<p>Radio frequencies have to be allocated to users so that
[one transmission will not interfere with another].
(A) one transmission will not interfere with another
(B) each transmission cannot interfere with anothers
(C) transmitting them will not interfere with one
another
(D) no transmission is interfered with by another
(E) no one transmission would have interference with
the other</p>
<p>I get why the answer is A. But I want to know how I should change D and E so that they both make sense.</p>
<p>For D, I first thought about the two prepositions "with" and "by."
Should I correct it to "no transmission is interfered by another"? (In other words, I'm asking where exactly choice D errs..)</p>
<p>For E, "have interference" sounds like an idiom to me. What's the meaning? And isn't "one ... the other" phrase okay?</p>
<p>yeah that makes sense but someone told me that there’s this expression “to have interference with,” which means an interference that is more indirect… By any chance, do you know this phrase?</p>
<p>Choice (A) is the most concise and least awkward. There’s nothing objectively wrong with choice (D) except that it ends in a preposition (awkward) and is written in the passive voice. Choice (E), besides being unnecessarily wordy, is incorrect because “the other” should be replaced with the non-specific “another.”</p>
<p>I don’t believe that there is an applicable idiom (i.e. to have interference with) of the kind that you’re searching for. The question sentence is a scientific/electronics statement of fact – i.e. radio waves interfere with one another. Apart from (A) the other choices are simply bad English and are not easily correctable.</p>