(A) Incorrect . For the errors explained above.
(B) Incorrect . For the following reasons:
- Here, "being less successful" modifies "Lotte Jacobi". It seems that because (or when) Lotte Jacobi was ?less successful?, she earned a small group of admirers. Whether we consider it with "when" or "because", the meaning of the sentence is illogical. If you are wondering from where "when or because" cropped up, look at the below examples:
- Being the most qualified in the group, he was the obvious choice for leading the group.
The above sentence means the same as "Because he was the most qualified, he was the obvious choice_"
- Standing on the stage, Tom announced his resignation.
The above sentence means the same as "When standing on the stage, Tom announced his resignation."
- ?Less? followed by ?compared to?, instead of ?than? ? Same error as in the original sentence
- ?she? compared with Germany ? Same error as in the original sentence
(C) Correct . "Less successful_" works as an adjective, modifying "Lotte Jacobi". The sentence now means that Lotte Jacobi was less successful after she emigrated to New York than she had been in Germany. The sentence uses ?nevertheless? to present a contrasting information: she earned a small group of admirers. Also, the comparison has been corrected in this option.
(D) Incorrect . For the following reasons:
- ?Less? followed by ?compared to? ? Same error as in the original sentence
- ?she? compared to ?Germany? ? Same error as in the original sentence
Some people also believe that the use of ?although? and ?nevertheless? together in this sentence is wrong.
Although we generally don?t use two contrasting words in a sentence, ?nevertheless? may at times be used with other contrasting words to emphasize the contrast. For example:
"Volkswagen considers incident an individual case but nevertheless reported it" ? WSJ.com
Therefore, we cannot say, with surety, that the use of ?although? and ?nevertheless? together in a sentence is incorrect.
(E) Incorrect . For the following reasons:
- Incorrect use of past perfect tense ? The period "after emigrating to New York" is the latter period, and the period "(when she resided) in Germany" was the earlier period. We should use "simple past" for the latter period and "past perfect" for the earlier period. However, as is, the past perfect has been used for both the periods while there is no simple past in this structure. Therefore, it is an incorrect use of "past perfect".
- "She had been_ her native Germany" is an independent clause joined to another independent clause with just a comma. Therefore, this option has a punctuation error.
It is important to note here that this option doesn?t have a comparison error. For example: the below sentence is fine.
She looked more beautiful in the casual wear than in the formal wear.
In the above comparison, the part "she looked" is elided after "than", and this ellipsis is perfectly fine.
Now, if you have some patience left, I?d like to point out that the below sentence will still not be ?entirely? correct:
She was less successful after emigrating to New York than in her native Germany.
Why do I doubt the correctness of the above sentence?
Because the sentence without ellipsis is:
She was less successful after emigrating to New York than she was in her native Germany.
In this sentence, we?re talking about two different time periods, and the sentence would be much clearer in terms of time sequence if we use simple past and past perfect for the different time periods. As is, the sentence uses simple past for both the time periods.
Therefore, I would strongly prefer an option that uses a combination of past perfect and simple past in this sentence.