Why is the answer A?

The other answers contains information we don’t have. We have no idea if they have organized the festival before, maybe last year was the first time. We do know of there’s a similar festival elsewhere or if they want to organize it again even if people show more interests now.

A is the same meaning, just constructed the opposite way. “If x happened last year, we would not hesitate to do y this year” “X didn’t happen last year, so we DID hesitate to do y this year.”

I'd need to see the instructions to make sure what it's asking of you, but judging from the supposed correct answers, I assume it wants you to find the sentence that says the same thing. Only option A fits this scenario. Options B and E add new information. Option C is straight up wrong information. Option D is talking about the future. Only A says the same thing as the sentence in the question.

Here’s why it isn’t any of the others: B talks about years before last year. This is not mentioned in the sentence. It also doesn’t talk about this year. C talks about danger, which is not mentioned in the original sentence. D talks about what conditions would need to happen in the future to run a festival, but the sentence only talks about the past. E talks about a reason that the interest might have decreased, which is not mentioned in the original sentence. A restates the information in the original sentence without anything extra. It’s the right answer.

The question text, simplified, says, If there WAS interest, we WOULD That implies if there WASN'T, we WOULDN'T. Which is A. --- B is incorrect, because we've not been given information about the comparative previous popularity. C is incorrect, because there's nothing about threats or being afraid. D is incorrect, because the question is about past observations, not now or in the future. E is incorrect, because there is no mention of rival festivals.

This is a third conditional. Third conditionals are always counterfactual - you ‘imagine’ a different situation in the past and its consequences. Answer A is what actually happened.

In addition to what all the others have said, I would never say "we hesitate to...". Normally people would say "we are hesitant to...".

A is the only one that doesn't change or add new information. Though I can tell it wasn't written by a native speaker. It just flows awkwardly.

"had there been" means "if there had been... (but there wasn't)".

There’s no mention about harm or fear of something. Yet, they might have some trauma on the festival which was organized last year, since they felt like a failure on this, but even if we put this together, we can’t be sure that they directly felt threatened during the festival. And… A. This one makes a lot of sense, just than C and others. They absolutely regret or imagine something because of inversion(had there been), which implies ‘if’, so I guess their reality is contrasted with their imagination.

Well, A is almost exactly the same as the first sentence. Everything matches. The other options are adding things that weren't even there.

Blimey - there's plenty of natives would struggle with this. Those sentences are so convoluted!

“Had there been more interest last year” clearly implies that “there was less interest last year than we had expected. “We wouldn’t hesitate to organize one this year” implies that we DID actually hesitate this year. Put together, this means, colloquially, “last year, people were not super interested in the festival so we are thinking maybe we might not run one this time. But if lots of people came last year then we’d absolutely run this thing again”.

"Had there been" is short for "if there had been." Both imply a condition that didn't happen, and a response that would have been taken if the condition had been true. A negates both the condition and the response but keeps the meaning. Because no one showed up last year, they don't want to organize anything this year.

Whoever wrote this clunky, convoluted language should be strung up by their toes. But it is A (and I say that with extreme duress). On behalf of anglophones everywhere, I’m sorry.

What kind of a class is this? It seems like apologetics for the most indirect and obfuscated passive political speech. D is close, but it's talking about next year. B is close as well but the sentence above didn't discuss historical interest and b doesn't discuss possibilities for a next festival. A is the only one that captures the reason they didn't do one last year and what they might do this year. Both the sentence given and the answer are written terribly and designed to be confusing. They're in passive tense to try to remove responsibility from the speaker.

Mixed conditionals

A effectively restates the original phrase in a concise manner. It's a little wonky, but it gets the idea across just as fine B isn't consistent with its wording. It goes from using basic words like "a lot" to using more colorful vocabulary and it becomes a mess C denotates irrelevant emotions into a thought that has no emotions to begin with. In writing such as this, it's important not to bring subjectivity into an idea that's meant to be more objective Both D and E introduce facts that aren't at all discussed in the original sentence. Neither next year nor other festivals in the area are discussed, so that information is entirely irrelevant

If there had been more interest in the festival we organised last year, -> the past perfect subjunctive ( a hypothetical situation in the past We wouldn't hesitate to organise another one this year. -> because the festival failed to catch as much attention as expected last year, we're hesitating (now, this year) to organise another one The problem with C is that they are not THREATEN. The word 'threaten' doesn't really sit well with the context.

C is wildly incorrect, there’s no talk about anyone being threatened. A says the same thing as the prompt you read, just worded slightly different

Because A is literally just the question but worded differently

Idk man it's definitely A

Option A is similar to ‘what if’, that is why.

On a side note all these sentences are overly complex and sound passive. I see so many sentences that just can't hold a complete thought. There's no reason to hold another festival this year because of the low turnout last year. This because of that. Not because of that we do not do this.

A) is writen in a very polite tone. It seems perfectly fine to me, but maybe you aren't used to seeing things worded that way.

It's definitely A. A didn't rewrite the content of the first compound sentence, just embellished it a bit. All of the others made changes to the content in ways that changed the meaning.

Which book is this ?

If you understood "subjunctive mood", you would know why A is the correct answer.

should that comma in A not be a semicolon? It's not a seperate clause, it's linking the causation to the effect.