Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) was unprecedented in its firsthand accounts of the indignities suffered by women
and because it was eloquent and passionate in exposing and criticizing these indignities.
The question tests parallelism concept:
the work was unprecedented in .... and in... Only option D maintains parallelism. Quote:
(A)
and because it was eloquent and passionate in exposing and criticizing
as we have parallelism marker "and", we need two items grammatically and logically parallel. We have a subordinate clause starting with "because" after "and", but we have any other subordinate clause presiding "and". For this reason, A is incorrect.
Quote:
(B) and in that it was eloquent and passionate when exposing and criticizing
- parallelism is better here: now we have two properties of "A Vindication of the Rights of Woman" that make the work "unprecedented". Let's keep this option...
Quote:
(C) as well as the eloquence and passion it
had in exposing and criticizing
- parallelism is not properly maintained, and the use of simple past tense is unjustifiable: it is a fact about the work and it is like general truth should be expressed with simple present.
Quote:
(D) and in the eloquence and passion with which it exposed and criticized
-
correct choice. The option bits the option B
Quote:
(E) but also its eloquent and passionate exposure and criticism of
- same || issue