Sentence Correction - 1 Flashcards

Question

Prepositions | Name some

Answer 1

* In * Under * By * For ## Footnote a word governing, and usually preceding, a noun or pronoun and expressing a relation to another word or element in the clause, as in “the man on the platform,” “she arrived after dinner,” “what did you do it for ?”.

Answer 2

A: is correct B: no main verb C: Genes at a university ?! D: At a university, genes ... demonstrated something?! E: A study of genes could be conducted. There is no way a study conducted of genes

Answer 3

A: هم معنیش برعکسه که قبلا امن‌تر بوده هم انگار طوفان‌های آب و هوایی توسط پیش‌بینی کننده‌ها ایجاد می‌شن B: Due to باید شروع یک فریز بیاد که یک اسم رو modify کنه. Accurately هم اشتباه استفاده شده برای making. Makie نمی‌تونه accurate باشه.By weather forcaster هم مثل قبلی اشتباه استفاده شده C: معنی رو برعکس کرده که انگار قبلا امن‌تر بوده. Accurately هم misplaced هست. D: به همون دلایل بالا غلطه E: is correct

Answer 4

In formal sentences the expression "due to" is correctly used to begin a phrase that modifies a noun, not verb.

Answer 5

A: غلطه اولا چون معلوم نیست ۱۹۴۷ اروپا ترکید در نتیجه جنگ جهانی یا اون برنامه پروپوز شد. Destruction of WWII هم غلطه. WWII که خراب نمی‌شه. در نتیجه WWII خرابی به بار میاد B: Destroction comming from? هدیه فرستاده؟. meaning to هم غلطه. meant to باید باشه چون پلن خودش کاری نمی‌کنه اجرای پلن منجر به چیزی میشه. C: Destruction of WWII یعنی جنگ خراب شده. جای In 1947 هم اشتباهه انگار در ۱۹۴۷ سال بعدش تصویب شد. D: به همون دلایل بالا درسته E: Is correct

Answer 6

A: misplaced introductory modifier - nonsensical meaning B: is correct C: misplaced introductory modifier - nonsensical meaning D: nonsensical meaning. "To pose as" means "To pretend to be" E: misplaced introductory modifier - nonsensical meaning

Answer 7

1- The noun that it modifies must appear right after introductory. 2- When an introductory noun modifier followed by a clause that has "it" as its subject, it maybe that the modifier does not logically modify "it."

Answer 8

Correct ## Footnote The introductory is not a noun modifier.

Answer 9

A: is correct B: Who is inspecting? C: Who are they? D: Who is inpecting them? E: "By being inpected" conveys a meaning that goods inspect themselves and cause somehow an entire order to be flawed

Answer 10

A: gold's price having been alarmed? B: is correct C: Same as A D: Gold's price is not a result of alarm E: Gold's price cannot be alarmed - dangling modifier ## Footnote Correctly answering this question requires noticing that the subject of each version is either “gold’s price” or “the price of gold” and that, therefore, any noun modifier that opens a version has to logically modify one of those subjects. چون اشتباه B , C , D توی E رفع شده ممکنه تصور کنی آخری درسته ولی آخری غیرمنطقی بود

Answer 11

Correct ## Footnote **Having yielded** two distinctive terracotta vessels that archaeologists believe were used for ritualistic purposes, the **group’s excavation** of the Harrapan site near Anupgarh in Rajasthan, India, created a stir among scholars whose research centers on Bronze Age civilizations.

Answer 12

Incorrect ## Footnote Investors are still holding out hope that a “Santa Claus rally,” a market surge that typically occurs in the final week of the year, will make up for some of the painful losses of the past few months, but **having dropped sharply** just days before Christmas Eve, **the market’s lackluster year** shows no sign of ending on a high note, so Wall Street execs may be better off revising their holiday wish lists.

Answer 13

Correct ## Footnote Heavy snow covering the tracks **delayed** trains **all morning**.

Answer 14

Correct ## Footnote John **understood** **completely** the argument made by the speaker.

Answer 15

Incorrect ## Footnote Although the board of directors could not come to agreement on many of the issues upon which it was tasked with deciding, **it did agree at its first meeting** to finalize the plan for the reduction of interest rate expense, which was presented by shareholders some months ago. معلوم نیست قرار شده تو جلسه اول فاینال کنن یا تو جلسه اول توافق کردن که بالاخره فاینال کنن در آینده

Answer 16

A: "Completely" could modify either "accept" or "unproven", and "often" could modify either "experience depression" or "do so." B: "Completely" clearly modifies "refuses", but "Often" could modifies either "do so" or "because of chemical imbalances" C: Same as A D: Same as above E: is correct ## Footnote The original version of this sentence contains two modifiers that are squinting. “**Completely**” could modify either “**accept**” or “**unproven**.” “**Often**” could modify either “**experience depression**” or “**do so**.”

Answer 17

* That * Which * Who * Whom * Whose

Answer 18

* use "that" for restrictive relative clause * use "which" for nonrestrictive relative clause ## Footnote Entities made up of people such as **teams**, **groups**, or **classes**, are considered things when the **context treat such an entity as a single unit** and, in such caces, are refered to via the use of the relative pronouns "**that**" or "**which**."

Answer 19

Eliminate it from the sentence. If it can be eliminated without the core meaning of the sentence changing, it is nonrestrictive and will use "which" ## Footnote یه روش باحال این بود که ببینیم توضیحه یک سابستی از گزاره اول هست یا نه. مثلا وقتی می‌گی نیوویورک دیگه بعدش اینکه بگیم که مردمی بداخلاق داره نانریستریکتیو هست

Answer 20

* always be set off from the rest of sentences by comma * when the word "which" proceded by a preposition or is used to meant "which one," no comma proceding "which" is necessary.

Answer 21

* Restrictive relative clauses are not set off from the rest of the sentences by comma. * این معنیش این نیست که اگر کنار ریستریکتیوها کاما دیدیم غلط هستن. اون کاما ممکنه به دلیل دیگه‌ای اونجا باشه

Answer 22

عبارت بعدیش nonrestrictive هست پس D,E غلط هست A: The use of “for which” does not make sense, as Truman Capote did not spend six years writing *for* the book. He spent six years writing to produce the book but not *for* the book. Furthermore, the use of the pronoun “it” is unnecessary and results in a circular meaning. Does it make sense that Capote spent six years writing the book for the book? B: is correct C: Lack of main verb

Answer 23

nonrestrictive هست پس گزینه‌های That دار حذف می‌شن D: the author does not meant the idea that visitors are aggressive B: is correct

Answer 24

A: این یعنی Wheather conditions ... are actually quite common. بی معنیه دیگه B: برای این twin reflections ... are actually quite common. تناقض داره با اول عبارت C: is correct D: Same as A E: تناقض ## Footnote Notice that, in order to make sense, the sentence must make clear that the weather conditions mentioned are particular weather conditions: those that result in a double rainbow. In order for the sentence to specify which weather conditions it is about, the sentence has to use a restrictive, rather than a nonrestrictive, modifier.

Answer 25

Remote: 1- A relative clause may be separated from the noun that it modifies by another modifier, such as a prepositional phrase or an appositive. 2- Certain types of main verbs that indicate **arrival**, **positioning**, and **comming into being** can exist between a relative clause and the noun that it modifies in which there is unlikely to be any confusion and the author would like to avoid putting the main verb after a long interventing relative clause. ## Footnote دکتر جان این فاصله‌هه تا ابد نیستا. همون اندازه فعله

Answer 26

Correct ## Footnote Since the relative clause “**which, analysts caution, may not represent …**” is separated from the noun it modifies, “**price levels,**” only by an **appositive** describing the price levels, “**52-weeks lows for stocks in key sectors,**” the sentence is grammatically correct and effectively conveys a logical meaning.

Answer 27

B: S-V agreement. Results دوم داره به هورمونها یا لول‌ها اشاره می‌کنه نباید سینگل باشه C: S-V agreement. elevating level هم انگار لول‌ها خودشون دارن می‌رن بالا D: That elevate بی معنیه دیگه E: S-V agreement و خود هورمون ها هم باعث نمیشن چاقی. کلا چون nonrestrictive بود that ها رو میشد حذف کرد.

Answer 28

Subject pronouns: I, You, He, She, It, We, They, Who Object pronouns: Me, You, Him, Her, It, Us, Them, Whom

Answer 29

A: is correct B: author is a human so, which incorrectly refered to author C: whom is a object pronoun D: first part before ", and" has not a main verb E: author is a person so we can not use "that."

Answer 30

A: that incorrectly refered to people B: "who" is incorrectly used as object of preposition "by" C: this version incorrecly uses "whom," an object pronoun, as the subject of clause "whom can not digest lactose." D: which incorrectly refers to "people." E: is correct

Answer 31

The relative pronoun "whose" can refer to things or people. "whose" in English language is only possessive relative pronoun.

Answer 32

Replace the noun being modified with its modifier. ## Footnote **An amazing example of Renaissnce art**, the statue dominated the exhibit.

Answer 33

دلیلی که گزینه آخر غلطه اینه که اینکه رادیو یه اینونشن توسعه داده شده توسط تسلا هست یک فکت هست که ادامه داره. تموم نشده. لذا استفاده از had اشتباهه

Answer 34

A | تو دومی it لنگش رو هواس

Answer 35

B | در مورد اولی نه Situation نه CEO هیچکدوم Decision نیستن

Answer 36

The **completed work of art** (reciever of action) was admired by the **smiling patrons**(doer of action).

Answer 37

1- Present participle phrases that are used restrictively modify specific nouns. 2- Present participle phrases that appear at the beginning or the middle of clauses, are nonrestrictive, and can be treated as noun modifiers for the purpose of placement. (**set off by comma**) 3- Present participle phrases that appear at the end of clauses and usually, but not always, modify the preceding clauses. (**modify an entire preceding clause, in which case the phrase is set off from the preceding clause by a comma and normally has as its agent the subject of the clause that it modifies. except these two situation: A) One type of exception occurs when a closing participle clause begins with "including." often "including" does not take the subject of the clause as its agent. B) A second type of exception occurs when the closing participle phrase modifies an actor-action pair that appear between the subject and the closing participle phrase.**) ## Footnote * Present participle phrases that modify entire clauses often describe the **results of the actions** mentioned in the preceding clauses, **cause of the events described** in the preceding clauses, or **events that were occurring while the events described** in the preceding clause were occurring. * When a writer utilizes a present participle phrase in discussing events that do not occur at the same time, he or she creates an illogical sentence. * It is **not enough** for a present participle phrase to logically modify a noun that appears in a sentence. In order for a sentence to make sense, any participle phrase that appears in that sentence has to work logically with the rest of the sentence.

Answer 38

A: There is no comma separating “fruits and other edibles” and “creating a public food forest.” Thus, “creating a public food forest” modifies either “fruits and other edibles” or “trees and smaller plants that bear fruits and other edibles.” So, this version conveys the illogical meaning that either trees and plants or fruits and other edibles were creating the food forest. B: is correct C: There is no comma separating “fruits and other edibles” and “planting a large area.” Thus, “planting a large area” modifies “fruits and other edibles.” So, this version conveys the illogical meaning that the fruits and other edibles were planting a large area. D: The placement of the phrase “planting a large area …” just before “public food forest” indicates that the phrase modifies “forest.” Thus, this version conveys the illogical meaning that the forest planted a large area. E: Because the present participial phrase “planting a large area …” is placed directly after “forest” and is not separated from “forest” by a comma, the phrase must modify “forest.” Thus, this version conveys the nonsensical meaning that the forest was planting a large area.

Answer 39

## Footnote نکته ای که باید یادت باشه وقتی participale داره بدون کاما وصل میشه اسم قبلیش رو داره modify می‌کنه

Answer 40

Incorrect ## Footnote Did investment guru Peter Lynch earn a reputation “as one of the greatest funds of its time?” No, because Peter Lynch is a person, not a mutual fund, right? So, this sentence is illogical. Correct: **Outperforming most other mutual funds over the preceding twenty-year period and earning a reputation as one of the greatest funds of its time, the Magellan Fund**, which was managed by investment guru Peter Lynch, provided investors with a vehicle for creating wealth during a time characterized by economic uncertainty.

Answer 41

A: The sentence begins with the present participial phrase “Having demonstrated that people can change gene expression by meditating.” The noun or pronoun that follows this opening modifier must be a noun that is capable of “having demonstrated something.” We see that the pronoun “it” directly follows the opening modifier, but the pronoun “it” is not a noun or pronoun that is capable of “having demonstrated something.” Therefore, we have a misplaced introductory modifier, and this sentence is incorrect; the participial phrase is misplaced. B: This choice is a bit tricky because, unlike many of the other choices, it uses a dependent clause, since the study has demonstrated …,” rather than a participial phrase. So, if we are focused on modifier placement issues, we might mistakenly perceive this choice as another one similar to (A), in which an introductory modifier illogically modifies “it.” However, if we read the sentence carefully, we see that it is well constructed and conveys a meaning that makes sense. Notice that the last clause in this version is written to “sound funny,” and therefore seem incorrect, as a result of the last clause’s having as its subject the gerund phrase “its having a significant impact on the field of epigenetics.” C: The participial phrase “having demonstrated …” is meant to modify the clause that follows it. However, the clause uses a delayed subject, and so, what appears right after the participial is the expletive “there.” Since “there” certainly would not have demonstrated something, it does not make sense for the “having demonstrated …” to modify “there.” So, it’s clear that the opening participial phrase is misplaced. Also, “having demonstrated …, there is a likelihood that the study will have a significant impact” is illogical in another way as well. The sentence does not say that it is likely that the study will have a significant impact.Rather it conveys that, since something demonstrated that people can affect gene expression by meditating, a likelihood that the study will have a significant impact exists. Expressing this idea is absurd since, under all conditions, a likelihood that the study will have a significant impact exists. That likelihood may be anything from 0 percent to 100 percent, but it will always exist. So, expressing that it will exist under certain conditions, “having demonstrated,” does not make sense. Finally, because the prepositional phrase “in the head researcher’s opinion” appears directly after “the field of epigenetics,” the prepositional phrase seems to modify “the field of epigenetics.” As a result, this version suggests the nonsensical idea that the field of epigenetics is located in the head researcher’s opinion. D: Because “having demonstrated that people can change gene expression by meditating” directly follows “the head researcher’s opinion,” this version conveys the nonsensical meaning that the head researcher’s opinion has demonstrated that people can change gene expression by meditating. The head researcher’s opinion might be that *the study* has demonstrated that people can change gene expression by meditating, but the opinion itself would have not demonstrated that. E: In this version, the participial phrase “having demonstrated …” is placed so as to logically modify “the study.” However, even though that modifier placement is logical, we have to be careful not to choose this version, because what this version expresses does not make sense. This version does not say that the study is likely to have a significant impact. Instead, it conveys the nonsensical meaning that the study “has a likelihood that will have a significant impact.” Of course, “a likelihood” would not “have a significant impact on the field of epigenetics.” Furthermore, because the prepositional phrase “in the opinion of the head researcher” appears directly after “the field of epigenetics,” the prepositional phrase seems to modify “the field of epigenetics.” As a result, this version suggests the nonsensical idea that the field of epigenetics is located in the opinion of the head researcher. ## Footnote اون گزینه دو درست بود ولی مساله مادیفایر نبود. اگر فقط قفلی رو مادیفایر باشی به فنا می ری

Answer 42

A: با توجه به اینکه قبل sitting کاما داریم پس داره کل clause رو مادیفای می‌کنه. یعنی recessed instrument ... sitting in the ... که غلطه B: while ---> when the action occure عملا کارکرد adv. داره یعنی اون قطعه وقتی راننده نشسته نقشش بادگیره فقط. غلطه C: کاما بین driver و sitting نیست پس داره راننده رو مادیفای می‌کنه که درسته D: driver + panel! E: as if ---> pretend to be اون تیکه as the driver هم مثل B غلطه

Answer 43

A: یعنی Solar energy system با price بودن ... B: Appositive هست و درسته D: This version conveys the nonsensical meaning that $15,000 *is at* a price, as opposed to a more logical meaning, such as that $15,000 *is* a price. E: Since the present participial phrase “making it an affordable price for many” appears after the clause and is separated from the preceding clause by a comma, we can tell that the phrase modifies the entire preceding clause.

Answer 44

1- Restrictively modify nouns: * Directly placed before or after the noun that it modifies * not separated from the noun by comma 2- Nonrestrictively modify a nouns: * Directly placed before or after the noun that it modifies * Separated from the noun by comma ## Footnote Issues: 1- Be on the lookout for an introductory phrase that begins with a past participle; we may have a **misplaced** modifier question on our hand. The noun that follows an introductory phrase that begins with a past participale must be the noun that phrase is meant to modify. 2- A second way in which Sentence Correction questioon writers can create issues is to use a **restrictive or nonrestrictive** past participale phrase where using a past participale phrase of other type, **nonrestrictive or restrictive**, would make more sense.

Answer 45

Correct ## Footnote The past participial phrase “**derived from walnuts and blueberries**” directly follows what it logically modifies, “**liquid**.”

Answer 46

A: Notice that the past participial phrase “situated on two and a half acres in the center of Marrakesh” is placed directly after “artist Jacques Majorelle” without a comma between the two and is followed by a comma. As a result, the phrase seems to illogically modify the artist, who would not be “situated on two and a half acres.” Also, it does not even quite make sense to say that “sights” are “situated on two and a half acres.” So, that phrase is clearly misplaced. Meanwhile, since the subject of the main clause is the plural “sights,” not the singular “the Majorelle Garden,” the clause’s verb, the singular “includes,” does not agree with the subject. B: The first issue we come to as we read this version is that “sights” is modified by the phrase “created by artist Jacques Majorelle and situated on two and a half acres in the center of Marrakesh.” While it would make sense to describe a garden as created by artist Jacques Majorelle and situated on two and a half acres, it does not really make sense to describe sights in that way. This issue is not a clear, strong decision point, but it does make this version less than ideal. **The issue that makes this choice clearly incorrect is that the use of “it” is problematic.** Since sights would include many cacti and a cubist villa, the singular “it”’ seems to incorrectly refer to the plural “sights.” On the other hand, we could decide that “it” must refer to the singular “the Majorelle Garden.” However, in that case, we have a meaning issue, because in that case, the sentence conveys the nonsensical meaning that the garden includes cacti and a villa only “when visitors to the Majorelle Garden see sights,” as if the cacti and villa cease to exist when the visitors don’t see sights. C: Since what follows the opening past participial phrase “created by artist Jacques Majorelle” is “visitors,” the opening phrase is misplaced, since visitors to the garden would not have been created by Jacques Majorelle. Also, “sights *to include* many cacti and a cubist villa” expresses that the sights will include those things in the future but do not currently include them. D: This version is a little tricky, because it is an inverted sentence in which the main verb, “are … seen,” precedes the subject, “sights.” All the same, this version is well constructed, with the past participial phrase “created by artist Jacques Majorelle and situated on two and a half acres …” correctly placed to logically modify “the Majorelle Garden.” This version is grammatically correct and effectively conveys a meaning that makes sense. E: The use of the restrictive relative clause “that was created by artist Jacques Majorelle …” to modify “the Majorelle Garden” is questionable because, presumably, there is only one “Majorelle Garden.” So, using a restrictive modifier to define which Majorelle Garden the sentence is about doesn’t seem to make sense. This issue is not a strong decision point, because it’s possible that there is more than one Majorelle Garden, but it does make this version suspect, especially in the context of the other versions, which tend to indicate that there is only one Majorelle Garden. Next, we see that “situated on two and a half acres …” directly follows “Jacques Majorelle” and seems to illogically modify “Jacques Majorelle.” While it’s arguable that “situated on two and a half acres …” is meant to modify the entire preceding phrase, “the Majorelle Garden that was created by artist Jacques Majorelle,” the placement of “situated on two and a half acres …” is certainly not ideal. Finally, what takes this choice out of contention for sure is that, since “including” is not a finite verb,” this version includes no main verb and, thus, is not a complete sentence.

Answer 47

Correct ## Footnote Since the past participial phrase “**found in the barn**” directly follows “**car**” and is **not set off from the rest of the sentence by commas**, we can tell that it specifies which car the sentence is about.

Answer 48

A: is nonrestrictive B: is correct C: "has" is singular but "coffee beans" is plural D: non restrictive E: Since the present participial phrase “having been roasted for too long” is set off by commas from the rest of the clause in which the phrase appears, the phrase takes as its agent the subject of the clause, which is “the use of coffee beans.” Thus, this version implies the nonsensical idea that the use of coffee beans can be roasted for too long.

Answer 49

B: This choice logically uses a restrictive past participial phrase to specify that a certain category of “publicized scientific studies” is being discussed, those publicized studies that are “retracted because of methodological errors or conflicts of interest” (as opposed to publicized studies in general). Thus, this version conveys a clear and logical meaning. Furthermore, this version contains no grammatical errors. E: In this version, the present participial phrase “resulting from methodological errors or conflicts of interest” modifies “publicized scientific studies that are retracted.” As a result, this version communicates the illogical meaning that “publicized scientific studies” themselves are “resulting from methodological errors or conflicts of interest.” Logically, retractions are what are “resulting from methodological errors or conflicts.” However, the noun “retractions” does not appear in this version, which instead uses the verb “retracted.”

Answer 50

Correct ## Footnote We see at the beginning of the sentence an absolute phrase composed of one noun, “**remarks**,” and some modifiers that modify “**remarks**,” and the absolute phrase logically modifies the clause that follows it.

Answer 51

Incorrect ## Footnote We cannot join the two independent clauses “the children gobbled up the apple crisp” and “their enjoyment was obvious” with only a comma. We can correct the sentence by changing the second independent clause to an absolute phrase (by removing the main verb from that clause). Although they already were full from the roasted corn, sweet potatoes, and green beans, the children gobbled up the apple crisp, **their enjoyment obvious**.

Answer 52

Incorrect ## Footnote The sentence is missing an independent clause. As currently written, what we have is merely two phrases. We cannot have a complete sentence made up of only phrases. A complete sentence is: Floor swept, bunks made, and soldiers standing at attention, the unit **was** ready for the morning inspection by the commanding officer. Notice that the absolute phrase “Floor swept, bunks made, and soldiers standing at attention” adds descriptive information.

Answer 53

Incorrect ## Footnote “Its bustling factories shuttered…” is an absolute phrase that would logically describe “Josh’s hometown.” However, since the subject of the sentence is “the recession,” the opening modifier, while modifying the entire clause, focuses on “the recession.” Thus, the sentence conveys that the factories and mansions belong to the recession. Rephrasing the sentence will fix this modification issue. A more effective sentence is: **Its bustling factories shuttered and its grand old mansions crumbling and condemned, Josh’s hometown looked like a different universe after the recession**, and the dwindling of the local workforce meant that any economic recovery would be slow.

Answer 54

باید دوتا clause رو به هم متصل کنه

Answer 55

* Whenever a subordinate clause, comes before an independent clause, there must be a comma between the subordinate clause and independent clause. ## Footnote Proponents of trophy hunting claim that it encourages wildlife conservation, but *since populations of targeted animals have declined dramatically **(,)** critics strongly disagree*.

Answer 56

Every, Each, Many a, Many an | **Always singular**

Answer 57

Always singular

Answer 58

Always singular

Answer 59

Always singular

Answer 60

Always singular

Answer 61

Always singular

Answer 62

Always singular

Answer 63

Always singular

Answer 64

Always singular

Answer 65

Always singular

Answer 66

Always singular

Answer 67

Always singular

Answer 68

Always singular

Answer 69

Always Singular

Answer 70

Always singular

Answer 71

Always singular

Answer 72

Always singular

Answer 73

Always singular

Answer 74

Singular except when prededs a plural noun | When preceds phrases need plural

Answer 75

Always plural

Answer 76

Always plural

Answer 77

Always plural

Answer 78

Always plural

Answer 79

* Some * Any * None * All * More * Most | Can be singular or plural depending on their referants ## Footnote **We can't ignore the prepositional phrase**

Answer 80

takes a verb that agrees in number with what percentage is a percentage of

Answer 81

can takes a singular or plural verb depending on what the fraction is a fraction of

Answer 82

Singular | Whereas the sub. is singular or plural

Answer 83

Plural | Singular: Alumnus

Answer 84

Plural | Singular: Criterion

Answer 85

Plural and singular | Singular: Datum

Answer 86

Singular | Plural: Fungi ## Footnote a simple type of plant that has no leaves or flowers and that grows on plants or other surfaces. mushrooms and mould are both fungi.

Answer 87

Plural and singular | Singular: Medium

Answer 88

Plural | Singular: Phenomenon

Answer 89

Plural | Singular: Nucleus ## Footnote the central part of an atom

Answer 90

Plural | Singular: Syllabi

Answer 91

as a field of study is singular

Answer 92

Singular ## Footnote اوریون

Answer 93

As a field of study singular

Answer 94

As a field of study singular

Answer 95

As a field of study is singular

Answer 96

Ethics and morals can take both singular and plural

Answer 97

Always singular ## Footnote * To know you **is** to love you. * Whether the Holy Grail actually exists **has** yet to be determined. * Meditatinc can relieve stress for some but **takes** time and practice that many people feel they can't devote.

Answer 98

1. Multiple possible antecedents 2. A pronoun's antecedent is missing 3. A pronoun has an adjective as its antecedent 4. A pronoun doesn't agree in number with its antecedent 5. A sentence contains an unneeded pronoun 6. The sentence contains illogical antecedents 7. A pronoun is referring to a clause 8. The sentence uses an incorrect pronoun case

Answer 99

Replace with "he" or "him"

Answer 100

Check for the presence of a delayed subject.

Answer 101

**However** is used to show contrast between two ideas or sentences and **highlight this contrast.** **adverb** used when you are adding a fact or piece of information that seems surprising, or seems very different from what you have just said => SYN: **Nevertheless**: * This is a cheap and simple process. However, there are dangers. * an extremely unpleasant disease that is, however, easy to treat used to say that it does not matter how big, good, serious etc something is because it will not change a situation in any way => SYN: **No matter how**: * You should report any incident, however minor it is. * We have to finish, however long it takes. however much/ many: * I really want the car, however much it costs. **Cunjunction** in whatever way: * You can do it however you like. ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 102

**Although** is used to show contrast within a sentence but **does not highlight the contrast.** ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 103

While is used in a similar way to although ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 104

**Furthermore** is used to **add new information** that is **even more important than the previous information.**

Answer 105

**Also** is used **within a sentence** to **add a new information** that is **similar to the previously mentioned informention.** ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 106

**First** is used to introduce the **first step in a process.** ## Footnote More suitable for process tasks

Answer 107

**Initially** is used to show you are talking about **what happened at the start** of something and **later changed.** ## Footnote More suitable for process tasks

Answer 108

**Similarly** is used to show something **followed a similar pattern or trend to somthing else.** ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 109

**In contrast** is used to show you are talking about **difference between two things.** ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 110

**In comparison** is used to shou you are **comparing two things.** ## Footnote Could be used in any type of task 1

Answer 111

**Meanwhile** is used to show **something happened**, or happens, **at the same time as something else**, **or to say what happened while waiting for something else to happen.**

Answer 112

1. Sub-Verb agreement 2. Pronouns and Antecedents 3. Modifiers 4. Verb tense, Mood and Voice 5. Parallelism 6. Logical comparison 7. Sentence Structure 8. Idioms 9. Logic and Meaning

Answer 113

**Incorrect** Linking two independent clauses with only a coordinating conjunction is always incorrect in a GMAT Sentence Correction question. | I went to the gym **,and** I lifted weights. ## Footnote The absence of a comma before a coordinating conjunction forbids having an independent clause follow because the result would be a run-on sentence.

Answer 114

**Correct** Despite its length, this is a complete sentence and correct as written. Notice that two independent clauses are connect by **a comma and the coordinating conjunction** “and."

Answer 115

**Incorrect** A semicolon is incorrectly used to connect a clause to a phrase. While what precedes the semicolon is an independent clause, what follows the semicolon includes no main verb. The sentence could be fixed through the addition of a main verb to what follows the semicolon. Improving nutrition and reducing stress prompted changes in the behavior of genes; among them **were** some genes believed to be tumor suppressors.

Answer 116

**Incorrect** What precedes the colon could not stand on its own as a sentence. Since “defining” is not a finite verb, what precedes the clause does not include a finite verb and, thus, includes no independent clause. To correct the sentence, we could change “defining” to the finite verb “defined.” The committee **defined** their goals for the year: to balance the budget, to support entrepreneurship, and to address environmental issues.

Answer 117

**Incorrect** Since “dismissing” is not a finite verb, and since “though many disagreements about the details of evolution remain unresolved” is a subordinate clause, this string of words does not include an independent clause. Thus, it is not a complete sentence. A correct version is: Few scientists **dismiss** Darwin’s theory entirely though many disagreements about the details of evolution remain unresolved.

Answer 118

**Incorrect** The sentence is correctly punctuated but incomplete. What may happen even if the trend translates to increased turnout? The coordinating conjunction/subordinating conjunction pair “yet even if” signals a two-part proposition, but the sentence provides only the first half of that statement. A possible correction is: Voter registration has surged in the months leading up to the election, with previously underrepresented demographics such as younger voters achieving record numbers, yet even if this trend translates to increased turnout at the polls **, voter participation still may be too low to significantly change the makeup of Congress**.

Answer 119

My choice: (B) Proponents of trophy hunting claim that it encourages wildlife conservation,**since the populations of targeted animals have declined dramatically,** critics strongly disagree. This version includes two independent clauses “proponents of trophy hunting claim …” and “critics strongly disagree,” and one subordinate clause, “since the populations of targeted animals have declined dramatically.” The issue is that the subordinate clause is properly punctuated to pair with *either* the opening independent clause *or* the closing independent clause, but not with both. In other words, this version incorrectly connects three clauses with only one conjunction, “since. Correct choice: (C) Proponents of trophy hunting claim that it encourages wildlife conservation, **but populations of targeted animals have declined dramatically, so** critics strongly disagree. This version correctly joins three independent clauses by using a comma and coordinating conjunction to link each successive independent clause to the preceding one. Let’s break the sentence into its component parts to check for errors: (independent clause + comma) Proponents of trophy hunting claim that it encourages wildlife conservation, (coordinating conjunction + independent clause + comma) but populations of targeted animals have declined dramatically, (coordinating conjunction + independent clause + period) so critics strongly disagree. The sentence meaning is clear and logical, and the construction is grammatically correct.

Answer 120

**Correct** Since the subject of the relative clause “Charles Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic Ocean” is “Charles Lindbergh,” the sentence is correctly constructed even though the relative pronoun “that” is omitted from the relative clause.

Answer 121

Since the subject of the relative clause “bears had damaged” is “bears,” the sentence is correctly constructed even though the relative pronoun “that” is omitted from the relative clause.

Answer 122

MY CHOICE (D) The rights **that women in Sparta enjoyed were unheard of in the rest of the ancient world; while girls** lived in Athens were confined to their fathers’ houses and married young, Spartan women were educated, participated in sports and public discourse, and owned land. This version is missing the necessary relative pronoun, “who,” after “girls.” Notice that the main verb of the clause “ _girls_ lived in Athens _were_ confined” is not “lived” but “were.” In other words, “were” goes with the subject “girls.” Since “girls” is the subject of “were,” without the relative pronoun “who,” there is no subject of “lived in Athens.” Thus, the clause is incomplete, and the meaning is nonsensical. CORRECT ANSWER (C) The rights **women in Sparta enjoyed were unheard of in the rest of the ancient world; while girls who** lived in Athens were confined to their fathers’ houses and married young, Spartan women were educated, participated in sports and public discourse, and owned land. This is the only version of the sentence that includes the necessary relative pronoun, “who,” after “girls.” Notice that the main verb of the clause “ *girls* who lived in Athens *were* confined” is not “lived” but “were.” In other words, “were” goes with the subject “girls.” Since “girls” is the subject of “were,” without the relative pronoun “who,” there would be no subject of “lived in Athens.” Notice, however, that a relative pronoun is _not_ necessary after “rights,” since “women” is the subject of the relative clause “women in Sparta enjoyed.” Also, both what appears before the semicolon and what appears after the semicolon can stand alone as a sentence. What appears before the semicolon is an independent clause, which can stand alone as a sentence, and what appears after the semicolon is a dependent clause followed by an independent clause, which can also stand alone as a sentence. The sentence is complete and grammatical, and the sentence meaning is clear.

Answer 123

**Fragment** Let’s cross off the relative clause: **The Apache tribal chief Mangas Coloradas,** who was otherwise known by the alias “Red Sleeve,” and who led a series of heroic retaliatory raids against the Mexican army in the 1830s after it took the scalps of Apache women and children. We see that the structure is composed of only a noun phrase, “the Apache tribal chief Mangas Coloradas,” and a relative clause, “who … children.” Thus, there is no independent clause or main verb.

Answer 124

**Noun phrase** **That healing approach** was developed centuries ago.

Answer 125

**Noun phrase** When delivered, **packages intended for the crew** should be taken upstairs.

Answer 126

(A) When you decide whom to support in an election, **a candidate for public office who is telegenic,** not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies. This version has no main verb. Without a main verb, there can be no independent clause, and without an independent clause, we don’t have a sentence. The subordinate clause “When you decide whom to support in an election” cannot contain the main verb – notice that that clause cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. “A candidate for public office who is telegenic” is no more than a long phrase. Notice that “is” is part of the relative clause “who is telegenic,” which describes “a candidate for public office.” So, no main verb here. Lastly, we see that “not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies” also cannot stand alone as a complete sentence, as it lacks both a subject and a main verb. Ask yourself, “ *What is* ‘not as important as whether you agree …’?” The sentence is incomplete. (B) When you decide whom to support in an election, **whether a candidate for public office is telegenic** not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies. This version has no main verb. Without a main verb, there can be no independent clause, and without an independent clause, we don’t have a sentence. Notice that “whether a candidate for public office is telegenic” is a noun clause and would be the subject of the sentence. Thus, “is” cannot be the main verb of the sentence, since a main verb cannot be contained within that noun clause. So, “whether a candidate for public office is telegenic not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies” is missing a main verb to tell us what the subject “whether a candidate for public office is telegenic” is/was/will be. Since the main verb is missing, the sentence is incomplete. (C) When you decide whom to support in an election, **a candidate for public office is telegenic is** not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies. The second “is” that appears in this version has no subject. Note that the independent clause starts with a noun phrase, “a candidate for public office,” which is the subject of “is” in “ *a candidate* for public office *is* telegenic ….” What, then, is the subject of “is not as important”? “A candidate for public office is telegenic” is an independent clause, not a noun clause So, “A candidate for public office is telegenic” cannot serve as the subject of a sentence. Thus, “A candidate for public office is telegenic is not as important” does not make sense. MY CHOICE (D) When you decide whom to support in an election, **whether a candidate for public office is telegenic,** not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies. There is no independent clause in this version. Without an independent clause, there is no sentence. Let’s look at each of the three clauses in this version to see whether any of them can stand alone as a complete sentence. The subordinate clause “When you decide whom to support in an election” cannot contain the main verb – notice that that clause cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. “Whether a candidate for public office is telegenic” also does not convey a complete thought and cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. “Not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies” lacks both a subject and a main verb and, thus, cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. Notice that “whether you agree with the candidate’s policies” is a noun clause. Thus, “agree” cannot be the main verb, since a main verb cannot be contained within that noun clause. CORRECT ANSWER (E) When you decide whom to support in an election, **whether a candidate for public office is telegenic is** not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies. This is the only version of the sentence that contains an independent clause, “whether a candidate for public office is telegenic is not as important as whether you agree with the candidate’s policies.” The noun clause “whether a candidate for public office is telegenic” is the subject. The second “is” is the main verb. The sentence is logical and complete.

Answer 127

**Object of a preposition** The noun clause “how the events unfolded” is the object of the preposition “of.”

Answer 128

**Object of a preposition** The noun clause “why the costs were so high” is the object of the preposition “on.”

Answer 129

**Noun clause** The dependent clause in this sentence is “what has been referred to as the Silver Era.” The clause does not follow a noun and serves as the subject of the sentence.

Answer 130

We can see that the list in this sentence is incorrectly constructed because there is no comma before the coordinating conjunction “and” that appears before the last item “sesame seeds.” At the same time, because “and” appears twice, the list appears to be composed of two items, “rice and beans” and “chickpeas and sesame seeds.” So, one way to correct the list is to replace the comma between those two items with the conjunction “or.” By combining rice and beans **or** chickpeas and sesame seeds, one can achieve amino acid balance.

Answer 131

**Needs semicolon** If this sentence did not use semicolons between list items, it would be difficult to determine where one item ends and the next one begins.

Answer 132

A) The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the **manager, the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée, and dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake,** was prepared by the pastry chef. A list of three elements is presented, but because each element contains commas within it, separating the elements by using commas makes the sentence confusing and difficult to read. Let’s break down what the three list elements are: Item 1: The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the manager, Item 2: the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée, Item 3: and dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake, was prepared by the pastry chef It would be easier to distinguish which parts of the sentence belong to which element of the list if semicolons, rather than commas, separated the elements from each other. Let’s look for a choice that creates a clearer, easier-to-read sentence. (B) The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the **manager, the main course was prepared by the head chef and the sous chef, a vegan entrée, the final course was dessert, a chocolate cake** was prepared by the pastry chef. The necessary coordinating conjunction is missing before the final element in the series in this version. Notice that a list of three elements is presented: Item 1: The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the manager, Item 2: the main course was prepared by the head chef and the sous chef, a vegan entrée, Item 3: the final course was dessert, a chocolate cake was prepared … Without the coordinating conjunction “and” introducing “the final course,” the sentence contains both an ungrammatical list and a comma splice. (Notice that each element of the list is an independent clause. As we know, two independent clauses should not be joined by a comma alone.) In fact, within the third element, we see an additional comma splice, since “the final course was dessert” and “a chocolate cake was prepared …” are both independent clauses. Furthermore, it would be easier to distinguish which parts of the sentence belong to which element of the list if semicolons, rather than commas, separated the elements from each other, since all of the elements already contain commas within them. Lastly, the noun phrase “a vegan entrée” logically further describes “the main course” but is too far removed from that noun for the meaning to be clear. Thus, it appears as though “the sous chef” is nonsensically described as “a vegan entrée” CORRECT ANSWER (C) The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the ma**nager; the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée; and dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake, ** was prepared by the pastry chef. This choice creates the clearest, easiest-to-read sentence of all the versions and contains no grammatical or meaning errors. By using semicolons to separate the three elements in the series, this version avoids any confusion about which parts of the sentence belong to which element in the series. Since the three elements already contain commas within them, using commas to separate the elements from each other would make the sentence more difficult to read. (D) The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the **manager, the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée; and dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake,** was prepared by the pastry chef. The portion of the sentence that appears before the semicolon contains a comma splice, which is never correct. Notice that this version contains three independent clauses: Independent Clause 1: The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the manager, Independent Clause 2: the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée; Independent Clause 3: and dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake, was prepared by the pastry chef. Independent clauses 2 and 3 are correctly joined using a semicolon. However, Independent clauses 1 and 2 are incorrectly joined by a comma alone. The sentence produced by this choice is not grammatically correct. MY CHOICE (E) The soup, appetizer, and fresh bread were prepared by the senior chef, the saucier, and the **manager; the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée and dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake,** was prepared by the pastry chef. Logically, “dessert” is “the final course,” not part of “the main course” along with “a vegan entrée.” However, in “the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, *a vegan entrée and dessert,* the final course, a chocolate cake, was prepared…,” the logical meaning is not clear because “a vegan entrée and dessert” are lumped together, both seeming to describe “the main course.” If “dessert” is indeed the final course, then two independent clauses are incorrectly joined by the coordinating conjunction “and” alone: the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée (independent clause) dessert, the final course, a chocolate cake, was prepared by the pastry chef (independent clause) If, by some crazy twist, dessert is in fact part of the main course, the sentence still is not correctly punctuated because it joins two independent clauses with a comma alone: the head chef and the sous chef prepared the main course, a vegan entrée and dessert, (independent clause) the final course, a chocolate cake, was prepared by the pastry chef (independent clause) Since this version conveys an unclear meaning and is not correctly punctuated regardless of the correct meaning, this choice is incorrect.

Answer 133

(A) Heads of government including **the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, France’s President, Emmanuel Macron, Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, and others who** met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit. This version is not a complete sentence.In fact, the sentence is nothing more than a series of noun phrases. There is no main verb to create an independent clause, and without an independent clause, there is no sentence. Notice that “met” cannot be the main verb of the sentence because it appears within the relative clause “who met for informal discussions,” which describes “others.” Additionally, the present participle “including” is not a finite verb, and thus cannot be the main verb. Notice also that the use of commas to separate the items in the list (the list introduced by “heads of government including”) makes the items difficult to parse. If one did not know that the Prime Minister of Canada is Justin Trudeau, that France’s President is Emmanuel Macron, and that Germany’s Chancellor is Angela Merkel, then one might think that the list is made up of six different people (plus “others”), rather than three. CORRECT ANSWER (B) Heads of government including **the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau; France’s President, Emmanuel Macron; Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel; and others** met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit. This is the only choice that creates a clear, complete, and logical sentence. The list of people who “met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit” is made easy to parse by the use of semicolons separating each person/job from the next. Notice the final semicolon and coordinating conjunction “and” preceding “others”. Those elements properly join “others” to the rest of the list, making “others” the final list item. Thus, the action “met for informal discussions” is attributable to all of the people in the list, not just to “others,” and the sentence is complete. (C) Heads of government including **Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, France’s President, Emmanuel Macron, and Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel; others** met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit. This version is made up of a list of items separated by commas, then a semicolon, and then an independent clause. So, there is an independent clause after the semicolon but no independent clause before the semicolon. Thus, the sentence is not grammatically correct. Notice that there is no main verb in “Heads of government including the Prime Minister of Canada …,” since the present participle “including” is not a finite verb, and thus cannot be the main verb. Without a main verb, we don’t have an independent clause. So, the use of a semicolon to join the first part of the sentence to the second part does not make sense. Notice also that the use of commas to separate the items in the list (the list introduced by “heads of government including”) makes the items difficult to parse. If one did not know that the Prime Minister of Canada is Justin Trudeau, that France’s President is Emmanuel Macron, and that Germany’s Chancellor is Angela Merkel, then one might think that the list is made up of six different people, rather than three. MY CHOICE (D) Heads of government including **the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau; France’s President, Emmanuel Macron; Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel and others** met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit. Notice that what appears to be the last element in the list separated by semicolons, “others,” is preceded by only the conjunction “and.” The necessary comma or, in this case, semicolon before “and” is omitted. In order for the list to be properly constructed the “and” that precedes the last element should be preceded by a semicolon. (E) Heads of government including **Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, France’s President, Emmanuel Macron, and Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, others** met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit. This version presents a list of people introduced by “Heads of government including.” We can tell that the last person in the list is “Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel” because that is preceded by a comma and the coordinating conjunction “and,” indicating the end of the list. However, the list would be made clearer by the use of semicolons, instead of commas, to separate each person and respective job title, since (without outside knowledge) “Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, France’s President, Emmanuel Macron” could be interpreted as either four people or two. Furthermore, since the comma and coordinating conjunction “and” preceding “Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel” marks the end of the list, “others,” which appears after “Angela Merkel,” is not part of the list. Notice that “others” begins an independent clause, “others met for informal discussions at the G7 Summit,” and that what precedes the independent clause is an incomplete thought: Heads of government including Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, France’s President, Emmanuel Macron, and Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel That is simply a list of nouns. There is no main verb to tell us what those heads of government did, since the present participle “including” is not a finite verb and thus not a main verb. So, we have a list of nouns joined to an independent clause with a comma. This version is neither grammatical nor logical.

Answer 134

In order to answer this question, we have to clearly see that the subject of the sentence is “design” and that, therefore, the main verb of the sentence has to be singular. MY CHOICE: **(E)** In keeping with the company’s multiple missions, the design of the **buildings, which are houses to the product development and design departments, intends to both support sustainability and inspire** creativity. Because the verb “intends” agrees with the subject “design,” this version is grammatically correct. However, this version conveys ideas that don’t make sense. “Which are houses to the product development and design departments,” conveys the somewhat nonsensical meaning that, to these departments, but perhaps not to other departments, the buildings are houses. Also, “the design ... intends to” conveys the illogical idea that the design itself is, basically, planning to do something. CORRECT CHOICE: **(C)** In keeping with the company’s multiple missions, the design of the **buildings that house the product development and design departments is intended to both support sustainability and inspire** creativity. In this version, the singular verb “is” agrees with the singular “design,” and this version is otherwise grammatically correct and conveys a meaning that makes sense.

Answer 135

**Correct** Judy **likes** to eat at fine restaurants and drink expensive wine, whereas Clarissa **says** that peanut butter and jelly **is** her favorite. **peanut butter and jelly ** is a single food item. Judy "likes to" **eat at fine restaurants and drink expensive wine**: drink => to drink

Answer 136

**The subject of the sentence is “stop and frisk,” which is later in the sentence termed a “practice.” Since a practice is a singular entity, a singular verb is necessary. (MY EYES!)** Notice that the subject is separated from the main verb by a long relative clause that contains multiple plural nouns: “searches,” “civilians,” and “police officers.” So, we have to be careful not to get fooled by the presence of those plural nouns into choosing a plural verb. CORRECT CHOICE: Stop and frisk, which involved unprompted searches and questioning of civilians on the street by police officers, **was ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge, a decision effectively putting** an end to this controversial law enforcement practice.

Answer 137

The sentence is a bit of a tongue-twister, but the important thing is to separate the main clause from the relative clause, so that which verb goes with which noun is clear. The main clause is inverted, and its main verb is (sings/sing). To determine whether the main verb should be plural or singular, we have to determine who or what sings. We see that it is the creatures who sing. So, the subject that goes with (sings/sing) is the plural “creatures.” Thus, the correct main verb of the main clause is the plural “sing.” Eliminate (A) and (C) The other clause within the sentence is the relative clause “whose call(s) (sends/send) ships crashing ….” In the correct answer, the subject and verb in this relative clause will agree. CORRECT CHOICE: In Homer’s epic poem *The Odyssey*, on a mysterious island in the middle of the sea **sing enchanting creatures whose call sends ships crashing and lures** passing sailors to their deaths. The plural “sing” agrees with the plural “creatures,” and the singular “sends” and “lures” agree with “call.” | Call means صدا

Answer 138