<p>"Societies acting through their governments make the rules to state which acts are illegal, but although war is the most violent of human activities, it has not been declared illegal by any of the world’s governments or their agencies."</p>
<p>(A) to state
(B) stating
(C) when they state
(D) that are stating
(E) where they state</p>
<p>Explanation for Correct Answer B : Choice (B) is correct. It avoids the error of the original by using an idiomatic verb form, the present participle “stating,” to modify the noun “rules.”</p>
<p>But how can we understand that the sentence wants to say that the rules (not the societies) state which acts are illegal? I thought the sentence meant to say that societies' purpose in making the rules was to "state which acts are illegal" and accordingly A would be the correct answer.</p>
<p>This question seems ambiguous to me, so please tell me how to avoid misunderstanding questions like this.</p>
<p>Thank you very much.</p>
<p>you need the gerundive to modify rules, hence stating.</p>
<p>I mean, I thought that “state” modified “societies” (therefore A would be correct). How to know which word does a modifier modify?</p>
<p>For something to modify something else it has to be an adjective. The adjective of a verb is called the gerundive, and using ends in -ing.</p>
<p>I think you misunderstand me. How to know that “state” modifies “rules” but not “societies”?
If “state” modifies “societies”, how do you correct that sentence?
Thank you very much : )</p>
<p>You have a point. It’s more clear if we recast and simplify the sentence:</p>
<p>“To state which acts are illegal societies make rules.”</p>
<p>This has a different meaning from:</p>
<p>“Societies make rules stating which acts are illegal.”</p>
<p>As another example consider:</p>
<p>(1) “The candidate made a speech to elaborate his position on the financial crisis.”</p>
<p>Recast as: “To elaborate his position on the financial crisis the candidate made a speech.”</p>
<p>What about:</p>
<p>(2) “The candidate made a speech elaborating his position on the financial crisis.”</p>
<p>In practice the writer of (1) probably meant (2). But perhaps not. In (1) what was the content of the speech? Perhaps the history of the financial crisis, or the background of the candidate, etc. In (2) the content of the speech is very clear.</p>
<p>Are we over-thinking this question? Most likely yes. That’s one of the downsides of examining the SAT questions with too great care.</p>
<p>Thank you so much, I’m glad that you understand my question. So basically luck still plays an important role in the SAT <em>sigh</em></p>