HOT Competition 4 Sep/8PM: Leonardo Da Vinci worked both for the Medic

Veritas Prep Official Explanation

The correct answer is E.

The issues among the answer choices include multiple parallelism problems, an agreement issue, and a case issue involving the pronoun for the Medici.

Answer E correctly uses the subject form “who” for the pronoun, since this pronoun does take a verb – the verb “were” later in the sentence. A pronoun that is the subject of any verb must always take the subject form. E also correctly uses the plural verb “were” to describe “the Medici”; without knowing who or what “the Medici” is/are, we can conclude that this subject must be plural, since the sentence later describes “the Medici” using the plural “his creators.” Additionally, E correctly parallels the compound structure “his downfall but also his creators.” Finally, E correctly parallels the “both… and” correlative conjunction structure.

Answer A at first correctly uses the object form “whom” to describe “the Medici,” since in this sentence the verb “described” refers to “he” (“Da Vinci”) and not “whom” (“the Medici”). However, the second part of this compound, “were his creators” fails, since this verb, “were,” needs to refer back to the same pronoun, but the object form “whom” cannot work as the subject of “were.” Furthermore, the structure “whom he described… but also were” is not parallel, since “described” is a verb on “he” but “were” is not a verb on “he.” Parallel elements must fill analogous roles within a sentence.

Answer B incorrectly uses the object form “whom” in a sentence in which the verb “were” is meant to refer back to that same pronoun. The object form of a pronoun is not allowed to be the subject of a verb. Furthermore, this answer does not correctly parallel the “both… and” correlative conjunction, since “both for… and” lacks a preposition after “and” to parallel the word “for.”

Answer C uses “which” in a manner that cannot produce a logical meaning. If “the Medici” are people (as, in fact, they are), then “which” should not refer to them and lacks any acceptable reference. If “the Medici” are not people, then it may be odd to refer to them as Da Vinci’s “creators.” Even if this point is arguable, this answer choice muddles its agreement. At first, using “was,” it describes “the Medici” as singular, but later, using “creators,” it describes “the Medici” as plural.

Answer D includes a nonsensical “about” that creates an error when combined with “described.” In the same way, this answer’s pairing of “whom” and “them,” both referring to “the Medici,” simply makes no sense. Essentially, Da Vinci “described the Medici about the Medici.” Furthermore, this answer fails to produce a parallel structure in its “for both… and for” butchery of the correlative conjunction at the end of the sentence.

It is worth noting that it was not strictly necessary to make a “who”/“whom” decision to correctly adjudicate this sentence. However, it is worth recognizing, at minimum, that this structure may not require (or even, in fact, allow) “whom.”