Hi there! I'm happy to help.
In A.D. 391, __resulting from the destruction of the largest library of the ancient world at Alexandria__, later generations lost all but the Iliad and Odyssey among Greek epics, most of the poetry of Pindar and Sappho, and dozens of plays by Aeschylus and Euripides.
(A) resulting from the destruction of the largest library of the ancient world at Alexandria,
(B) the destroying of the largest library of the ancient world at Alexandria resulted and
(C) because of the result of the destruction of the library at Alexandria, the largest of the ancient world,
(D) as a result of the destruction of the library at Alexandria, the largest of the ancient world,
(E) Alexandria's largest library of the ancient world was destroyed, and the result was
Very sad, the destruction of the great library at Alexandra --- that tragedy set Western civilization back several centuries.
Notice, first of all, that the clause after the underline forms a bonafide stand-on-its-own sentence by itself --- what is grammar is called an
independent clause. Either this will remain an independent clause in the full sentence, or it will become a dependent clause and (this is crucial) something in the underlined part would have to be the independent clause of the sentence. You can turn an independent clause into a dependent clause by putting what is called a
subordinating conjunction in front of it; some examples of subordinating conjunctions are: after, although, as, as far as, as if, as long as, as soon as, as though, because, before, if, in order that, since, so, so that, than, though, unless, until, when, whenever, where, whereas, wherever, and while.
In (A), the original prompt, the word "resulting" is a modifier, and makes the whole underlined phrase a modifying phrase. The problem is: it modifies the closest noun, which is "later generations." "Later generations" are not doing the "resulting", so (A) is out.
(B) is unbelievably awkward: the destroying of the library resulted, and . . . This answers is proposing two independent clauses, linked by the word "and" – a perfectly valid grammatical construction, but nobody would say "the destroying of X resulted" as a sentence by itself. We would say "X was destroyed" or "so-and-so destroyed X." Because of this awkward phrase, (B) is out.
(C) has the phrase "because of the result" --- this phrase, in and of itself, is redundant, because both "because" and "result" specify a cause-effect relationship. One would say "P happened because of Q", or "As a result of Q, P happened." C has this awkward phrase, and is out.
(D) is smooth ---- "as a result of", then gives the proper cause (destruction of the library), then gives the result. Dependent clause, then independent clause --- a perfectly valid construction.
(E) has the awkward phrase “Alexandria's largest library of the ancient world was destroyed.” This implies that Alexandria had several ancient libraries, and here we are talking about only the largest of them. This distorts the meaning. It’s not that the library was one of many in Alexandria and happened to be the largest of them; rather, the library, which happened to be in Alexandria, was *the* largest of the entire ancient world. Furthermore, the way the end of this choice meshes with the rest of the sentence is awkward: “ . . , and the result was, later generations lost . . .” (Notice the comma that follows the underlined phrase: that will be there regardless of which answer choice is correct.) (E) is out.
(D) is the only answer choice without a major problem, and it works smoothly.
Does that answer your questions?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test PrepEducation is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)