Sentence Correction Set 1

1. Los Angeles has a higher number of family dwellings per capita than any large city.

A higher number of family dwellings per capita than any large city

Higher numbers of family dwellings per capita than any other large city

A higher number of family dwellings per capita than does any other large city

Higher numbers of family dwellings per capita than do other large cities

A high per capita number of family dwellings, more than does any other large city

Los Angeles has a higher number of family dwellings per capita than any other large city. This means that compared to all other large cities, Los Angeles has a greater number of family dwellings for every person living there. The use of "does" in the answer choice indicates that Los Angeles has a higher number of family dwellings per capita compared to each individual large city, rather than just in general.

Explanation

Los Angeles has a higher number of family dwellings per capita than any other large city. This means that compared to all other large cities, Los Angeles has a greater number of family dwellings for every person living there. The use of "does" in the answer choice indicates that Los Angeles has a higher number of family dwellings per capita compared to each individual large city, rather than just in general.

2. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

Explanation

caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

3. According to public health officials, in 1998 Massachusetts became the first state in which more babies were born to women over the age of thirty than under it.

Than

Than born

Than they were

Than there had been

Than had been born

If you not sure whether the original sentence is fine as is, try to replace "than" by any of the other four choices while keeping track of the meaning (or intended meaning) of the sentence.

If you pay attention, you'll find out rather quickly that every choice except Choice A (the original) is meaningless, even ludicrous.

Take choice B for instance: than born

What you would be saying here is that some babies were born under the age of thirty. Duh!, I certainly hope so.

Choice A is the best answer since "under it" is just the same as "under the age of thirty" and, of course, we're talking about women, not babies. Got it?

Explanation

If you not sure whether the original sentence is fine as is, try to replace "than" by any of the other four choices while keeping track of the meaning (or intended meaning) of the sentence.

If you pay attention, you'll find out rather quickly that every choice except Choice A (the original) is meaningless, even ludicrous.

Take choice B for instance: than born

What you would be saying here is that some babies were born under the age of thirty. Duh!, I certainly hope so.

Choice A is the best answer since "under it" is just the same as "under the age of thirty" and, of course, we're talking about women, not babies. Got it?

4. A huge flying reptile that died out with the dinosaurs some 65 million years ago, the Quetzalcoatlus had a wingspan of 36 feet, believed to be the largest flying creature the world has ever seen.

Believed to be

And that is believed to be

And it is believed to have been

Which was, it is believed,

Which is believed to be

First, try to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

We cannot use just the phrase believed to be, for it seems to refer to "wingspan" (and, grammatically, it does) rather than to "Quetzalcoatlus", which is the flying creature mentioned in the sentence. To correct the mistake, we need to put after the second comma the coordinating conjunction "and"and use the personal pronoun "it" to refer back to the antecedent, Quetzalcoatlus, the original subject. The pronoun "it" is needed because of the presence of the second comma, which is not underlined and therefore not replaceable. The relative pronoun "that" is inappropriate when placed after the second comma as it cannot replace Quetzalcoatlus. Doing so would be grammatically incorrect.

Finally, if the relative pronoun "which" is placed just after the second comma, it can refer only to "wingspan" or, perhaps, to "feet" without any confusion. So, Choice D and Choice E are incorrect for yet another reason.

From the above discussion, every choice can be eliminated except Choice C, the correct answer.

Note: The past infinitive "to have been" is needed instead of the present infinitive "to be" because the Quetzalcoatlus has died out.

Explanation

First, try to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

We cannot use just the phrase believed to be, for it seems to refer to "wingspan" (and, grammatically, it does) rather than to "Quetzalcoatlus", which is the flying creature mentioned in the sentence. To correct the mistake, we need to put after the second comma the coordinating conjunction "and"and use the personal pronoun "it" to refer back to the antecedent, Quetzalcoatlus, the original subject. The pronoun "it" is needed because of the presence of the second comma, which is not underlined and therefore not replaceable. The relative pronoun "that" is inappropriate when placed after the second comma as it cannot replace Quetzalcoatlus. Doing so would be grammatically incorrect.

Finally, if the relative pronoun "which" is placed just after the second comma, it can refer only to "wingspan" or, perhaps, to "feet" without any confusion. So, Choice D and Choice E are incorrect for yet another reason.

From the above discussion, every choice can be eliminated except Choice C, the correct answer.

Note: The past infinitive "to have been" is needed instead of the present infinitive "to be" because the Quetzalcoatlus has died out.

5. Emily Dickinson's letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's death in 1886, outnumbering her letters to anyone else.

The correct answer is "Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber." This answer accurately describes the letters written by Emily Dickinson to Susan Huntington Dickinson. The use of "which" correctly introduces the relative clause that provides additional information about the letters. The phrase "beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886" specifies the time period during which the letters were written. The word "outnumber" indicates that the number of letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson is greater than the number of letters to anyone else.

Explanation

The correct answer is "Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber." This answer accurately describes the letters written by Emily Dickinson to Susan Huntington Dickinson. The use of "which" correctly introduces the relative clause that provides additional information about the letters. The phrase "beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886" specifies the time period during which the letters were written. The word "outnumber" indicates that the number of letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson is greater than the number of letters to anyone else.

6. The first English settlers to establish a permanent colony in America did it not at Plymouth but along the shore of the James River west of Chesapeake Bay.

It not at Plymouth but

So not at Plymouth but

Not at Plymouth but instead

Not at Plymouth but did so

It not at Plymouth but rather

The correct answer is "so not at Plymouth but". This phrase is used to contrast the location where the first English settlers established a permanent colony in America with the expected location of Plymouth. It indicates that the settlers did not choose Plymouth as their colony location, but instead chose the shore of the James River west of Chesapeake Bay.

Explanation

The correct answer is "so not at Plymouth but". This phrase is used to contrast the location where the first English settlers established a permanent colony in America with the expected location of Plymouth. It indicates that the settlers did not choose Plymouth as their colony location, but instead chose the shore of the James River west of Chesapeake Bay.

7. A study by the Ocean Wildlife Campaign urged states to undertake a number of remedies to reverse a decline in the shark population, which includes the establishment of size limits for shark catches, closing state waters for shark fishing during pupping season, and requiring commercial fishers to have federal shark permits.

Which includes the establishment of size limits for shark catches, closing

Which includes establishing limits to the size of sharks that can be caught, closing

Which include the establishment of size limits for shark catches, the closing of

Including establishing size limits for shark catches, closing

Including the establishing of limits to the size of sharks that are caught, the closing of

As always, try first to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

(Note that, ungrammatically, I tend to put the period or comma outside the quotation marks in order to be clear about which specific noun I am talking.)

To begin with, the relative pronoun "which" is way too far from "remedies", the noun it is supposed to modify if we read properly the intended meaning of the sentence. Within the current structure of the sentence, the antecedent of "which" could be "shark population" or even "decline", but definitely not "remedies". But then the sentence would not make sense.

So, "including" must be in place of "which includes" right after the first comma.

However, the most blatant grammatical flaw is the lack of parallel structure between "establishment" on one hand and "closing" and "requiring" on the other hand, elements that describe the kind of remedies undertaken. Since the last item in the list, "requiring", is a present participle (verb in -ing form and playing the role of a verb or adjective), "establishment" needs to be replaced by the present participle "establishing" to be consistent with "closing" and "requiring".

This leaves us with only Choice D, the best answer.

Note: In Choice E, "The establishing" and "the closing" are gerunds (verbs in -ing form playing the role of a noun) and are not parallel with "requiring", a present participle.

Explanation

As always, try first to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

(Note that, ungrammatically, I tend to put the period or comma outside the quotation marks in order to be clear about which specific noun I am talking.)

To begin with, the relative pronoun "which" is way too far from "remedies", the noun it is supposed to modify if we read properly the intended meaning of the sentence. Within the current structure of the sentence, the antecedent of "which" could be "shark population" or even "decline", but definitely not "remedies". But then the sentence would not make sense.

So, "including" must be in place of "which includes" right after the first comma.

However, the most blatant grammatical flaw is the lack of parallel structure between "establishment" on one hand and "closing" and "requiring" on the other hand, elements that describe the kind of remedies undertaken. Since the last item in the list, "requiring", is a present participle (verb in -ing form and playing the role of a verb or adjective), "establishment" needs to be replaced by the present participle "establishing" to be consistent with "closing" and "requiring".

This leaves us with only Choice D, the best answer.

Note: In Choice E, "The establishing" and "the closing" are gerunds (verbs in -ing form playing the role of a noun) and are not parallel with "requiring", a present participle.

8. Were it not for the fusion-powered heat and radiation that rush from its core, instead its own weight would cause a star to collapse.

Instead its own weight would cause a star to collapse

Instead a star would have collapsed under its own weight

A star would have to be collapsing under its own weight

A star would collapse under its own weight

Its own weight would have caused a star’s collapse

First, try to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

The sentence has two clauses -- a dependent clause and a main clause -- separated by a comma. The first clause is really a condition, that is an "if clause". "Were it not" can properly be replaced by "If it were not". The first clause is a modifying phrase that refers to something that is not mentioned yet, and we would expect that "thing" to appear explicitly in the main (second) clause. Even though this is not always true for this kind of sentence structure (main clause-dependent clause), it is grammatically elegant to have the "thing" being modified to appear just after the comma. In the above sentence, the "thing" that is modified is clearly "a star".

The above remark leaves us with Choice C or Choice D. Evidently, D is the preferable answer choice between the two since it makes more sense and is more concise.

Note: A great way to look at the sentence is to switch the position of the dependent clause (the first clause) and that of the main clause. It will become clear then that Choice A and Choice B can be easily eliminated and that Choice D is the best answer:

A star would collapse under its own weight were it not for the fusion-powered heat and radiation that rush from its core.

Explanation

First, try to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

The sentence has two clauses -- a dependent clause and a main clause -- separated by a comma. The first clause is really a condition, that is an "if clause". "Were it not" can properly be replaced by "If it were not". The first clause is a modifying phrase that refers to something that is not mentioned yet, and we would expect that "thing" to appear explicitly in the main (second) clause. Even though this is not always true for this kind of sentence structure (main clause-dependent clause), it is grammatically elegant to have the "thing" being modified to appear just after the comma. In the above sentence, the "thing" that is modified is clearly "a star".

The above remark leaves us with Choice C or Choice D. Evidently, D is the preferable answer choice between the two since it makes more sense and is more concise.

Note: A great way to look at the sentence is to switch the position of the dependent clause (the first clause) and that of the main clause. It will become clear then that Choice A and Choice B can be easily eliminated and that Choice D is the best answer:

A star would collapse under its own weight were it not for the fusion-powered heat and radiation that rush from its core.

9. Currently 26 billion barrels a year, world consumption of oil is rising at a rate of 2 percent annually.

World consumption of oil is rising at a rate of

The world is consuming oil at an increasing rate of

The world’s oil is being consumed at the increasing rate of

The rise in the rate of the world’s oil consumption is

Oil is consumed by the world at an increasing rate of

The given correct answer is "world consumption of oil is rising at a rate of". This answer accurately states that the consumption of oil globally is increasing over time. It implies that the demand for oil is growing at a consistent rate of 2 percent annually.

Explanation

The given correct answer is "world consumption of oil is rising at a rate of". This answer accurately states that the consumption of oil globally is increasing over time. It implies that the demand for oil is growing at a consistent rate of 2 percent annually.

10. A huge flying reptile that died out with the dinosaurs some 65 million years ago, the Quetzalcoatlus had a wingspan of 36 feet, believed to be the largest flying creature the world has ever seen.

Believed to be

And that is believed to be

And it is believed to have been

Which was, it is believed,

Which is believed to be

First, try to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

We cannot use just the phrase believed to be, for it seems to refer to "wingspan" (and, grammatically, it does) rather than to "Quetzalcoatlus", which is the flying creature mentioned in the sentence. To correct the mistake, we need to put after the second comma the coordinating conjunction "and"and use the personal pronoun "it" to refer back to the antecedent, Quetzalcoatlus, the original subject. The pronoun "it" is needed because of the presence of the second comma, which is not underlined and therefore not replaceable. The relative pronoun "that" is inappropriate when placed after the second comma as it cannot replace Quetzalcoatlus. Doing so would be grammatically incorrect.

Finally, if the relative pronoun "which" is placed just after the second comma, it can refer only to "wingspan" or, perhaps, "feet" without any confusion. So, Choice D and Choice E are incorrect for yet another reason.

From the above discussion, every choice can be eliminated except Choice C, the correct answer.

Note: The past infinitive "to have been" is needed instead of the present infinitive "to be" because the Quetzalcoatlus has died out.

Explanation

First, try to find the error(s), if any, in the original sentence.

We cannot use just the phrase believed to be, for it seems to refer to "wingspan" (and, grammatically, it does) rather than to "Quetzalcoatlus", which is the flying creature mentioned in the sentence. To correct the mistake, we need to put after the second comma the coordinating conjunction "and"and use the personal pronoun "it" to refer back to the antecedent, Quetzalcoatlus, the original subject. The pronoun "it" is needed because of the presence of the second comma, which is not underlined and therefore not replaceable. The relative pronoun "that" is inappropriate when placed after the second comma as it cannot replace Quetzalcoatlus. Doing so would be grammatically incorrect.

Finally, if the relative pronoun "which" is placed just after the second comma, it can refer only to "wingspan" or, perhaps, "feet" without any confusion. So, Choice D and Choice E are incorrect for yet another reason.

From the above discussion, every choice can be eliminated except Choice C, the correct answer.

Note: The past infinitive "to have been" is needed instead of the present infinitive "to be" because the Quetzalcoatlus has died out.

11. A mixture of poems and short fiction, Jean Toomer's Cane has been called one of the three best novels ever written by Black Americans—the others being Richard Wright, author of Native Son, and Ralph Ellison, author of Invisible Man.

Black Americans—the others being Richard Wright, author of Native Son, and Ralph Ellison, author of Invisible Man

Black Americans—including Native Son by Richard Wright and Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison

A Black American—including Richard Wright, author of Native Son, and Ralph Ellison, author of Invisible Man

A Black American—the others being Richard Wright, author of Native Son, and Ralph Ellison, author of Invisible Man

A Black American—the others being Richard Wright’s Native Son and Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man

First, single out the error(s) in the original sentence. The sentence clearly violates the parallel structure rule. The part of the sentence before the hyphen is not parallel to the part after the hyphen. Understand that Cane is the title of a novel written by Jean Toomer, that Native Son is the title of a novel written by Richard Wright, and that Invisible Man is the title of a novel written by Ralph Ellison.

The text highlights the three best novels ever written in Black American literature. Just as, in the first part, the focus is on Jean Toomer's Cane, so, in the second part, must the focus be on Richard Wright’s Native Son and on Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man for consistency. Also, the use of the possessive form (Jean Toomer's Cane) must be preserved in the second part that is underlined.

From the discussion above, we can eliminate every answer choice except Choice E, the correct answer.

Note also that "written by Black Americans" does not make sense as the novels were each written by a single author. The phrase "written by a Black American" uses the proper choice of words. That would also eliminate Choice A and and Choice B right away.

Explanation

First, single out the error(s) in the original sentence. The sentence clearly violates the parallel structure rule. The part of the sentence before the hyphen is not parallel to the part after the hyphen. Understand that Cane is the title of a novel written by Jean Toomer, that Native Son is the title of a novel written by Richard Wright, and that Invisible Man is the title of a novel written by Ralph Ellison.

The text highlights the three best novels ever written in Black American literature. Just as, in the first part, the focus is on Jean Toomer's Cane, so, in the second part, must the focus be on Richard Wright’s Native Son and on Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man for consistency. Also, the use of the possessive form (Jean Toomer's Cane) must be preserved in the second part that is underlined.

From the discussion above, we can eliminate every answer choice except Choice E, the correct answer.

Note also that "written by Black Americans" does not make sense as the novels were each written by a single author. The phrase "written by a Black American" uses the proper choice of words. That would also eliminate Choice A and and Choice B right away.