OFFICIAL EXPLANATIONProject SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC2)
Quote:
THE PROMPT
During the last month, researchers
had narrowed down to two the possible origins that are being discussed in classrooms across the nation to explain the emergence of a new species of caterpillar.
• Core meaning?
A new species of caterpillar has emerged.
During the last month, researchers have narrowed the possible origins of this emergence down to two possibilities, both of which are being discussed in classrooms across the country.
• Tip off?
→
During the last month.That phrase signals that whatever happened is still going on or finished very recently.
We need to "bridge the past and the present."
→ To do so we use present perfect.
HAS/HAVE + PAST PARTICIPLE (verbED)
Present perfect should be used to describe events that started in the past and that continue into the present but can be used for other situations not related to this kind of context.
Quote:
A) had narrowed down to two the possible origins that are being discussed in classrooms across the nation to explain the emergence of a new species of caterpillar
• wrong verb tense
→
had narrowed is past perfect, the "past of the past," the tense we use to describe the earlier of two past events.
Past perfect
had narrowed signals that the action or event is finished, but that meaning does not match "During the last month."
We need
have narrowed.
→ Among other things, present perfect is used to describe actions performed during a time period that is not yet over.
Present perfect:
In the last week, the CEO changed his mind five times. [Time period is still going.]
Past perfect:
Last week the CEO made a final decision, and none too soon at that—he had changed his mind five times in as many days. [Both events occurred in the past. Time period is finished.]
• confusing modifier placement
→ the origins both (1) are being discussed and (2) explain the emergence of the new species
→ the placement of "to explain" is too far from "origins" and too close to "nation."
Noun modifiers should be as close as possible to the nouns that they modify.
This sentence is poorly constructed.
ELIMINATE A
Quote:
B) had narrowed down to two the possible origins to explain the emergence of a new species of caterpillar that are being discussed in classrooms across the nation
• wrong verb tense
→ same problem as that in option A.
Had narrowed is the wrong verb tense to bridge the past and the present.
• confusing modifier placement
→ the origins are still doing two things. They explain the emergence of the new species and are discussed in classrooms.
The phrases at issue are both noun modifiers:
(1)
to explain the emergence of a new species and (2)
that are being discussed in classrooms.
Option B switches the order of the phrases that we see in option A.
In a strict sense, the phrasing is grammatical.
A very long string of prepositional phrases follows the noun
origins. That string is then followed by the that-clause.
Although it is not common for a that-clause to be far from its noun, such a placement is not forbidden.
The subtle but glaring problem? These two stacked modifiers just do not sit well together.
The verb error is fatal; at the same time, the sentence is muddled.
ELIMINATE B
Quote:
C) have narrowed down to two the possible origins that classrooms across the nation are discussing the emergence of a new species of caterpillar
• nonsensical - this sentence is full of babble. We have a mess when we try to break it down.
During the last month, researchers have narrowed down to two the possible origins [full clause]
. .THAT [relative pronoun that should modify "origins" and should be followed by its OWN verb, not by the noun "classrooms"]
. . . classrooms across the nation are discussing the emergence of a new species of caterpillar. [full clause]
→ IC + THAT [missing its clause] + IC ???
No. We can connect two independent clauses with a conjunction (a FANBOY), but we cannot use
that to do so, and if
that is a relative pronoun, it must be followed by its own clause, including its own verb.
That is already a subject—a pronoun in need of a verb.
ELIMINATE C
Quote:
D) have narrowed down to two the possible origins to explain the emergence of a new species of caterpillar, origins that are being discussed in classrooms across the nation
• correct
Sophisticated inversion exists in this sentence; you will find "narrowed down to two" in high end prose.
We could rearrange the words, this way:
Researchers have narrowed the possible origins to explain the emergence of a new species of caterpillar down to two.• verb tense
have narrowed fits with
during the last month.• noun modifier problem is resolved by repeating the word
origins and using a special kind of appositive
→ the information after the comma correctly expands on
origins: they are being discussed in classrooms across the nation.
→ this kind of modifier is an appositive, and a special kind of appositive at that
→ repeating a word or phrase as is done in this option is called a
resumptive modifier. (Think "resume." We "pick up" the noun again; we resume the sentence with the word we need.)
This short article, here, explains resumptive modifiers and gives many good examples. I would take a look at the site.
KEEP
Quote:
E) have narrowed it down to two possible origins to explain the emergence of a new species of caterpillar, origins that are being discussed in classrooms across the nation
•
it has no antecedent. Fatal.
If we look at meaning, this
it does not succeed as an
it that precedes a delayed antecedent.
In context, this
it means "the field of explanations about origins that might explain the emergence of a new species."
If you want to eliminate option E, compare it to option D, and ask: which is worse?
No contest. Option D is not plagued with a buttinsky, no-clear-antecedent pronoun.
ELIMINATE E
The answer is D.COMMENTSBhupendra9621 , welcome to SC Butler.
I am always glad to see new posters. (All aspirants are welcome. Standing invitation.)
I am also always glad to see my veterans.
This question is a bit tricky.
Kudos for bravery or a good explanation or both.