The prosecutor’s argument, which hinged on a little known provision in

The prosecutor’s argument, which hinged on a little known provision in a 1972 law, differed considerably from the plaintiff, who contended that a landmark 1999 Supreme Court decision supported his argument................comparision error,....here The prosecutor’s argument is compared with the plaintiff........but it should be with the argument of the plaintiff.....

(B) that of the plaintiff.........rectifies the error........CORRECT

OA:B

The right answer is option B.

This is a comparison question. A basic requirement for comparisons is parallelisms of the entities being compared. What two entities are being compared: 1. The prosecutor's argument and 2. the argument of the plaintiff.
Option A is incorrect because it illogically compares the prosecutor's argument to the plaintiff.
Option C is incorrect because those is a plural pronoun, and it cannot refer to the singular noun argument. The prosecutor made an argument, it has to be compared with an argument made by the plaintiff.

The final split required to pick the right choice between B, D, and E is the alternative way prosecutor's argument can be written. The prosecutor's argument is the same as the argument of the prosecutor. So we know that the right preposition is of the plaintiff in order to ensure parallelism. Based on this, we can eliminate options D and E, which use by and from erroneously.

The right answer is option B.

The prosecutor’s argument, which hinged on a little known provision in a 1972 law, differed considerably from the plaintiff, who contended that a landmark 1999 Supreme Court decision supported his argument.


(A) the plaintiff
(B) that of the plaintiff
(C) those from the plaintiff
(D) that espoused by the plaintiff
(E) that from the plaintiff

MEANING
Pro's argument differed from Plain's argument;
We are comparing a single argument vs a single argument.

Ans (B)

The prosecutor’s argument is compared with the argument of the plaintiff
-> B is correct: that of the plaintiff

The prosecutor’s argument differed from argument of (that of) the plaintiff.

Ans B

Posted from my mobile device

The prosecutor’s argument, which hinged on a little known provision in a 1972 law, differed considerably from the plaintiff, who contended that a landmark 1999 Supreme Court decision supported his argument.

(A) the plaintiff
wrong: the prosecutors's argument cannot be parallel with the plaintiff

(B) that of the plaintiff
correct

(C) those from the plaintiff
wrong: "of" should be used instead of "from".

(D) that espoused by the plaintiff
wrong: wrong meaning

(E) that from the plaintiff
wrong: same mistake as answer choice C made

The comparison is between the prosecutors argument and with that of plaintiff

In option A The prosecutor's argument is correctly compared with plaintiff

In option C use of those is incorrect

In option D and E are incorrect bcz of meaning error

IMO B

Posted from my mobile device

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

When making a comparison, you must compare like parts (i.e., compare an argument to an argument). You cannot compare unlike parts (i.e., an argument with a person). To correct the issue, we must compare the prosecutor’s argument with the plaintiff's argument (i.e., with that of the plaintiff).

A. the sentence illogically compares unlike parts (i.e., the prosecutor’s argument and the plaintiff)

B. the sentence logically compares the prosecutor’s argument with that of the plaintiff (i.e., with the argument of the plaintiff)

C. the plural those improperly refers to a singular argument when the singular that should be used instead

D. the phrase that espoused by the plaintiff is unduly wordy

E. the word from improperly makes the sentence not parallel (i.e., the argument of the prosecutor is not parallel with the argument from the plaintiff)