New hardy varieties of rice show promise of producing high yields with

I though costly is an adverb since it ends with -ly. I got to know that costly is an adjective. This belief caught me in trouble. Can anyone post such exceptions where word ending in -ly is an adjective.

Hi deep31993, a list of such words is available here.

Obviously, memorizing this humongous list is not the solution. Generally if you form simple sentences, it gives you a handy clue whether the word in question is a adjective or an adverb.

deep31993 One hint here is that we aren't given a choice to use costly as an adverb. All of the choices follow costly with a noun, so we know it must be an adjective.

In option D , I am not sure that "was" is wrong as that can refer to irrigation only but If we think logically then D is telling that irrigation itself is not required ..... I think its illogical

New hardy varieties of rice show promise of producing high yields without the costly requirements of irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer by earlier high yielding varieties.

Meaning: New varieties show promise of high yields without the disadvantages brought up by last year varieties. The advantages are costly irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer

(A) requirements of irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer by earlier high yielding varieties no reason to use "by earlier high yielding varieties"

(B) requirements by earlier high yielding varieties of application of commercial fertilizer and irrigation requirement of is split up with a long clause

(C) requirements for application of commercial fertilizer and irrigation of earlier high yielding varieties meaning not OK

(D) application of commercial fertilizer and irrigation that was required by earlier high yielding varieties was should be replaced by were because subject is plural

(E) irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer that were required by earlier high yielding varieties Good enough. Meaning OK. structure clear

Options A,B,C are out because "costly requirements" in these option mean that the irrigation and fertilizer demanded these costly things.
B/C are also wrong because of unidiomatic usage - "requirements by / requirements for"
D - has Subject Verb error " was " is incorrect - should be were.


Hence E.

AjiteshArun
Could you explain how can we connect these 2 things by 'to', please? Any example which depict the highlighted part?

Hi TheUltimateWinner,

Sure. We cannot go with "application of fertilizer earlier varieties". "Application of fertilizer to earlier varieties", on the other hand, is acceptable.

In choice D, it seems that 'that' refers to only 'irrigation' NOT both 'commercial fertilizer' and 'irrigation' simultaneously. Should THAT modify only one part (e.g., irrigation) though it carries two things with AND? I mean-shouldn't THAT modify both part of AND simultaneously (apart from meaning issue)?

New hardy varieties of rice show promise of producing high yields without the costly requirements of irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer by earlier high yielding varieties.

(A) requirements of irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer by earlier high yielding varieties X

It doesn't make sense to say that the 'application of X' has a costly requirement because you're talking about the application itself

(B) requirements by earlier high yielding varieties of application of commercial fertilizer and irrigation X

This one is wrong because you are saying 'varieties of application'...that's nonsensical

(C) requirements for application of commercial fertilizer and irrigation of earlier high yielding varieties X

This one is wrong because you are saying 'the application of commercial fertilizer and irration has requirements, but what's costly are the irrigation and application in and of themselves

(D) application of commercial fertilizer and irrigation that was required by earlier high yielding varieties X

This is wrong for two reasons: 'was' is singular whereas 'application of...AND ...' is plural. The more important error is that it suggests 'irrigation' can be applied

(E) irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer that were required by earlier high yielding varieties CORRECT

Hello! why cant it be application of (commercial fertilisers and irrigation)??

Hi pk6969,

The phrase application of irrigation is a problem. That is, we would not normally use application of and irrigation together like this. Think about it this way: we can apply fertiliser, but can we apply irrigation?

is it an inverted sentence structure because of which we are using "Were" with subject being "high yielding varieties" ?
Please confirm - thanks.

Hi kittle,

The subject of that verb is that:

1. X and Y that were required by earlier high yielding varieties. ← That is the subject of were required, and it points to X and Y.

Were required is in the passive voice, which is why high yielding varieties is used after the verb. That is, high yielding varieties is not the subject in that clause.

Hello kittle,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your question, the primary clause - "New hardy varieties of rice show promise of producing high yields" - is not inverted, as it is an active voice construction. However, "that were required by earlier high yielding varieties" is inverted, as it is a passive voice construction. That having been said, the subject that the passive verb "were required" refers to is actually "irrigation and application of commercial fertilizer".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Hey, I am writing this explanation as to make sure I understood well also if it can help then great!

If you just see from a "Finding a Subject" point of view, which I think is the most important part of SC, the subject - "Costly requirements" does not have any "Verb" so this rules our ABC, then D vs E is clear was vs were.

This is actually what I say a dumb-down version of SC where you just find the subject and all the other things follow with it. There can be much other better explanation which is very close to grammar.

If you find me wrong please advise.

In addition, D is worded so that there is a singular application of "fertilizers and irrigation"... of course, you don't apply irrigation.