Sentence Correction Sentence Correction - 2

Option(D) is correct

There are two main problems with the original sentence:

(1) The government authorities urged citizens to do three things: remain vigilant, report suspicious behavior, and take actions to speed up the recovery from an economic catastrophe. Consequently, these three requests from the government need to be parallel. In this case, each command should be in the infinitive form (e.g., to remain, to report, andto take). The original sentence wrongly constructs the phrase taking actions necessary to speed up the recovery from an economic catastrophe such that it modifies the two previous actions. Instead, this phrase should reflect the fact that taking actions... is a third action that the government is urging citizens to take. In short, the three actions that the government is urging are not parallel and they should be.

(2) taking actions necessary... illogically modifies the command to remain vigilant and report suspicious behavior because these two actions would not speed up the recovery from an economic catastrophe. In other words, it does not make sense that remaining vigilant and reporting suspicious behavior (two actions that would occur before an attack) would be modified such that these are actions that speed up the recovery from an attack.

A. The meaning of the original sentence is distorted as this sentence indicates that the government asked citizens to be more vigilant in reporting suspicious behavior (a single command) while the original sentence separated the command to remain vigilant and the command to report suspicious behavior; the three actions that the government urged are not parallel

B. The three actions that the government urged are not parallel (i.e., to remain is not parallel with reporting and take)

C. The three actions that the government urged are not parallel (i.e., to remain is not parallel with reporting and taking); the word necessary is not needed

D. The sentence is correctly constructed as the three actions that the government urged are parallel; the un-needed word necessary is omitted

E. The three actions that the government urged are not parallel (i.e., to remain is not parallel with taking); the word necessary is not needed

Option(D) is correct

The conditional clause (the "if" clause) does not require would. Also we should write "in the garden" to be parallel to "in the greenhouse".

Option(C) is correct

Both which and this should refer to a specific noun. Since the first part of the sentence does not provide a suitable noun, we must introduce a word such as increase or trend. D is incorrect as it uses a comma to link two sentences.

Option(E) is correct

There are two main problems with the original sentence.

(1) The original sentence contains an improper idiom. The idiom as many x than is not idiomatically correct and should be replaced by the idiomatically correct phrase as many x as.

(2) would be killed in World War I is illogical as it is in the future tense, implying that World War I occurred after World War II. The phrase could be made significantly more concise using as many lives as World War I. The words would be killed in or were killed in are not necessary and should be omitted.

A. The correct idiom is used (as many ... as); the sentence correctly implies that World War II occurred after World War I; the unnecessary phrase were killed in is omitted

B. The use of the future tense causes the sentence to illogically imply that World War I occurred after World War II

C. The idiom as many ... than is incorrect; those who were killed in is awkward and unnecessary

D. The idiom as many ... than is incorrect

E. The idiom as many ... than is incorrect; the use of the future tense causes the sentence to illogically imply that World War I occurred after World War II

Option(A) is correct

The subject the clauses requires a plural verb; change lies to lie. Similarly, make is required to agree with clauses.

Option(B) is correct

There are two main problems with the original sentence.

(1) The subject (thousands of acres, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (is, which is singular and should be replaced with the plural are). Some students argue that land is singular, even if it is thousands of acres. While land is singular, the phrase of pristine land is not the subject, but rather a prepositional phrase that describes the subject thousands of acres, which is plural.

(2) in danger to is not idiomatically correct and should instead be in danger of

A. in danger for is not idiomatically correct

B. The subject (thousands of acres, which is plural) agrees with the verb (are, which is plural); in danger of is idiomatically correct

C. The subject (thousands of acres, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (is, which is singular)

D. in danger to is not idiomatically correct

E. The subject (thousands of acres, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (is, which is singular); in danger to is not idiomatically correct

Option(A) is correct

The tutor was the basis for the protagonist, or the tutor's experience was the basis for the experience of the protagonist. Only A makes this relation clear.

Option(D) is correct

This question tests the correct use of two idioms.

(1) to issue x with y; The original sentence incorrectly writes issued x in y (i.e., issued The Edict of Milan in the hopes to ending).

(2) with the hope of y; The original sentence incorrectly writes in the hopes toy (i.e., in the hopes to ending).

A. issued The Edict of Milan in is not a proper idiom; in the hope to is not a proper idiom

B. issued The Edict of Milan in is not a proper idiom; in the hope to is not a proper idiom

C. with the hope to is not a proper idiom

D. issued The Edict of Milan with is a proper idiom; with the hope of ending is a proper idiom

E. issued The Edict of Milan in is not a proper idiom; in the hopes to is not a proper idiom

Option(C) is correct

The object us is required after the preposition for. Which requires a clear antecedent. Only C corrects both problems.

Option(B) is correct

There are two main problems with this sentence.

(1)The subject (prospects, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (depends, which is singular and should be replaced by the plural verb depend).

(2)The idiom depend on whether is correct not depend on if

A. the phrase the prospects ... depend whether the team can procure is awkward and the correct idiom depend on whether should be used

B. the subject prospects (plural) agrees with the verb depend (plural); depend on whether is idiomatically correct

C. the verb depends (singular) should be replaced by the verb depend (plural) as a plural subject (prospects) requires a plural verb

D. depend on if is not idiomatically correct

E. the verb depends (singular) should be replaced by the verb depend (plural) as a plural subject (prospects) requires a plural verb; the phrase depends on if is not idiomatically correct