past.
So essentially the state of oil companies has been compared. What its state will be in the future with what its state was in the past. Logically this comparison is absolutely parallel. Note that different verb tenses have been used but that is acceptable to communicate the intended meaning since the comparison has two elements – one in the future and the other in the past.
Idioms – This sentence uses a construction with the word “estimates”. This word can be used in the following ways:
- A estimates B to do C
- A estimates that B does C
Note that this choice uses the first construction.
This choice is correct as is.
Answer Choices
A
oil companies, in order to conserve margins, to be more conservative in setting exploration targets than they have been
Correct
B
oil companies, in order to conserve margins, to set exploration targets more conservatively than they were
The simplified version of this choice is as follows: (only including the comparison aspect)
OPEC estimates oil companies to set targets more conservatively than they were in the past.
Notice the comparison here.
- Oil companies to set targets
- more conservatively than
- They were in the past.
This choice has two errors:
- Verb Tense:
- Notice per the intended meaning, the state in the past time frame was expressed as “have been”, indicating a progressive action.
- Now notice in this choice, the action/state in the past time frame has been expressed using “were”, indicating a point in time action.
- Thus, the verb tense does not communicate the intended meaning.
- Meaning - This choice communicates ambiguous meaning as explained below.
The construction of this choice is such that the pronoun “they” may refer to either of the two nouns, leading in both cases concrete errors.
“they” refers to “targets”:
- Oil companies to set
- Targets
- The targets were set in the past.
In this case, notice that the word “set” has been repeated. Now this reference while leads to logical meaning, changes the intended meaning. Per the original choice, it was clear that it is the oil companies that set the targets in the past as well. But per this choice, since the construction “the targets were set” has been used, we longer know who is the one who set these targets. Thus, this reference of “they” leads to change in meaning of the intended sentence and hence is not correct.
“they” refers to “oil companies”:
- Oil companies to set Targets
- The oil companies were set in the past.
In this case, notice that the word “set” has been repeated. In fact, the only form of word “set” that can be repeated here is “set”. We cannot repeat the word “setting” since this form does not appear anywhere in the sentence.
And hence you can see that this sentence is grammatically as well as logically incorrect. Per this choice “companies were set in the past”. This is non-sensical.
Thus, choice B is incorrect.
C
oil companies to conserve margins and to set exploration targets more conservatively than they have
- In spite of discovering new sources of oil exploration in the Canadian oil sands and along the Norwegian coast,
- OPEC estimates oil companies
- to conserve margins and
- to set exploration targets
- more conservatively than they have in the past.
This choice changes the intended meaning of the sentence by creating a list that is different from that in the original choice. Notice how the two elements in list per this choice are "to conserve margins", "to set exploration targets". This is not the intended meaning because per the original sentence, the exploration targets are to be set in order to conserve margins. This purpose is not expressed appropriately in this answer choice.
D
that oil companies conserve margins, set exploration targets more conservatively than they have been
This choice has similar error as discussed in choice C.
E
that oil companies, so that they conserve margins, will be more conservative than they have been in setting of exploration targets
- In spite of discovering new sources of oil exploration in the Canadian oil sands and along the Norwegian coast,
- OPEC estimates that oil companies,
- so that they conserve margins,
- will be more conservative
- than they have been in setting of exploration targets in the past.
This choice has two errors.
Notice that the sentence seems to convey that the setting of exploration targets happened only in the past. This is not the case. Here are some possible ways to present the intended comparison:
- By moving “in setting of exploration targets”
- Oil companies will be more conservative in setting of exploration targets than they have been in the past.
- In this case, the comparison became clear and unambiguous with the correct placement of "in setting of exploration targets”.
- By removing “in the past”
- Oil companies will be more conservative than they have been in setting of exploration targets.
- Notice that “have been” provides the needed context that this is the event that happened in the past.
- “in setting of exploration” now unambiguously applies to both the items of comparison and is not restricted to just “in the past”.
The usage "so that they conserve.." is awkward here. "so that..." is typically used to provide purpose of an action. In this case, no such action has been stated. Consider the following sentence which illustrates the usage of "so that".
Michael gave money to the hospital so that the hospital management could buy the equipment needed for lab tests.