Answer Key - English
EngQ1-Answer: The best answer is D. This option precisely defines the location wherein the subject of the sentence-the man in the silver suit-can be found. The sentence as is contains the correct information, but the phrasing interrupts the flow of the sentence, and unnecessarily includes the specifier "one" in the phrase. Option B is inconclusive, as the center of the rings may not necessarily include the inside of a ring, depending on how the rings are arranged. Option C is incorrectly phrased, as the "one" incorrectly modifies the phrase "center ring." Thus, the best answer is option D, as it contains the necessary information in a phrasing that is both factually and structurally correct.
EngQ2-Answer: The best answer is B. The use of "pacing" implies a repetitive motion over a limited space, and as the rest of the phrase identifies the lion as being inside a cage, no further information is needed. Option A is not appropriate in this case, as it is stylistically incorrect and contains redundant information. Option C is also redundant, and contains a stylistic error; "between the sides" in this context is not a common usage, and is confusingly phrased for most readers. Back and forth is a common adjectival phrase, but back and forth motion is implied in the word "pacing," so option D would also be redundant. Thus, the best option is B, as it shortens the sentence to a succinct phrasing and eliminates unnecessary information.
EngQ3-Answer: The best answer is C. Since the previous sentence was specifically about the lion in his cage, a peripheral mention of the lion's cage that illustrates the subject of this sentence and its relationship to the cage is a solid transition. While the previous sentence mentioned clowns as well, they were not the subject of the sentence, and so the relationship between sentences would not be firmly and logically established by a transition using them. Aerialists were not mentioned at all in the previous sentence, and neither were customers; as a result, there is not a factual basis on which a transition can be anchored. Thus, the best option is C, which connects the subjects of the sentences and allows for a smooth and logical transition between them.
EngQ4-Answer: The best answer is A. This sentence is written from a first-person perspective, as illustrated by the use of "I" and "my" for pronouns, so descriptive information that reinforces the "I" point of view would be the best choice for adjectives. Option B has redundant phrasing, as arched implies a certain degree of height; overhead can also be interpreted as redundant in this context, but it is common usage to include it. Option C is grammatically correct, but is more suited to an impersonal sentence in this context. Option D also contains redundant phrasing and is idiomatically incorrect when combined with the final clause of the sentence. Option A fits smoothly into the first-person perspective, is idiomatically correct and completes the metaphor logically; thus, option A is the best choice.
EngQ5-Answer: The best answer is D. The mini-passage expresses the love the narrator has for circuses, and is written using the past tense, which implies a looking back from the present time and also implies a strong connection with circuses. Option A expresses a change in time, but does not link the subject of the sentence thematically with the passage and does not follow logically. Option B contains a correct time transition, but also has no thematic connection to the passage. Option C has both a time transition and a weak thematic connection, but does not develop it in a consistent fashion with the passage. Only option D has both the thematic connection and a time transition, which makes option D the correct answer.
EngQ6-Answer: The best answer is A. The bolded section highlights a break between clauses in the sentence, and the second clause is a dependent clause, meaning it cannot stand alone as a sentence. Since the dependent clause requires punctuation to conjoin it to the previous clause, option B would not be an appropriate choice. Hyphens are used to form compound words, so option C would not be acceptable either. Option D would not be the best choice because colons are used primarily to form lists or join clauses (usually parallel or independent clauses). Since the clause beginning with "the comic story" is a dependent clause, the semi-colon would be the most accurate selection from the available options. As a result, option A is the best choice.
EngQ7-Answer: The best answer is D. In the context of the sentence, the bolded phrase is being used to describe the quality of length, so the phrase as is would not be appropriate to the sentence, which would eliminate option A. The word "grate," which is most commonly used as a verb for rubbing something against a serrated surface or a noun for a metal hatch cover, would have no bearing on the prepositional phrase, so option B would not be an acceptable choice. From the context of the sentence, the word "too" as a quantity descriptor is not the proper use, so option C would not be acceptable. The prepositional phrase "to great" is in context the only proper choice, so option D would be the correct answer.
EngQ8-Answer: The best answer is B. The author is making the point that a humorous story is already a work of art, so adjectives like "potentially" are not correct, eliminating option D. Along these lines, adjectives like "mainly" imply there is some sense in which the term being modified does not fully meet the qualification. Since the passage clearly states that the humorous story is a work of art, such adjectives are not appropriate, and thus option C is not correct. Although the definition of "only" might seem to make a good fit, the connotation of the word implies a limitation that does not match the author's intent, so option A is not correct. The use of the word "strictly" does not have the same connotation, and rules out any judgment that the humorous story is not art, which aligns closest with the author's intent. Thus, option B is correct.
EngQ9-Answer: The best answer is A. The author is drawing a comparison between storytelling styles, and in regard to the comic story, the author demonstrates that the comic story teller makes clear his or her delight or high opinion of the story. Thus, option D would not be suitable, as the story teller is interested in sharing the tale. A story is generally not rushed in its telling in order to impart maximum information and impact, so option B would not work in this example. The clause immediately following the bolded section says the story teller laughs at the story; in context, that is the proper placement of the mention of laughter, and other mentions would be redundant, so option C is not relevant. The term "eager delight" most clearly identifies the story teller's frame of mind in relating a comic story, so option A would be the correct choice.
EngQ10-Answer: The best answer is D. The author refers to the narrative climax of the comic story as being the aspect of the story that generates laughter. Modern common parlance has different meanings for the word "nub," so in this context, option A would not be suitable. Although the point of the story may indeed be the central theme meant to be communicated, the expression of the humor is usually more important than the content, so option B would also not be suitable in this context. A summary of a story that had just been told would be unnecessarily redundant in virtually all settings, so option C would not be correct. However, the punchline, or humorous conclusion, would be the part of the story most likely to elicit laughs even if repeated, and thus, option D is the correct answer.
EngQ11-Answer: The best answer is C. From the context of the sentence, the reader can see that the adverb must modify "fashionable" such that the next action becomes more likely, and as written, the bolded adverb fails to do that. Thus, option A is not correct. Using "prohibitively" as the adverb would modify the term such that the end result is exactly opposite of what the context implies, so option B is not correct. Given the sentence's construction, an adverb must be used at that location, as "yet" and "fashionable" would not be used correctly without one, so option D is not correct. Only option C, with its adverb modifying the term in a positive fashion to agree with the rest of the clause, correctly completes the sentence; thus, option C is correct.
EngQ12-Answer: The best answer is A. The author intends to reinforce the first sentence with the reason expressed in the second sentence, so the sentences must logically agree. If option B is used, then the sentences logically contradict each other and the point is negated. Therefore, option B is not correct. By the same token, option C is not correct, as using it in the second sentence also creates a logical negation of the first sentence. The sentence structure would be incorrect if option D is selected, as there would be no term for "more" to modify, so option D is not correct. Only option A offers a logical completion of the second sentence and allows it to complement the first sentence; therefore, option A is the correct answer.
EngQ13-Answer: The best answer is B. The author is describing an action taken against a population by a political entity-in this case, King George III is taking action against the population of the American colonies-so the word "oppress" is the more correct term to use in this situation. Thus, options C and D are automatically excluded, since they use "repress" in their construction. Furthermore, the agent of the tyrannical action being taken is a compound of the English king's actions and Parliament's, so the term "combination" has a direct relationship to the action. Given the relationship and the context of the sentence, using a comma to separate the terms would be incorrect, so option A is not suitable. Only option B uses the correct terminology and punctuation, so option B is the correct answer.
EngQ14-Answer: The best answer is C. In the context of the sentence, the author is using compare and contrast to list what is not included in his work. Since the first term is "compliments," the second or contrasting term must be a word opposite in meaning. Option A is not suitable, as a conundrum is a puzzle or riddle and thus does not fit the author's intention. Option B is also not suitable, as catharsis is an emotional purging and thus has no relation to the sentence. Likewise, option D would not be correct, as a conference also has no relation to the sentence. Only option C, which holds an opposite definition to compliment, suits the author's contextual intention, and so option C is the correct answer.
EngQ15-Answer: The best answer is B. Reducing the number of adjectives to one in the sentence would have little effect on the meaning of the sentence, as it would have only changed the structure without altering the primary adjective. Thus, option A would not be correct. Generally, reducing adjectives makes a sentence more direct but detracts from its descriptive nature, so option C would not be correct either. Since formal diction depends more on tone and syntax than specific numbers of words, option D would not be suitable here either. Only option B, which directly refers to the emotional impact of the sentence (and is achieved by getting directly to the point), would be a suitable choice for the suggested change; thus, option B is correct.
EngQ16-Answer: The best answer is D. At the time of writing, all governments in the Western world (defined in this case as Europe west of Russia) were as the author identified, so option A would not be suitable. However, there are more than two types of government-for example, democracy as practiced by the Greeks is not mentioned-so option B is not correct, as it identifies a condition that the passage has not met. Although the author is known as a political philosopher, the opening of the passage explicitly defines the state as one of the types of government he goes on to discuss, so option C is not relevant, as the author is discussing governments. Only option D strictly defines the purpose of the passage and how it relates to the stated goal of the question; thus, option D is correct.
EngQ17-Answer: The best answer is B. While commas have multiple uses, their primary usage, and the one the author intends here, is to separate items in a list. If the comma is placed after the first coordinating conjunction, as in option A, the emphasis changes from a list to a specific sub-clause; as the rest of the sentence is clearly numerating a list, option A is therefore not correct. Option C illustrates a comma where neither grammar nor rhythm would indicate a comma belongs; thus, option C is not correct. Option D shows a run-on phrase, which in the context of the sentence is incorrect, as it does not correctly demonstrate the list structure the author intends, and so option D is incorrect. Only option B, which correctly places the comma to illustrate items in a list, fits the context and structure of the sentence; thus, option B is correct.
EngQ18-Answer: The best answer is D. Value judgments such as "interesting," while commonly used in teaching situations, are subjective measurements, and do not reflect the inherent structure or meaning as much as the reader's bias. As a result, this option is not valid for this example, so option A is not correct. In order for "precise" to apply, the replacement clause would have to strictly and carefully define a condition rather than restating it in fewer words. Since this is not the case, option B is not correct. The change in terms does not carry an emotional weight or a sense of urgency, so option C is not suitable. Only option D, which accurately describes the condition of expressing more ideas in fewer words, properly describes the effect of the substituted phrase, so option D is correct.
EngQ19-Answer: The best answer is A. In order for the bolded words to function as nouns, they would have to describe a person, place or thing; in other words, something concrete, which neither word does. Therefore, option B is incorrect. Since neither word describes an action that the subject of a sentence could take or perform, neither word can function as a verb. As a result, option C is also incorrect. While the bolded words do modify a word in the sentence in degree, the term being modified-force-is not a verb, adjective or adverb in itself; in this case, force is a noun. Therefore, the bolded words fail to meet the condition of adverbs, so option D is incorrect. Since the bolded words modify a noun, they act as adjectives, and so option A is the correct choice.
EngQ20-Answer: The best answer is D. The sentence's construction and context indicate the author is drawing a conclusion about the nature of governing over a long period of time, so a phrase giving a sense of time spanned is essential. However, the phrasing of the bolded clause is redundant, as the context of the sentence already implies the author is considering the totality of the time period. As a result, option A is not correct. Since the context of the sentence requires a sense of time passed for comparison purposes, option B cannot be used, as the sentence would become illogical without the time span mentioned. Option C is not suitable for the same reason that option A was unsuitable; since totality is implied in the passage, using "total" provides redundant information. Only option D provides the time information needed without redundancy; thus, option D is correct.
Last Updated: 02/23/2013