[ANS-104 Questions] Form Structure and Sense
[ANS-104 Questions] Form Structure and Sense
FORM - STRUCTURE
AND SENSE
LIÊN HỆ
0327 857 858 (Bộ phận Tư Vấn)
0329 857 858 (Bộ phận Học Vụ)
0325 857 858 (Bộ phận kĩ thuật tài khoản)
www.msanhdaysat.com
www.sattest.online
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "occurs"
agrees in number with the singular subject "radiation."
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb "have occurred" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
"radiation." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "occur" doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject "radiation." Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb "are occurring" doesn’t agree in number with
the singular subject "radiation."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice ensures
that the modifying phrase “despite being cheap, versatile, and easy to produce” appears immediately before the
noun it modifies, “commercial plastics,” clearly establishing that the commercial plastics—and not another noun
in the sentence—are being described as cheap, versatile, and easy to produce.
Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the function word “there”
immediately after the modifying phrase illogically and confusingly suggests that “there” is cheap, versatile, and
easy to produce. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “two
problems” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “problems” are cheap, versatile,
and easy to produce. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun
phrase “commercial plastics’ two associated problems” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically
suggests that the “problems” are cheap, versatile, and easy to produce.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the
noun phrase “the activists” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase
“after...legislation.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that the activists—and not another noun in the
sentence—were pleading for the passage of antidiscrimination legislation.
Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “pressure on
lawmakers” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “pressure” was pleading for the
passage of antidiscrimination legislation. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The
placement of the noun phrase “a sit-in protest” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that
the “protest” was pleading for the passage of antidiscrimination legislation. Choice C is incorrect because it
results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “lawmakers” immediately after the modifying
phrase suggests that “lawmakers” were pleading for the passage of antidiscrimination legislation. While it’s
possible for lawmakers to plead for the passage of legislation, the context strongly suggests that it’s the activists
who pleaded for years for the passage of antidiscrimination legislation.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The previous sentence tells us how economists in India "use" a certain tool, while
this sentence describes general facts about that tool. To express general facts (and also to match the simple
present tense of "use"), we should use the simple present tense form "measures."
Choice B is incorrect. This choice uses the past perfect tense, but the previous sentence tells us that the tool is
currently used to measure things, so the past tense doesn’t make sense for this verb. Choice C is incorrect. This
choice uses the future perfect conditional tense, but the previous sentence tells us that the tool is currently used
to measure things, so the future tense doesn’t make sense for this verb. Choice D is incorrect. This choice uses
the future perfect continuous tense, but the previous sentence tells us that the tool is currently used to measure
things, so the future tense doesn’t make sense for this verb.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The conventions being tested are the use of possessive determiners and plural
nouns. The singular possessive determiner "its" and the plural noun "wings" correctly indicate that the butterfly
has multiple wings.
Choice B is incorrect because the context requires the plural noun "wings," not the plural possessive noun
"wings’." Choice C is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive determiner "its" and the
plural noun "wings," not the contraction "it’s" and the singular possessive noun "wing’s." Choice D is incorrect
because the context requires the singular possessive determiner "its" and the plural noun "wings," not the
contraction "it’s" and the plural possessive noun "wings’."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the past progressive tense verb “was studying” is consistent with the other past tense verbs (e.g.,
“made” and “collected”) used to describe Buratti’s discovery. Further, the past progressive tense correctly
indicates that an ongoing action in the past was occurring (she was studying) at the same time that another
event occurred in the past (she made an interesting discovery).
Choice A is incorrect because the present tense verb “studies” isn’t consistent with the past tense verbs used to
describe Buratti’s discovery. Choice B is incorrect because the present perfect progressive tense verb “has been
studying” isn’t consistent with the past tense verbs used to describe Buratti’s discovery. Choice C is incorrect
because the future tense verb “will study” isn’t consistent with the past tense verbs used to describe Buratti’s
discovery.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The modifier “Based on events…by a king,” is describing the drama “Rabinal Achí.”
Modifiers need to be next to the subjects they describe, so “Rabinal Achí” needs to be the first word after the
comma.
Choice B is incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of Standard
English. The modifier “Based on events…by a king,” is describing the drama “Rabinal Achí.” Modifiers need to be
next to the subjects they describe, so “Rabinal Achí” needs to be the first word after the comma. Choice C is
incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of Standard English. The
modifier “Based on events…by a king,” is describing the drama “Rabinal Achí.” Modifiers need to be next to the
subjects they describe, so “Rabinal Achí” needs to be the first word after the comma. Choice D is incorrect. This
doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of Standard English. The modifier “Based on
events…by a king,” is describing the drama “Rabinal Achí.” Modifiers need to be next to the subjects they
describe, so “Rabinal Achí” needs to be the first word after the comma.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "was"
agrees in number with the singular subject "amplifying." Gerunds such as "amplifying" are always singular.
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb "were" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
"amplifying." Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb "have been" doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject "amplifying." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "are" doesn’t agree in number with the
singular subject "amplifying."
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the past tense verb “vowed” is consistent with the other past tense verbs (“guided” and “upheld”)
used to narrate the events surrounding President Roosevelt’s decision to conserve the nation’s wilderness areas.
Choice A is incorrect because the present progressive tense verb “is vowing” isn’t consistent with the past tense
verbs used to narrate the events surrounding President Roosevelt’s decision to conserve the nation’s wilderness
areas. Choice C is incorrect because the future tense verb “will vow” isn’t consistent with the past tense verbs
used to narrate the events surrounding President Roosevelt’s decision to conserve the nation’s wilderness areas.
Choice D is incorrect because the simple present tense verb “vows” isn’t consistent with the past tense verbs
used to narrate the events surrounding President Roosevelt’s decision to conserve the nation’s wilderness areas.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is finite and nonfinite verb forms within a sentence. A
main clause requires a finite verb to perform the action of the subject (in this case, “embryos”), and this choice
supplies the clause with the finite present tense verb “enter” to indicate how the embryos achieve diapause.
Choice B is incorrect because the nonfinite to-infinitive “to enter” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice C is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “having entered” doesn’t supply the main clause with
a finite verb. Choice D is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “entering” doesn’t supply the main clause
with a finite verb.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of finite and nonfinite verb forms within a
sentence. A main clause requires a finite verb to perform the action of the subject (in this case, “some
historians”), and this choice supplies the finite present tense verb “claim” to indicate what some historians do.
Choice A is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “claiming” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice C is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “having claimed” doesn’t supply the main clause with
a finite verb. Choice D is incorrect because the nonfinite to-infinitive “to claim” doesn’t supply the main clause
with a finite verb.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement and agreement between
nouns. The singular verb “is” and the singular noun “version” both agree in number with the relative pronoun
“which.” In this context, “which” functions as a singular subject because it refers to the singular noun “the Nerf
football.”
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “were” doesn’t agree in number with the singular noun phrase “the
Nerf football” that it’s modifying. Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “are” and the plural noun
“versions” don’t agree in number with the singular noun phrase “the Nerf football” that they’re modifying. Choice
C is incorrect because the plural verb “were” and the plural noun “versions” don’t agree in number with the
singular noun phrase “the Nerf football” that they’re modifying.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
past perfect verb “had doubled” properly indicates that the doubling of the organization’s initial membership
occurred during a specific period before the present (between the organization’s founding in 1967 and the end of
the 1990s).
Choice A is incorrect because the present perfect verb “has doubled” doesn’t indicate that the organization’s
doubling of its initial membership occurred during a specific period in the past. Choice C is incorrect because
the present tense verb “doubles” doesn’t indicate that the organization’s doubling of its initial membership
occurred during a specific period in the past. Choice D is incorrect because the future tense verb “will double”
doesn’t indicate that the organization’s doubling of its initial membership occurred during a specific period in
the past.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the present tense verb “reach” is consistent with the present tense verbs “travel” and “are diverted”
used to describe how atoms move through the synchrotron.
Choice A is incorrect because the future tense verb “will reach” is inconsistent with the present tense verbs used
to describe how atoms move through the synchrotron. Though the atoms’ movement is a recurring action and
“will reach” can also be used to indicate a habitual or recurring action, it creates a logical inconsistency in this
sentence when paired with the present tense verbs “travel” and “are diverted.” Choice C is incorrect because the
past perfect tense verb “had reached” is inconsistent with the present tense verbs used to describe how atoms
move through the synchrotron. Choice D is incorrect because the present progressive tense verb “are reaching”
is inconsistent with the present tense verbs used to describe how atoms move through the synchrotron. While
both verbs occur in the present, the present progressive tense suggests that the action is currently in progress.
This creates a logical inconsistency when paired with the present tense verbs “travel” and “are diverted,” which
offer a general description of the tendencies of the atoms’ movement, rather than a description of an action that
is currently in progress.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the present tense verb “get” is consistent with the other present tense verbs (“are,” “travel,” and
“pack”) used to describe the Sherpas and their activities.
Choice B is incorrect. The past perfect verb “had gotten” isn’t consistent with the other present tense verbs used
to describe the Sherpas and their activities. Choice C is incorrect. The past tense verb “got” isn’t consistent with
the other present tense verbs used to describe the Sherpas and their activities. Choice D is incorrect. The past
progressive verb “were getting” isn’t consistent with the other present tense verbs used to describe the Sherpas
and their activities.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "was"
agrees in number with the singular subject "Farouk El-Baz."
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb "are" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject "Farouk El-
Baz." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "have been" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
"Farouk El-Baz." Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb "were" doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject "Farouk El-Baz."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The subject "survey" is singular, and so is the verb "was."
Choice A is incorrect. The subject "survey" is singular, but the verb "are" is plural. Choice B is incorrect. The
subject "survey" is singular, but the verb "were" is plural. Choice C is incorrect. The subject "survey" is singular,
but the verb "have been" is plural.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the future tense verb “will learn,” used in conjunction with the phrase “in a later chapter,” correctly
indicates that “you” (the reader) are going to learn about obsidian’s structure at some point in the future.
Choice A is incorrect because the past perfect verb “had learned” doesn’t indicate that the subject is going to
learn about obsidian’s structure in the future. Choice B is incorrect because the past perfect progressive verb
“had been learning” doesn’t indicate that the subject is going to learn about obsidian’s structure in the future.
Choice D is incorrect because the present perfect verb “have learned” doesn’t indicate that the subject is going to
learn about obsidian’s structure in the future.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The subject "talents" is plural, and so is the verb "aren’t": "the artistic talents…aren’t
limited."
Choice A is incorrect. The subject "talents" is plural, but the verb "hasn’t been" is singular. Choice B is incorrect.
The subject "talents" is plural, but the verb "wasn’t" is singular. Choice C is incorrect. The subject "talents" is
plural, but the verb "isn’t" is singular.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun–antecedent agreement. The plural pronoun
“they” agrees in number with the plural antecedent “customers.”
Choice B is incorrect because the singular pronoun “one” doesn’t agree in number with the plural antecedent
“customers.” Choice C is incorrect because the second person pronoun “you” isn’t conventional as a substitute for
“customers.” It suggests that the audience (“you”) is the customer. Choice D is incorrect because the singular
pronoun “it” doesn’t agree in number with the plural antecedent “customers.”
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "sweeps"
agrees in number with the singular subject "she," which refers to Alice Coltrane.
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb "sweep" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject "she."
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb "are sweeping" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
"she." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "were sweeping" doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject "she."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of finite and nonfinite verb forms within a
sentence. The nonfinite to-infinitive “to forge” is correctly used to form a nonfinite (infinitive) clause that
explains why the chemists re-created and reprogrammed the DNA-cleaving bacteria.
Choice B is incorrect. Without a comma separating the main clause (“chemists...bacteria”) from the participle
“forging,” this choice illogically suggests that the bacteria are forging a tool, which doesn’t make sense. Choice C
is incorrect. Without a coordinating conjunction such as “and” placed before it, the finite past tense verb “forged”
can’t be used in this way to describe the chemists’ actions. Choice D is incorrect. If read as a finite verb, the
present progressive verb “forging” isn’t consistent with the past tense verbs used in this sentence to describe the
actions of the chemists. If read as a nonfinite verb, the participle “forging” can’t be used in this way because
there is no following main clause for it to modify.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb "were"
agrees in number with the plural subject "objects."
Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb "was" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject "objects."
Choice B is incorrect because the singular verb "is" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject "objects."
Choice C is incorrect because the singular verb "has been" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject
"objects."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of finite and nonfinite verb forms within a
sentence. The nonfinite to-infinitive “to tell” is correctly used to form a nonfinite (infinitive) clause that explains
the reason Engle uses poetry in her novel.
Choice A is incorrect because the finite present tense verb “tells” can’t be used in this way to explain the reason
that Engle uses poetry in her novel. Choice B is incorrect because the finite past tense verb “told” can’t be used in
this way to explain the reason that Engle uses poetry in her novel. Choice C is incorrect because the finite
present progressive tense verb “is telling” can’t be used in this way to explain the reason that Engle uses poetry
in her novel.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the
noun phrase “many critics” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase “in
assessing…Kurosawa.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that it is the critics—and not another noun in
the sentence—who assess Kurosawa’s films.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “Kurosawa’s…
sources” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that his use of Western literary sources is
what assesses Kurosawa’s films. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of
the function word “there” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “there” is what
assesses Kurosawa’s films. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the
noun phrase “the focus…critics” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the critics’
focus is what assesses Kurosawa’s films.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The missing verb is part of the same clause as the verb "premiered," and "Price" is
the subject of both. So we need the past-tense form "developed" in order to match "premiered."
Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a verb form error. The missing verb is part of the same clause as the
verb "premiered," and "Price" is the subject of both. So we need the past-tense form "developed" in order to match
"premiered." Choice C is incorrect. This choice creates a verb form error. The missing verb is part of the same
clause as the verb "premiered," and "Price" is the subject of both. So we need the past-tense form "developed" in
order to match "premiered." Choice D is incorrect. This choice creates a verb form error. The missing verb is part
of the same clause as the verb "premiered," and "Price" is the subject of both. So we need the past-tense form
"developed" in order to match "premiered."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
present tense verb “survives” correctly indicates that the wood frog regularly survives subfreezing temperatures
by producing large amounts of glucose.
Choice A is incorrect because the past perfect verb “had survived” doesn’t indicate that the wood frog regularly
survives subfreezing temperatures by producing large amounts of glucose. Choice B is incorrect because the
past tense verb “survived” doesn’t indicate that the wood frog regularly survives subfreezing temperatures by
producing large amounts of glucose. Choice C is incorrect because the conditional verb “would survive” doesn’t
indicate that the wood frog regularly survives subfreezing temperatures by producing large amounts of glucose.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The object for the verb "was" is "first," and "to place" is acting as a modifier for "first."
What was the finding? It was "the first." The first to do what? The first "to place humans in North America" 10,000
years ago. When a verb serves as a modifier within a noun phrase, it must be nonfinite (i.e., not conjugated to a
specific subject). The infinitive form "to place" is the only nonfinite option among the choices that makes sense
in context.
Choice A is incorrect. The object for the verb "was" is "first," and "places" is acting as a modifier for "first." What
was the thing that Parker’s finding did? What was it the first to do? Place humans in North America 10,000 years
ago. When a verb acts as a modifier, it must be nonfinite (i.e., not conjugated to a specific subject), but "places" is
a finite form of the verb. Choice B is incorrect. The object for the verb "was" is "first," and "placed" is acting to
modify "first." What was it that Parker’s finding was the first to do? Place humans in North America 10,000 years
ago. When a verb acts as a modifier, it must be nonfinite (i.e., not conjugated to a specific subject), but "placed" is
a finite form. "Placed" can also be a past participle, but that wouldn’t make sense here because the meaning of
"the first placed humans" would be unclear. Choice C is incorrect. The object for the verb "was" is "first," and
"place" is modifying "first." What was the thing that Parker’s finding did? What was it the first to do? Place
humans in North America. When a verb acts as a modifier, it must be nonfinite (i.e., not conjugated to a specific
subject), but "place" is a finite form of the verb. Additionally, "place" can’t serve as a noun here, because it results
in an illogical sentence (the "finding" wasn’t "the first place").
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of nonfinite verb forms within a sentence.
Working together with the finite verb "need," the nonfinite to-infinitive verb "to digest" is correctly used to form a
subordinate clause that describes what the reindeer need.
Choice A is incorrect because the verb "digest" (in either its finite or nonfinite form) can’t be used in this way
with the finite verb "need." Choice B is incorrect because the finite verb "will digest" can’t be used in this way
with the finite verb "need." Choice D is incorrect because the nonfinite participle "digesting" can’t be used in this
way with the finite verb "need."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of possessive determiners. The plural
possessive determiner “their” agrees in number with the plural conjoined noun phrase “Watson and Crick” and
thus indicates that the findings were those of Watson and Crick.
Choice A is incorrect because “they’re” is the contraction for “they are,” not a possessive determiner. Choice B is
incorrect because “it’s” is the contraction for “it is” or “it has,” not a possessive determiner. Choice D is incorrect
because the singular possessive determiner “its” doesn’t agree in number with the plural conjoined noun phrase
“Watson and Crick.”
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
simple past tense verb “suggested” properly indicates that Zufall offered her suggestion for the product’s name in
the past. This verb tense is consistent with the previous sentence’s use of a simple past tense verb (“advised”) to
describe Zufall’s advice to McVicker in the 1950s.
Choice B is incorrect because the present tense verb “suggests” doesn’t indicate that Zufall offered her
suggestion in the past. Choice C is incorrect because the past perfect verb “had suggested” isn’t consistent with
the previous sentence’s use of the simple past tense verb “advised” to describe Zufall’s advice to McVicker.
Choice D is incorrect because the past progressive verb “was suggesting” isn’t consistent with the previous
sentence’s use of the simple past tense verb “advised” to describe Zufall’s advice to McVicker.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The singular possessive pronoun "its" agrees with the singular antecedent "the
animal" and indicates that the "young" belong to it.
Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a pronoun-antecedent agreement error. "They’re" is a contraction of
"they are," a plural pronoun and verb, but the antecedent "the animal" is singular. Also, we don’t need the extra
verb "are" — we already have a main verb in this clause, so adding "are" would be confusing and ungrammatical.
Choice B is incorrect. This choice creates a pronoun-antecedent agreement error. "Their" is a plural pronoun, but
the subject of the sentence is "the animal," a singular noun. Choice D is incorrect. This choice creates a
confusing and ungrammatical sentence. "It’s" is a contraction for "it is." We already have the verb "nurses" in this
clause, so we shouldn’t add the verb "is."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The subject of the modifier "fortifying soil in arid ecosystems against erosion" is
"biocrusts." Subject-modifier placement requires a modifier and its subject to be next to each other, so "biocrusts"
or some variant meaning "biocrusts" (in this case, "these crusts") must begin the missing clause.
Choice A is incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The subject of the modifier
"fortifying soil in arid ecosystems against erosion" is "biocrusts," not "a recent study’s estimate." Choice B is
incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The subject of the modifier "fortifying soil in
arid ecosystems against erosion" is "biocrusts," not "an estimated 60 percent reduction." Choice D is incorrect.
Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The subject of the modifier "fortifying soil in arid
ecosystems against erosion" is "biocrusts," not "a recent study."
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of non-finite (untensed) verb forms in a
sentence. The modal “would,” which indicates the future from a perspective in the past, should be accompanied
by a non-finite plain form verb. In this choice, the non-finite plain form verb “create” is used correctly in
conjunction with the non-finite plain form verb “increase” to describe what the lock would do.
Choice A is incorrect because the finite present tense verb “creates” can’t be used in this way with the modal
“would” to describe what the lock would do. Choice C is incorrect because the present participle “creating” can’t
be used in this way with the modal “would” to describe what the lock would do. Choice D is incorrect because the
finite past tense verb “created” can’t be used in this way with the modal “would” to describe what the lock would
do.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The subject of the sentence is “The African Games Co-production Market.” That’s
one market, so it’s a singular noun, which means it needs a singular verb. “Promotes” is the only singular verb
among the choices.
Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a subject-verb agreement error. The subject “The African Games Co-
production Market” is singular, but the verb “promote” is plural. Choice B is incorrect. This choice creates a
subject-verb agreement error. The subject “The African Games Co-production Market” is singular, but the verb
“are promoting” is plural. Choice D is incorrect. This choice creates a subject-verb agreement error. The subject
“The African Games Co-production Market” is singular, but the verb “have promoted” is plural.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is finite verb use in a main clause. A main clause
requires a finite verb to perform the action of the subject (in this case, Ashford’s “gestures” and “habit”), and this
choice supplies the finite past tense verb “helped” to indicate what Ashford’s gestures and habit helped
accomplish.
Choice B is incorrect because the non-finite participle “helping” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice C is incorrect because the relative clause “that helped” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice D is incorrect because the non-finite to-infinitive “to help” doesn’t supply the main clause with a
finite verb.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject–verb agreement. The singular verb “allows”
agrees in number with the singular subject “landing.”
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “are allowing” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
“landing.” Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “have allowed” doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject “landing.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “allow” doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject “landing.”
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of plural and possessive nouns. The plural
possessive noun “people’s” and the plural noun “stories” correctly indicate that there are multiple stories from
multiple people.
Choice B is incorrect because the context requires the plural possessive noun “people’s” and the plural noun
“stories,” not the plural noun “peoples” and the singular possessive noun “story’s.” Choice C is incorrect because
the context requires the plural possessive noun “people’s,” not the plural noun “peoples.” Choice D is incorrect
because the context requires the plural noun “stories,” not the singular possessive noun “story’s.”
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the
noun phrase “researcher Robert Losey” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying
phrase “since…Siberia.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that researcher Robert Losey—and not another
noun in the sentence—is who uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern
Siberia.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “researcher
Robert Losey’s argument” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “argument” is
what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia. Choice C is
incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “domestication” immediately after
the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “domestication” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old
reindeer training harness in northern Siberia. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The
placement of the noun phrase “the argument” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that
the “argument” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of plural nouns. The plural nouns
"musicians" and "audiences" correctly indicate that there were multiple musicians introducing the music to
multiple audiences.
Choice B is incorrect because the context requires the plural nouns "musicians" and "audiences," not the plural
possessive nouns "musicians’" and "audiences’." Choice C is incorrect because the context requires the plural
nouns "musicians" and "audiences," not the singular possessive nouns "musician’s" and "audience’s." Choice D is
incorrect because the context requires the plural noun "musicians," not the plural possessive noun "musicians’."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "focuses"
agrees in number with the singular subject "each one of these plays," which refers to each play individually.
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb "focus" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject "each one
of these plays." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "are focused" doesn’t agree in number with the
singular subject "each one of these plays." Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb "were focused" doesn’t
agree in number with the singular subject "each one of these plays."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun-antecedent agreement. The plural pronoun
"they" agrees in number with the plural antecedent "animals," which refers to tardigrades.
Choice A is incorrect because the singular pronoun "that" doesn’t agree in number with the plural antecedent
"animals." Choice B is incorrect because the singular pronoun "it" doesn’t agree in number with the plural
antecedent "animals." Choice D is incorrect because the singular pronoun "he" doesn’t agree in number with the
plural antecedent "animals."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the
noun phrase “Julian’s 1935 synthesis” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying
phrase “named…years.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that Julian’s 1935 synthesis of the alkaloid
physostigmine—and not another noun in the sentence—was named in 1999 as one of the greatest achievements
by a US chemist in the past hundred years.
Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “Julian” immediately
after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that Julian himself was named as one of the greatest
achievements by a US chemist in the past hundred years. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling
modifier. The placement of the prepositional phrase “in 1935” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically
and confusingly suggests that “in 1935” was named as one of the greatest achievements by a US chemist in the
past hundred years. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun
phrase “the alkaloid physostigmine” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically and confusingly
suggests that the alkaloid physostigmine itself (not the synthesis of it) was named as one of the greatest
achievements by a US chemist in the past hundred years.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the present perfect tense verb “have contributed,” used in conjunction with the phrase “since it
began in 2012,” correctly indicates that map editors have contributed in the past and continue to do so in the
present.
Choice A is incorrect because the present tense verb “contribute” is inconsistent with the phrase “since it began
in 2012,” which suggests that the contributions occurred in the past and continue into the present. Choice B is
incorrect because the future tense verb “will contribute” is inconsistent with the phrase “since it began in 2012,”
which suggests that the contributions occurred in the past and continue into the present. Choice D is incorrect
because the future tense verb “will be contributing” is inconsistent with the phrase “since it began in 2012,”
which suggests that the contributions occurred in the past and continue into the present.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The modifier “far from being
modern inventions” must be describing “drinking straws,” because those are the only possible inventions in this
sentence.
Choice A is incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The modifier “far from being
modern inventions” can’t be describing “Sumerians,” because they are a group of people, not an invention. Choice
C is incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The modifier “far from being modern
inventions” can’t be describing “the use of drinking straws,” because it is not “the use” of drinking straws that is
an invention—it is the drinking straws themselves. Choice D is incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go
next to each other. The modifier “far from being modern inventions” can’t be describing “Ancient Mesopotamia,”
because that is a place, not an invention.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of plural and possessive nouns. The plural
possessive noun “grains’” and the plural noun “properties” correctly indicate that the simulations involved
multiple snow grains and that those snow grains had several properties.
Choice A is incorrect because the context requires the plural possessive noun “grains’” and the plural noun
“properties,” not the singular possessive noun “grain’s” and the plural possessive noun “properties’.” Choice C is
incorrect because the context requires the plural noun “properties,” not the singular possessive noun
“property’s.” Choice D is incorrect because the context requires the plural possessive noun “grains’,” not the
plural noun “grains.”
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of plural and possessive nouns. The plural
nouns “stories” and “immigrants” correctly indicate that the memoir tells multiple stories of multiple
immigrants.
Choice A is incorrect because the context requires the plural noun “stories,” not the singular possessive noun
“story’s.” Choice B is incorrect because the context requires the plural nouns “stories” and “immigrants,” not the
singular possessive noun “story’s” and the plural possessive noun “immigrants’.” Choice D is incorrect because
the context requires the plural nouns “stories” and “immigrants,” not the plural possessive noun “stories’” and the
singular possessive noun “immigrant’s.”
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. Subject-modifier placement requires a modifier and its subject to be next to each
other. The subject of the modifier "a coming-of-age story…colonialism" is Chraïbi’s novel The Simple Past, so the
subject "Chraïbi’s debut novel" fits perfectly after this introductory modifying phrase.
Choice A is incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each other. The introductory modifier "a
coming-of-age story…colonialism" is describing Chraïbi’s novel, not Morocco. However, this choice places
Morocco directly next to that modifier. Choice C is incorrect. Modifiers and their subjects must go next to each
other. The introductory modifier "a coming-of-age story…colonialism" all describes Chraïbi’s novel, not Chraïbi
himself. However, this choice places Chraïbi directly next to that modifier. Choice D is incorrect. Modifiers and
their subjects must go next to each other. The modifier "a coming-of-age story…" is describing Chraïbi’s novel, so
that needs to be the subject immediately after the modifier. This choice adds another modifier that describes
Chraïbi’s novel, but then puts "Chraïbi" himself—not the novel—right after that modifier, which doesn’t make
sense. Chraïbi wasn’t "published two years before" Moroccan independence; his novel The Simple Past was.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “has
been” agrees in number with the singular subject “writing.”
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “were” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “writing.”
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “have been” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
“writing.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “are” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
“writing.”
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of finite and nonfinite verb forms within a
sentence. The nonfinite present participle “forcing” is correctly used to form a participial phrase that
supplements the main clause “those...cover,” describing the effects on monkeys of the lack of food sources.
Choice A is incorrect because the finite present tense verb “forces” can’t be used in this way to supplement the
main clause (“those...cover”). Choice B is incorrect. While the nonfinite to-infinitive “to force” could be used to
form a subordinate clause that supplements the main clause (“those...cover”), to-infinitives conventionally
express purpose, and nothing in the sentence suggests that the food sources become unavailable for the purpose
of forcing monkeys to hunt marine animals. Choice D is incorrect because the finite past tense verb “forced”
can’t be used in this way to supplement the main clause (“those...cover”).
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. "That…[rain] back onto Mars’s surface" is a relative clause that describes the "bits of
molten rock." Forming the clause requires a conjugated, finite verb, and this is the only choice that provides that.
Choice A is incorrect. "To rain" is an infinitive and can’t serve as the main verb of a clause. A conjugated verb is
needed here to form the main verb of the relative clause "that…[rain] back onto Mars’s surface," which describes
the "bits of molten rock." Choice B is incorrect. "Raining" is a present participle and, on its own, can’t serve as the
main verb of a clause. A conjugated verb is needed here to form the main verb of the relative clause "that…[rain]
back onto Mars’s surface," which describes the "bits of molten rock." Choice C is incorrect. "Having rained" is a
perfect participle and can’t serve as the main verb of a clause. A conjugated verb is needed here to form the main
verb of the relative clause "that…[rain] back onto Mars’s surface," which describes the "bits of molten rock."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes
“silica glass’s atomic arrangement” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying
phrase “compared to that of alumina glass.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that silica glass’s atomic
arrangement—and not another noun in the sentence—is being compared to the atomic arrangement (“that”) of
alumina glass.
Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “silica glass”
immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that silica glass itself (rather than its atomic
arrangement) is being compared to alumina glass’s atomic arrangement. Choice B is incorrect because it results
in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “silica glass” immediately after the modifying phrase
illogically suggests that silica glass itself (rather than its atomic arrangement) is being compared to alumina
glass’s atomic arrangement. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the
noun phrase “a significant disadvantage” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “a
significant disadvantage” is being compared to alumina glass’s atomic arrangement.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
present tense verb “experiences” is consistent with the other present tense verbs (e.g., “connects” and “prepares”)
used to describe the events in Truong’s novels. Furthermore, it’s conventional to use the present tense when
discussing a literary work.
Choice A is incorrect because the past tense verb “experienced” isn’t consistent with the other present tense
verbs used to describe the events in Truong’s novels. Choice B is incorrect because the past perfect tense verb
“had experienced” isn’t consistent with the other present tense verbs used to describe the events in Truong’s
novels. Choice D is incorrect because the future progressive tense verb “will be experiencing” isn’t consistent
with the other present tense verbs used to describe the events in Truong’s novels.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of possessive nouns. The singular possessive
noun "Moon’s" correctly indicates that there is only one Moon, and it has a gravitational pull.
Choice B is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive noun "Moon’s," not the plural noun
"Moons." Choice C is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive noun "Moon’s," not the plural
possessive noun "Moons’." Choice D is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive noun
"Moon’s," not the singular noun "Moon."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of plural and possessive nouns. The singular
possessive noun “playa’s” and the plural possessive noun “rocks’” correctly indicate that the sediment is that of
one playa (the Racetrack Playa) and that there are multiple rocks that have mysteriously migrated across the
sediment.
Choice A is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive noun “playa’s” and the plural
possessive noun “rocks’,” not the plural noun “playas” and the singular possessive noun “rock’s.” Choice B is
incorrect because the context requires the plural possessive noun “rocks’,” not the plural noun “rocks.” Choice D
is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive noun “playa’s,” not the plural possessive noun
“playas’.”
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. "It" is a singular pronoun used to stand in for objects. Since the antecedent in this
case is the singular noun phrase "the human brain," "it" is a perfect pronoun to use here.
Choice A is incorrect. Although "she" is a singular pronoun, it is reserved for people and animals, not objects like
"the human brain." Choice B is incorrect. "They" is a plural pronoun, but we need a singular pronoun to represent
the antecedent "the human brain." Choice D is incorrect. "Those" is a plural pronoun, but we need a singular
pronoun to represent the antecedent "the human brain."
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the
noun phrase “the bioswales” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase
“By reducing…sewers.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that the bioswales—and not another noun in
the sentence—are reducing runoff flowing into city sewers.
Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “the
mitigation…waterways” immediately after the modifying phrase results in unclear modification. The resulting
sentence makes it hard to determine what is responsible for “reducing the runoff”: the bioswales or some other
noun in the sentence. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun
phrase “the bioswales’ mitigation…waterways” immediately after the modifying phrase results in unclear
modification. The resulting sentence makes it hard to determine what is responsible for “reducing the runoff”:
the bioswales or some other noun in the sentence. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier.
The placement of the noun phrase “street flooding and the resulting pollution” immediately after the modifying
phrase illogically suggests that the “flooding and pollution” are reducing runoff flowing into city sewers.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The noun that goes with "expand and contract" is "rivers," a plural noun. "They" is a
third-person plural pronoun, so it can correctly stand in for "rivers."
Choice B is incorrect. This choice creates a pronoun-antecedent agreement error. "One" is a singular pronoun,
but the noun that goes with "expand and contract" is "rivers," a plural noun. Choice C is incorrect. This choice
creates a pronoun-antecedent agreement error. "It" is a singular pronoun, but the noun that goes with "expand
and contract" is "rivers," a plural noun. Choice D is incorrect. This choice creates a pronoun-antecedent
agreement error. The noun that goes with "expand and contract" is the plural noun "rivers." Rivers are not people,
so "we" can’t be used to stand in for it.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of nonfinite verb forms within a sentence.
The nonfinite present participle "including" is correctly used to form a participial phrase that supplements the
main clause "he patented many inventions," listing several of Spikes’s patented inventions.
Choice A is incorrect because the finite past tense verb "included" can’t be used in this way to supplement the
main clause "he patented many inventions." Choice B is incorrect because the finite present tense verb
"includes" can’t be used in this way to supplement the main clause "he patented many inventions." Choice D is
incorrect because the finite future tense verb "will include" can’t be used in this way to supplement the main
clause "he patented many inventions."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of finite and nonfinite verb forms within a
sentence. A main clause requires a finite verb to perform the action of the subject (in this case, “a recent study”),
and this choice supplies the finite present tense verb “explains” to indicate that the study explains why plants
that attract bats have evolved to produce moderately sweet nectar.
Choice B is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “explaining” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice C is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “having explained” doesn’t supply the main clause
with a finite verb. Choice D is incorrect because the nonfinite to-infinitive “to explain” doesn’t supply the main
clause with a finite verb.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The past tense of "suspended" matches the past tense of "applied," which has the
same subject ("he") and takes place in the same context: "He applied…and [he] suspended."
Choice A is incorrect. The perfect infinitive "to have suspended" doesn’t match the past tense of "applied," and it
can’t serve as a verb on its own. These are both verbs with the same subject and in the same context, so there’s
no need to shift tenses. Choice B is incorrect. The present participle "suspending" doesn’t match the past tense
of "applied," and it can’t serve as a verb on its own. These are both verbs with the same subject and in the same
context, so there’s no need to shift tenses. Choice C is incorrect. The infinitive "to suspend" doesn’t match the
past tense of "applied," and it can’t serve as a verb on its own. These are both verbs with the same subject and in
the same context, so there’s no need to shift tenses.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. Nothing belongs to the “poems” in the sentence, so it should not be possessive—just
a simple plural noun. The protagonist does belong to the novel—it’s the protagonist of the novel—so “novel” needs
to be a singular possessive noun.
Choice B is incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of Standard
English. This choice uses the singular possessive “poem’s,” but the text indicates that it should be the simple
plural “poems”: there is more than one poem, and nothing belongs to the poems. Choice C is incorrect. This
doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of Standard English. This choice uses the
singular possessive “poem’s,” but the text indicates that it should be the simple plural “poems”: there is more
than one poem, and nothing belongs to the poems. This choice also uses the plural possessive “novels’,” which is
incorrect because there is only one novel. Choice D is incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that
conforms to the conventions of Standard English. This choice uses the plural possessive “novels’,” which is
incorrect because there is only one novel, so it should be the singular possessive “novel’s.” .
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verb forms within a sentence. The
nonfinite present participle verb “looking” is correctly used to form a subordinate clause that describes the
intent behind how L’Engle begins her novel.
Choice A is incorrect because the finite past tense verb “looked” can’t be used in this way to form a subordinate
clause. Choice B is incorrect because the finite present tense verb “looks” can’t be used in this way to form a
subordinate clause. Choice C is incorrect because the finite present progressive tense verb “is looking” can’t be
used in this way to form a subordinate clause.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested here is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb
“was” agrees in number with the singular subject “Josephine St. Pierre Ruffin.”
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “were” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
“Josephine St. Pierre Ruffin.” Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “are” doesn’t agree in number with the
singular subject “Josephine St. Pierre Ruffin.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “have been” doesn’t
agree in number with the singular subject “Josephine St. Pierre Ruffin.”
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The pronoun "them" agrees with the plural antecedents "poems" and "works."
Choice B is incorrect. "This" is a singular pronoun, but its antecedents, "poems" and "works," are plural. Choice C
is incorrect. "That" is a singular pronoun, but its antecedents, "poems" and "works," are plural. Choice D is
incorrect. "It" is a singular pronoun, but its antecedents, "poems" and "works," are plural.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun-antecedent agreement. The plural reflexive
pronoun “themselves” agrees in number with the plural antecedent “turtle barnacles,” correctly indicating what
is attached to a sea turtle shell.
Choice A is incorrect because the singular pronoun “it” doesn’t agree in number with the plural antecedent
“turtle barnacles.” Choice C is incorrect because it results in an unclear and confusing sentence. In this context,
it’s unclear what the plural pronoun “them” refers to. Choice D is incorrect because the singular reflexive
pronoun “itself” doesn’t agree in number with the plural antecedent “turtle barnacles.”
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense in a sentence. In
this choice, the past tense verb “was ruled” correctly indicates that Oba Ewuare I ruled the Kingdom of Benin in
the distant past (from 1440 to 1473). This past tense verb choice is consistent with the other past tense verb
(“was”) used to describe the Kingdom of Benin.
Choice A is incorrect because the present tense verb “is ruled” doesn’t indicate that Oba Ewuare I ruled the
Kingdom of Benin in the distant past. Choice B is incorrect because the future tense verb “will be ruled” doesn’t
indicate that Oba Ewuare I ruled the Kingdom of Benin in the distant past. Choice C is incorrect because the
present perfect tense verb “has been ruled” doesn’t indicate that Oba Ewuare I ruled the Kingdom of Benin in the
distant past.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verb forms within a sentence. Relative
clauses, such as the one beginning with "how," require a finite (tensed) verb, a verb that can function as the main
verb of a clause. This choice correctly supplies the clause with the finite past tense verb "served."
Choice A is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite participle "serving" doesn’t
supply the clause with a finite verb. Choice B is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The
nonfinite participle "having served" doesn’t supply the clause with a finite verb. Choice D is incorrect because it
results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite to-infinitive "to serve" doesn’t supply the clause with a
finite verb.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “outlines”
agrees in number with the singular subject “document.”
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “have outlined” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
“document.” Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “were outlining” doesn’t agree in number with the
singular subject “document.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “outline” doesn’t agree in number with
the singular subject “document.”
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject–verb agreement. The singular verb “is”
agrees in number with the singular subject “the triangle.”
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “are” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “the
triangle.” Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “have been” doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject “the triangle.” Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “were” doesn’t agree in number with the
singular subject “the triangle.”
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. Misaka served in World War II before he joined the New York Knicks in 1947. To
show that a past occurrence took place before another past occurrence, we need to use “had” + the past tense
form of the verb. This is called the past perfect tense.
Choice A is incorrect. Misaka served in World War II before he joined the Knicks. Both events are in the past, but
his service in World War II happened earlier, so we need a verb that makes it clear that his service (and the two
national championships) had ended by the time he joined the Knicks. Choice B is incorrect. “Was already
serving” forms the continuous past tense, which we use when we’re showing a past action that was ongoing.
Misaka served in World War II before he joined the Knicks. Both events are in the past, but they’re not happening
at the same time, so we shouldn’t use the continuous past tense here. Choice C is incorrect. Misaka served in
World War II in the past, so we shouldn’t use the present tense “serves.”
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun–antecedent agreement. The plural pronoun
“they” agrees in number with the plural antecedent “woodcuts” and clearly identifies what was exhibited at the
Smithsonian American Art Museum.
Choice A is incorrect because the singular pronoun “it” doesn’t agree in number with the plural antecedent
“woodcuts.” Choice C is incorrect because the singular pronoun “this” doesn’t agree in number with the plural
antecedent “woodcuts.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural pronoun “some” is illogical in this context
(referring to “some” of two woodcuts).
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
past perfect verb “had reached” is used correctly to describe a past action that was completed before another
action in the past. Specifically, in this hypothetical scenario about the origins of RNA and DNA on Earth, the
simple sugars had to have reached Earth before they could react with other molecules on the planet.
Choice A is incorrect because the present tense verb “reach” doesn’t indicate that the simple sugars reached
Earth before reacting with other molecules on the planet. Choice C is incorrect because the future tense verb
“will reach” doesn’t indicate that the simple sugars reached Earth before reacting with other molecules on the
planet. Choice D is incorrect because the present progressive verb “are reaching” doesn’t indicate that the simple
sugars reached Earth before reacting with other molecules on the planet.
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of plural and possessive nouns. The singular
possessive noun “screw’s” and the plural noun “threads” correctly indicate that there is only one screw and it has
multiple threads.
Choice A is incorrect because the context requires the plural noun “threads,” not the singular possessive noun
“thread’s.” Choice B is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive noun “screw’s,” not the
plural possessive noun “screws’.” Choice D is incorrect because the context requires the singular possessive
noun “screw’s” and the plural noun “threads,” not the plural noun “screws” or the plural possessive noun
“threads.’”
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. There’s only one photographer (Adams), and the photos are his, so the singular
possessive "photographer’s" is correct. There’s more than one photo, and nothing belongs to the photos, so the
simple plural "photos" is correct.
Choice A is incorrect. This choice uses the singular possessive "photo’s," which isn’t correct. There’s more than
one photo, and they don’t possess anything, so the noun should be the simple plural "photos." Choice B is
incorrect. This choice uses the simple plural "photographers" and the singular possessive "photo’s," which aren’t
correct. There’s only one photographer (Adams) and there’s more than one photo. Choice D is incorrect. This
choice uses the simple plural "photographers," which isn’t correct. There’s only one photographer (Adams).
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
present tense verb “fly” is consistent with the other present tense verb ( “journey”) used to describe the
butterflies’ yearly migration. Together, these simple present tense verbs correctly indicate that the migration is a
current, yearly occurrence.
Choice A is incorrect. The simple past tense verb “flew” isn’t consistent with the other present tense verb used to
describe the butterflies’ yearly migration. Choice B is incorrect. The past progressive tense verb “were flying”
isn’t consistent with the other present tense verb used to describe the butterflies’ yearly migration. Choice C is
incorrect. The past perfect tense verb “had flown” isn’t consistent with the other present tense verb used to
describe the butterflies’ yearly migration.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of possessive determiners. The plural
possessive determiner "their" agrees in number with the plural noun "the poems," thus indicating that the poems
had eight panels of text stitched together in the shape of a traditional eight-pointed Lakota star quilt.
Choice B is incorrect because "it’s" is the contraction for "it is" or "it has," not a possessive determiner. Choice C
is incorrect because "they’re" is the contraction for "they are," not a possessive determiner. Choice D is incorrect
because the singular possessive determiner "its" doesn’t agree in number with the plural noun "the poems."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "evokes"
agrees in number with the singular subject "Alexander’s use."
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb "are evoking" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
"Alexander’s use." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "have evoked" doesn’t agree in number with the
singular subject "Alexander’s use." Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb "evoke" doesn’t agree in number
with the singular subject "Alexander’s use."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. "Ascended" is in the simple past tense. Since Kamehameha became king in the past,
this makes the most sense.
Choice B is incorrect. "Will ascend" is in the future tense, but we wouldn’t know about Kamehameha III’s ascent if
it hadn’t happened yet. The information in the sentence, as well as the tense of other verbs, tells us that the
events described happened in the past. Choice C is incorrect. "Ascends" is in the simple present tense. However,
the information in the sentence, as well as the tense of other verbs, tells us that the events described happened
in the past. Choice D is incorrect. "Is ascending" is in the continuous present tense, which we use to show that
something is ongoing, but this doesn’t make sense here—the information in the sentence, as well as the tense of
other verbs, tells us that the events described happened in the past.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb "enable"
agrees in number with the plural subject "sound-based tools."
Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb "has enabled" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject
"sound-based tools." Choice C is incorrect because the singular verb "is enabling" doesn’t agree in number with
the plural subject "sound-based tools." Choice D is incorrect because the singular verb "enables" doesn’t agree in
number with the plural subject "sound-based tools."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The word "earning" is being used to introduce an additional modifying phrase,
which describes how Fairuz’s repertoire lent her cross-generational appeal. When a verb ends in -ing and
doesn’t have a helper verb like "is" before it, it can be used to modify a noun or verb. This is appropriate here.
Choice A is incorrect. The underlined verb is being used to introduce additional descriptive information, which
is set off from the rest of the sentence by a comma. Because there is no subject here, a finite form of the verb
(like "earned") creates an error. We need another form of the verb that doesn’t require a subject and can introduce
descriptive information. Choice B is incorrect. The underlined verb is being used to introduce additional
descriptive information, which is set off from the rest of the sentence by a comma. Because there is no subject
here, a finite form of the verb (like "had earned") creates an error. We need another form of the verb that doesn’t
require a subject and can introduce descriptive information. Choice D is incorrect. The underlined verb is being
used to introduce additional descriptive information, which is set off from the rest of the sentence by a comma.
Because there is no subject here, a finite form of the verb (like "earn") creates an error. We need another form of
the verb that doesn’t require a subject and can introduce descriptive information.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “has
enhanced” agrees in number with the singular subject “A Sheaf Gleaned in French Fields,” which is the title of a
book of poems.
Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “are enhancing” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject
“A Sheaf Gleaned in French Fields.” Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “have enhanced” doesn’t agree
in number with the singular subject “A Sheaf Gleaned in French Fields.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural
verb “enhance” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “A Sheaf Gleaned in French Fields.”
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested here is pronoun-antecedent agreement. The singular
pronoun "it" agrees in number with the singular antecedent "object."
Choice A is incorrect. The singular pronoun "this" is used to refer to a specific thing, but here there is no specific
object being referred to. Instead, the sentence is referring back to a hypothetical object that Cave might use in a
Soundsuit. Choice B is incorrect. The singular pronoun "that" is used to refer to a specific thing, but here there is
no specific object being referred to. Instead, the sentence is referring back to a hypothetical object that Cave
might use in a Soundsuit. Choice C is incorrect because the plural pronoun "these" doesn’t agree in number with
the singular antecedent "object."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. This choice uses the singular verb "remains" to match the singular subject
"equation."
Choice A is incorrect. The singular noun "equation" doesn’t match with the plural verb conjugation "have
remained." Choice B is incorrect. The singular noun "equation" doesn’t match with the plural verb conjugation
"remain." Choice D is incorrect. The singular noun "equation" doesn’t match with the plural verb conjugation "are
remaining."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. It’s the only choice that offers a form of the verb “acknowledge” that can go with the
subject “International Astronomical Union” to make a complete sentence. This might seem like an odd use of
“would,” but when speaking from a point of view in the past, we can actually use “would” to express something
that happened later. That’s the case here: 200 years after Wang Zhenyi’s death, the IAU would finally
acknowledge her contributions.
Choice B is incorrect. This choice creates a sentence fragment. There’s no main verb elsewhere in the sentence,
so we need a form of the verb “acknowledge” that can go with the subject “the International Astronomical Union”
and serve as that main verb. “To acknowledge” can’t do that. Choice C is incorrect. This choice creates a sentence
fragment. There’s no main verb elsewhere in the sentence, so we need a form of the verb “acknowledge” that can
go with the subject “the International Astronomical Union” and serve as that main verb. “Having acknowledged”
can’t do that. Choice D is incorrect. This choice creates a sentence fragment. There’s no main verb elsewhere in
the sentence, so we need a form of the verb “acknowledge” that can go with the subject “the International
Astronomical Union” and serve as that main verb. The “-ing” form can’t do that.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The subject of the modifier “a nearly frictionless state” is “superlubricity.” Subject-
modifier placement requires a modifier and its subject to be next to one another, so “superlubricity” must be the
first word in the missing clause.
Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a subject-modifier placement error. The subject of the modifier “a
nearly frictionless state” is “superlubricity.” Subject-modifier placement requires a modifier and its subject to be
next to one another, so “superlubricity” must be the first word in the missing clause. Choice B is incorrect. This
choice creates a subject-modifier placement error. The subject of the modifier “a nearly frictionless state” is
“superlubricity.” Subject-modifier placement requires a modifier and its subject to be next to one another, so
“superlubricity” must be the first word in the missing clause. Choice C is incorrect. This choice creates a subject-
modifier placement error. The subject of the modifier “a nearly frictionless state” is “superlubricity.” Subject-
modifier placement requires a modifier and its subject to be next to one another, so “superlubricity” must be the
first word in the missing clause.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun–antecedent agreement. The singular
pronoun “it” agrees in number with the singular antecedent “violin” and thus indicates that the traditional violin
(and not its curves) was made lighter.
Choice A is incorrect because the plural pronoun “those” doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent
“violin.” Choice B is incorrect because the singular pronoun “one” is ambiguous in this context; the resulting
sentence leaves unclear what Stradivari made lighter. Choice C is incorrect because the plural pronoun “them”
doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent “violin.”
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. In this choice, the
present tense verb “is,” used in conjunction with the word “today,” correctly indicates that Paik is currently
considered the first video artist.
Choice A is incorrect because the future-indicating verb “will be” doesn’t indicate that Paik is currently
considered the first video artist. Choice B is incorrect because the past perfect tense verb “had been” doesn’t
indicate that Paik is currently considered the first video artist. Choice C is incorrect because the past tense verb
“was” doesn’t indicate that Paik is currently considered the first video artist.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation between a subject and a verb. When, as
in this case, a subject (“Calida Garcia Rawles”) is immediately followed by a verb (“was”), no punctuation is
needed.
Choice A is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb. Choice B is incorrect
because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb. Choice C is incorrect because no
punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject–verb agreement. because the singular verb
“is” agrees in number with the singular subject “the shape.”
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “are” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “the shape.”
Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “were” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “the
shape.” Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “have been” doesn’t agree in number with the singular
subject “the shape.”
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of finite verbs in a relative clause. Relative
clauses, such as the one beginning with “which,” require a finite verb, a verb that can function as the main verb
of a clause. This choice correctly supplies the clause with the finite past tense verb “provided.”
Choice B is incorrect because the non-finite participle “having provided” doesn’t supply the clause with a finite
verb. Choice C is incorrect because the non-finite to-infinitive “to provide” doesn’t supply the clause with a finite
verb. Choice D is incorrect because the non-finite participle “providing” doesn’t supply the clause with a finite
verb.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice ensures
that the introductory phrase “upon recovering two years later” appears immediately before the noun it modifies
(“Henry”), clearly establishing that Henry recovered two years later.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “the reign of
Henry” immediately after the introductory phrase illogically suggests that the reign of Henry recovered two
years later. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase
“Henry’s reign” immediately after the introductory phrase illogically suggests that Henry’s reign recovered two
years later. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the function word
“it” immediately after the introductory phrase illogically suggests that “it” recovered two years later.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. This verb needs to function as the main verb in the sentence, with the subject “one
species,” so it needs to be conjugated. This choice gives us the singular present tense “includes,” which is the
only conjugated form of the verb among the choices.
Choice A is incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of Standard
English. This verb needs to function as the main verb in the sentence, with the subject “one species,” so it needs
to be conjugated. “Having included” is a participle form of the verb: it’s not conjugated and doesn’t function like a
normal verb. Choice B is incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of
Standard English. This verb needs to function as the main verb in the sentence, with the subject “one species,” so
it needs to be conjugated. “Including” is the gerund form of the verb: it’s not conjugated and doesn’t function like
a normal verb. Choice C is incorrect. This doesn’t complete the text in a way that conforms to the conventions of
Standard English. This verb needs to function as the main verb in the sentence, with the subject “one species,” so
it needs to be conjugated. “To include” is the infinitive form of the verb: it’s not conjugated.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of nonfinite verb forms in a sentence. The
nonfinite to-infinitive verb "to join" is correctly used to form a subordinate clause that expresses why Ochoa left
her position (to join the training program).
Choice B is incorrect because the finite verb "is joining" can’t be used in this way to indicate Ochoa’s action of
joining the training program. A conjunction such as "and" would be needed to coordinate "is joining" with the
previous finite verb, "left." Choice C is incorrect because the finite verb "joined" can’t be used in this way to
indicate Ochoa’s action of joining the training program. A conjunction such as "and" would be needed to
coordinate "joined" with the previous finite verb, "left." Choice D is incorrect because the finite verb "joins" can’t
be used in this way to indicate Ochoa’s action of joining the training program. A conjunction such as "and" would
be needed to coordinate "joins" with the previous finite verb, "left."
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verb forms within a sentence. The main
clause of a sentence requires a finite (tensed) verb, and this choice supplies the finite present tense verb
“explain” to indicate what the scientists do.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite participle “having
explained” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite verb. Choice C is incorrect because it results in an
ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite participle “explaining” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice D is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite to-infinitive “to
explain” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite verb.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is finite and nonfinite verb forms within a sentence.
Relative clauses, such as the one beginning with “that,” require a finite verb, a verb that can function as the main
verb of a clause. This choice correctly supplies the clause with the finite future tense verb “will be.”
Choice A is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “being” doesn’t supply the clause with a finite verb. Choice
B is incorrect because the nonfinite to-infinitive “to be” doesn’t supply the clause with a finite verb. Choice C is
incorrect because the nonfinite to-infinitive “to have been” doesn’t supply the clause with a finite verb.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is finite and nonfinite verb forms within a sentence. A
main clause requires a finite verb to perform the action of the subject (in this case, “people in the Americas”), and
this choice supplies the finite past perfect tense verb “have used” to indicate what people in the Americas used
the gourd for.
Choice A is incorrect because the nonfinite to-infinitive “to use” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite
verb. Choice C is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “having used” doesn’t supply the main clause with a
finite verb. Choice D is incorrect because the nonfinite participle “using” doesn’t supply the main clause with a
finite verb.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. Faure redesigned the battery in 1881, and the original battery was invented “fifteen
years earlier.” Notice that this is the only choice in the past tense. To indicate that a past occurrence took place
before another past occurrence, we need to use “had” + the past tense form of the verb. This is called the “past
perfect” tense.
Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a tense error. Planté invented the original battery in the past, so we
shouldn’t use the present tense “is inventing.” Choice B is incorrect. This choice creates a tense error. Planté
invented the original battery in the past, so we shouldn’t use the future tense “will invent.” Choice C is incorrect.
This choice creates a tense error. Planté invented the original battery in the past, so we shouldn’t use the present
tense “invents.”
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the
noun phrase “Anna Behrensmeyer” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying
phrase “a pioneer…fossils.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that Anna Behrensmeyer—and not another
noun in the sentence—is a pioneer in the field of taphonomy.
Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “fossils of thin-
shelled organisms” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “fossils” are a pioneer in
the field of taphonomy. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the
pronoun “it” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “it” is a pioneer in the field of
taphonomy. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “a
2005 analysis” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “a 2005 analysis” is a pioneer in
the field of taphonomy.
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb "takes"
agrees in number with the singular subject "a cycle of lunar phases."
Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb "are taking" doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject "a
cycle of lunar phases." Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb "have taken" doesn’t agree in number with
the singular subject "a cycle of lunar phases." Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb "take" doesn’t agree in
number with the singular subject "a cycle of lunar phases."
Rationale
Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verbs to express tense. Simple present
tense verbs can be used to describe actions that tend to occur, including in a hypothetical or future scenario. In
this case, the simple present tense verb “produce” indicates what the air exchange systems might be able to do
in the future (produce oxygen for astronauts).
Choice A is incorrect. The present progressive tense verb “are producing” suggests that the oxygen is currently
being produced, not that it might be produced in the future. Choice B is incorrect because the past tense verb
“produced” suggests that the oxygen was produced in the past, not that it might be produced in the future.
Choice D is incorrect because the present perfect tense verb “have produced” suggests that the oxygen has been
produced from a point in the past up to the present, not that it might be produced in the future.
Rationale
Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun-antecedent agreement. The singular
pronoun "it" agrees in number with the singular antecedent "the Salt Lake Temple."
Choice B is incorrect because the singular pronoun "one" is ambiguous in this context; the resulting sentence
leaves unclear whether there is only one Salt Lake temple or multiple. Choice C is incorrect because the plural
pronoun "they" doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent "the Salt Lake Temple." Choice D is
incorrect because the plural pronoun "both" doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent "the Salt Lake
Temple."
Rationale
Choice D is the best answer. The subject of the verb is “Lincoln,” and the first sentence tells us that we’re talking
about something that Abraham Lincoln did in 1860. So the simple past tense “leveraged” fits the logic of the text.
Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a tense issue. “Has leveraged” is the present perfect tense, which is
used for an action that began in the past and continues into the present. Lincoln started leveraging his rivals’
talents in 1860—it’s definitely not still happening today. So the present perfect tense isn’t appropriate. Choice B is
incorrect. This choice creates a tense issue. “Is leveraging” is the present tense, but Lincoln leveraged his rivals’
talents in 1860, so the present tense isn’t appropriate. Choice C is incorrect. This choice creates a tense issue.
“Will leverage” is the future tense, but Lincoln leveraged his rivals’ talents in 1860, so the future tense isn’t
appropriate.
Rationale
Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verb forms within a sentence. The
nonfinite to-infinitive verb “to study” is correctly used to form a subordinate clause that indicates what Dr.
Caballero-Gill uses chemistry and fossil evidence for (to study oceans as they were in the past).
Choice A is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The finite verb “has studied” can’t be used
in this way to form a subordinate clause that indicates what Dr. Caballero-Gill uses the evidence for. Choice C is
incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The finite verb “studied” can’t be used in this way to
form a subordinate clause that indicates what Dr. Caballero-Gill uses the evidence for. Choice D is incorrect
because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The finite verb “studies” can’t be used in this way to form a
subordinate clause that indicates what Dr. Caballero-Gill uses the evidence for.