Choice A is the best answer because the text indicates that Fox-Foot doesn’t let the group build a fire or create a canoe landing when it’s time for supper. This context suggests that he doesn’t want anyone who might be following the group to see any sign of them or their activities. In other words, Fox-Foot doesn’t want there to be any trace, or evidence, of the group’s movements (“their passing”) through the area.

Choice B is incorrect because the text conveys that Fox-Foot doesn’t want the group to be detected, not that he doesn’t want their presence to create a blemish, or a spoiling flaw, in the area; human activity could disturb a natural environment, but the context emphasizes that Fox-Foot is instead focused on avoiding giving any sign of the group’s movements through a place (“their passing”) to anyone who might be following them.

Choice C is incorrect because the text focuses on Fox-Foot’s desire to avoid detection by those who might be following the group. This context conveys that Fox-Foot doesn’t want to create any signs or evidence of the group moving through a place (“their passing”), not that he doesn’t want to leave behind some quantity of their presence; indeed, it isn’t clear what an amount of a group’s movement would be.

Choice D is incorrect because nothing in the text suggests that the group has a sketch, or rough drawing, of their movements through that area (“their passing”) that might be left behind. Rather, the context emphasizes that Fox-Foot is focused on ensuring that the group doesn’t give any kind of indication of their presence, as he wants to avoid detection by anyone who might be following the group.

Skim a sentence before and after the underlined word sentence to choose the quick answer.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of noses on ancient sculptures. In this context, “fragile” means weak or delicate. This matches the text’s description of noses on ancient sculptures, which are often missing from sculptures’ heads because they are “especially easy to break.” Therefore, this context indicates that the noses on ancient sculptures are the most fragile part of the sculptures’ heads.

Choice A is incorrect. In this context, “recognizable” would mean identifiable, and since the text indicates that noses are often missing from ancient statues, they therefore cannot be the most recognizable part of the statue.

Choice C is incorrect because the text indicates that many ancient statues are missing noses, so noses wouldn’t be “common,” or frequent, aspects of ancient statues; they would conversely be uncommon.

Choice D is incorrect because the text only indicates that noses on ancient statues often stick out and end up missing from the heads, which doesn’t relate to the noses being “sophisticated,” or knowledgeable or refined.

The first sentence indicates a negative trait ‘missing’ a hint for you to choose the option which has a negative impact.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of advance indications of solar flares. In this context the word “impending” means imminent or approaching. The text mentions a study by Leka and colleagues that found that the Sun’s corona provides an advance indication of solar flares. The text then points out why such an advance indication would be useful—solar flares can interfere with communications on Earth—and concludes by describing the characteristic of the corona that gives a warning of a solar flare. The text indicates that this characteristic—increased brightness in a particular region of the corona—comes before the appearance of the flare. Therefore, in context, the best answer would indicate that the flare is approaching, or impending.

Choice A is incorrect. The best answer would be one that indicates that the increased brightness of the Sun’s corona precedes the appearance of the flare. But if the flare were “antecedent,” or previous, then the flare would instead precede the appearance of the increased brightness of the corona, a statement
that is logically inconsistent.

Choice C is incorrect. The word “innocuous,” or harmless, does not logically complete the text; since solar flares can interfere with communications on Earth, they cannot reasonably be described as innocuous.

Choice D is incorrect. If the solar flares have an advance indication of their appearance, then there must therefore be a time before the appearance of the flares when they do not exist. But the word “perpetual,” or never-ending, would in context indicate that the flare exists at the same time as the advance indication provided by the Sun’s corona, which would not make logical sense.

Skim a sentence and focus on the keywords to choose the correct answer.

Choice D is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of using magnetism to detect stress in buried metal pipes. In this context, “exploited” means made productive use of. The text indicates that the magnetic fields of some metals change under stress and Saleem and
colleagues showed that it is possible to measure those changes from a distance, thereby demonstrating that the integrity of underground metal pipes can be evaluated without having to unearth them. This context thus indicates that Saleem and colleagues made productive use of, or exploited, this tendency of the metals’ magnetic fields.

Choice A is incorrect because in this context, “hypothesized” would mean making a tentative assumption to be evaluated in a study or experiment. Although Saleem and colleagues may have had one or more hypotheses for these experiments, the text presents the information about the tendency of some metals’ magnetic fields to change under stress as a known fact that the researchers made productive use of, not as a hypothesis to be evaluated. The text after the colon indicates that the researchers were not evaluating whether such changes occur but whether those changes can be measured at a distance.

Choice B is incorrect because in this context, “discounted” would mean downplayed or ignored, but the text does not suggest that Saleem and colleagues minimized or ignored the tendency of the magnetic fields of some metals to change under stress. Rather, the text indicates that this tendency is the basis for Saleem and colleagues’ method of assessing the pipes’ integrity.

Choice C is incorrect because nothing in the text indicates that Saleem and colleagues “redefined,” reevaluated, or reformulated, the tendency of some metals’ magnetic fields to change under stress. Instead, the text indicates that the researchers made use of that tendency to demonstrate that it is possible to evaluate the integrity of underground pipes without unearthing them.

Skim a sentence before and after the underlined word sentence to choose the correct and quick answer.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of behavioral psychology studies. In this context, “ameliorate” means to help remedy or improve. The text states that many behavioral psychology studies are flawed because the subjects used are “highly unrepresentative.” It is then suggested that researchers should recruit subjects from “diverse backgrounds and locations” to help address the issue of unrepresentative subject pools. Thus, this context conveys that recruitment efforts focused on diversity would help ameliorate the problems outlined in the text.

Choice A is incorrect. In this context, “sanction” could have two meanings: to give official approval for something or to enact a penalty, neither of which makes sense in this context. The text describes a situation known to be problematic in behavioral psychology studies and then presents a potential remedy to that situation; the text does not suggest that the situation is officially approved or results in any type of penalty.

Choice C is incorrect because rather than “rationalize,” or explain or justify, a situation, the text presents a situation and its potential remedy.

Choice D is incorrect because the text is not attempting to “postulate,” or suggest a claim or theory, related to the situation described in the text but is rather presenting a potential remedy for the situation.

“Actively recruit” clearly hints to use the option that denotes growth.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the significance of the 2014 archaeological finding at El Algar. In this context, “concede” means to admit something is true after first resistingthat admission. The text indicates that some researchers believe “Bronze Agesocieties were ruled by men.” But the Bronze Age burial of a woman at El Algarincluded “valuable objects signaling a high position of power,” which would raisethe possibility that “women may have also held leadership roles.” Thus, the text iscalling into question the notion that only men were leaders in these societies andspeculating that people holding this view may reconsider their opinion.

Choice A is incorrect because “waive” means to refrain from insisting that something, such as a right or a requirement, be observed; the word isn’t used, however, in contexts where someone acknowledges that an opinion they hold may be invalid, as is the case in the text.

Choice C is incorrect. According to the text, the finding from the El Algar burial site undermines the view that Bronze Age societies were exclusively ruled by men. However, “refute” means to demonstrate that something is false and would not make sense in context. Lull and team’s finding supports the view that women may have also held leadership roles, not that they did not participate in such roles.

Choice D is incorrect because in this context, “require” means to demand or specify as mandatory. However, it would not make sense for contemporary researchers to demand that Bronze Age “women may have also held leadership roles.”

Having wide knowledge of vocabularies with quick reading skills.

Choice C is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the factors that influence peoples’ decisions to move to a different state. As used in this context, “overshadowed by” means to be surpassed by or caused to seem less important than other factors affecting a move. The text indicates that, according to a US tax policy expert, when people think about an interstate move, state taxes have little effect on their decisions, while employment opportunities, housing availability, and climate have a very strong effect. This context suggests that people consider these other factors to be more important than state taxes.

Choice A is incorrect because the text indicates that state taxes aren’t as important a consideration as other factors when people are thinking of moving to another state. The context doesn’t suggest that state taxes are “consistent with,” or in agreement with these other factors.

Choice B is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense in context to say that state taxes are “representative of,” or typical of, other factors. Taxes aren’t an example of employment opportunities, housing availability, and climate, which are the other factors listed in the text.

Choice D is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense in context to say that state taxes are “irrelevant to,” or unconnected or unimportant to other factors. State taxes are irrelevant to peoples’ decisions, not to other factors. In other words, although the text suggests that state taxes may be irrelevant to people considering a move to another state, the other factors mentioned in the text, such as employment opportunities, are unable to have an opinion about state taxes. Furthermore, the text indicates that significant differences in state taxes have almost no effect on peoples’ choices to move, but they aren’t completely unimportant.

Keep working on your skimming skills by practicing.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the author’s claim about the relationship between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. As used in this context, “tenuous” means lacking substance or strength. The text states that the author’s claim isn’t convincing because it doesn’t consider certain pieces of evidence—relevant recent discoveries. The context conveys the idea that the author’s claim is weak.

Choice A is incorrect because the text doesn’t suggest that the author’s claim is “disorienting,” or confusing; rather than indicating that the claim is hard to grasp, the text focuses on the idea that it has a weakness that makes it unconvincing.

Choice C is incorrect because describing the claim as “nuanced,” or subtle, wouldn’t make sense in context. The text emphasizes that the claim is unconvincing because it didn’t consider certain key archaeological finds; it doesn’t suggest that what’s in the claim seems subtle.

Choice D is incorrect because the text faults the claim for not considering certain key archaeological finds; it doesn’t suggest that the author’s claim is “unoriginal,” or imitative and lacking originality.

Having wide knowledge of vocabularies with quick reading skills.

Choice D is the best answer because it accurately states the text’s main purpose. The poem begins with the speaker urging a child to “go forth” with her encouragement (“my heart’s desire”). The speaker goes on to suggest that new experiences (“Great reaches, yet unknown”) lie ahead for the son that “life is calling” him to seek out. Thus, the main purpose is to encourage a child to embrace the experiences available to him in his life.

Choice A is incorrect because the speaker encourages the child to pursue new experiences (“Great reaches”) without knowing exactly what those experiences will be (“yet unknown”) or suggesting that they should match the speaker’s own accomplishments.

Choice B is incorrect because the speaker focuses on positive possibilities for her son (“Great reaches, yet unknown”) and her enthusiastic encouragement to embrace those possibilities (“life is calling you!”), while there is no mention of raising a child or associated struggles.

Choice C is incorrect because the speaker frames the possibilities for her son in a positive light when she says that “great reaches, yet unknown” are waiting for him, and this positive outlook for the son is consistent throughout the text.

You require a good understanding of English Literature for this. A time-consuming question, so in a real exam, focus on the ranking of it. The higher the rank, the more marks you will get out of it then do it. If you are running against time and it is a lower-rank question then guess the answer.

Choice D is the best answer because it best describes the function of the underlined sentence in the text’s overall portrayal of how the women in Ohiyesa’s tribe harvested maple syrup. The text states that the women used an axe to strike the maple trees in order to find out which ones would produce sap. The underlined sentence compares the trees to people, with the sap described as the trees’ “life-blood.” Some of the trees are ready to give out their sap, while others are unwilling to do so. Using personification, the sentence provides greater detail about the aspect of the maple trees—their potential to give sap—that the women are evaluating.

Choice A is incorrect because the personalities of the women are not discussed in the text. Although the underlined sentence does mention “individual characters,” this reference is not to the women in the text but rather to the maple trees, which the sentence compares to people with individual character traits.

Choice B is incorrect because the underlined sentence focuses on the trees’ willingness or refusal to yield sap, not on the beneficial relationship between the women and the trees. Additionally, although the text does suggest that the women and their tribe benefit from the maple trees since the trees allow the women to harvest syrup, there is nothing in the text to suggest that the trees benefit from this relationship in turn.

Choice C is incorrect because the underlined sentence is comparing maple trees to humans, not addressing the influence of the natural environment on how the actual humans in the text, the women, behave.

Only reading the underlined sentence might lead you to the wrong conclusion, so better to read one prior and later sentence as well.

Choice C is the best answer because it presents a finding that, if true, would weaken Foster’s hypothesis that damage to eelgrass roots improves the health of eelgrass meadows by boosting genetic diversity. The text indicates that sea otters damage eelgrass roots but that eelgrass meadows near Vancouver Island, where there’s a large otter population, are comparatively healthy. When Foster
and her colleagues compared the Vancouver Island eelgrass meadows to those that don’t have established otter populations, the researchers found that the Vancouver Island meadows are more genetically diverse than the other meadows are. This finding led Foster to hypothesize that damage to the eelgrass roots encourages eelgrass reproduction, thereby improving genetic diversity and the
health of the meadows. If, however, other meadows not included in the study are less healthy the larger the local otter population is and the longer the otters have been in residence, that would suggest that damage to the eelgrass roots, which would be expected to increase with the size and residential duration of the otter population, isn’t leading meadows to be healthier. Such a finding would therefore weaken Foster’s hypothesis.

Choice A is incorrect because finding that small, recently introduced otter populations are near other eelgrass meadows in the study wouldn’t weaken Foster’s hypothesis. If otter populations were small and only recently established, they wouldn’t be expected to have caused much damage to eelgrass roots, so even if those eelgrass meadows were less healthy than the Vancouver Island meadows, that wouldn’t undermine Foster’s hypothesis. In fact, it would be consistent with Foster’s hypothesis since it would suggest that the greater damage caused by larger, more established otter populations is associated with healthier meadows.

Choice B is incorrect because the existence of areas with otters but without eelgrass meadows wouldn’t reveal anything about whether the damage that otters cause to eelgrass roots ultimately benefits eelgrass meadows.

Choice D is incorrect because the health of plants other than eelgrass would have no bearing on Foster’s hypothesis that damage to eelgrass roots leads to greater genetic diversity and meadow health. It would be possible for otters to have a negative effect on other plants while nevertheless improving the health of eelgrass meadows by damaging eelgrass roots.

Look for the word ‘finding’ or something related to it.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of Zelda Fitzgerald’s contributions to literature. The text begins by saying that many scholars view Zelda mainly in terms of her marriage to F. Scott Fitzgerald and “don’t recognize Zelda as a writer in her own right.” The text then mentions a novel and “numerous short stories” that she wrote and that such scholars tend to ignore. Therefore, those scholars who focus on Zelda only as an inspiration for F. Scott’s writings risk misrepresenting the full range of Zelda’s contributions to literature.

Choice A is incorrect. Although the text does mention that Zelda Fitzgerald “likely influenced” her husband’s literary work, its focus is on Zelda’s own writing, not on her husband’s writing or factors that might have influenced it.

Choice C is incorrect because the text does not discuss F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald’s opinions of each other’s works.

Choice D is incorrect. Although the text does suggest that F. Scott Fitzgerald’s works were “likely influenced in part” by his marriage to Zelda, it does not discuss autobiographical interpretations of the works of either F. Scott or Zelda.

Work on your skimming skills by practicing more.

Choice B is the best answer because it presents the conclusion that most logically completes the text’s discussion of the study by Versace and colleagues. The text indicates that newborn animals of some species are attracted to faces and to stimuli that resemble faces. These species, the text says, share
two characteristics: they’re social and they practice parental care, meaning that parents care for their young. The text goes on to describe Versace and colleagues’ experiment, which showed that although Testudo tortoises aren’t social and don’t practice parental care, tortoise hatchlings were attracted to a
stimulus that resembles a face. Since Versace and colleagues have shown that a species that isn’t social and doesn’t practice parental care nevertheless has the innate characteristic of being attracted to face-like stimuli, it follows that this characteristic shouldn’t be assumed to be an adaptation related to social
interaction or parental care.

Choice A is incorrect because the text indicates that the tortoise hatchlings were attracted to the face-like stimuli (even though their species is solitary and doesn’t practice parental care), not that they perceived the stimuli as threatening.

Choice C is incorrect because the phenomenon discussed in the text is an attraction to faces and face-like stimuli on the part of newborn animals, which can’t show any learned characteristics since they were just born. Additionally, the text tells us that the tortoises Versace and colleagues studied aren’t social and don’t practice parental care, so any findings about those tortoises wouldn’t be relevant to the question of whether an attraction to faces in social species that practice parental care is innate or learned.

Choice D is incorrect because the text gives no indication that adult tortoises were presented with face-like stimuli and, if adults were in fact tested, no information about how they responded is provided. Since no information about adult tortoises’ responses is provided, no conclusion comparing those responses to the responses of newly hatched tortoises can be supported.

Work on your skimming skills by practicing more.

Choice A is the best answer because it most logically completes the text. The text explains that the Cantares Mexicanos contains poems about the Aztec Empire from before the Spanish invasion. Furthermore, it indicates that notes in the collection attest that some of these poems predate the Spanish invasion, while some customs depicted are likely Spanish in origin. The implication is that
some poems were composed before the invasion but the references to Spanish customs could have come about only after the invasion, and thus that the collection includes content that predates the invasion and also content from after the invasion.

Choice B is incorrect because the text clearly indicates that the collection is in Nahuatl, not Spanish, so the compilers’ unfamiliarity with Spanish is irrelevant to whether the collection contains material composed after the Spanish invasion.

Here, choice C is incorrect because the text mentions only the Aztec Empire and Spain: there is no information about the relationship of Aztec literature to any traditions other than its own or Spain’s.

Choice D is incorrect because the text states that some of the poems make “inarguable references” to common Spanish customs, which conflicts with the idea that these references can reasonably be attributed to mere coincidence.

Work on your skimming skills by practicing more.

Choice A is the best answer because it presents the conclusion that most logically follows from the text’s discussion of the study of capuchin monkeys’ cognitive abilities. The text explains that the study failed to distinguish between outcomes for the tasks performed by the capuchin monkeys, such that simpler tasks requiring less dexterity, or skill, were judged by the same criteria as tasks that demanded more dexterity. Because the study didn’t account for this discrepancy, the researchers might have assumed that observed differences in performance were due to the abilities of the monkeys rather than the complexity of the tasks. In other words, the results may suggest cognitive differences among
the monkeys even though such differences may not really exist.

Choice B is incorrect because the text focuses on the fact that the tasks assigned to the capuchin monkeys in the study varied in difficulty and that the variety wasn’t taken into consideration. The text doesn’t suggest that the capuchin monkeys couldn’t perform certain tasks, just that some tasks were more difficult to do.

Choice C is incorrect because the text doesn’t suggest that the study’s results are indicative of the abilities of capuchin monkeys but not of other monkey species; in fact, the text suggests that the results may not even be an accurate reflection of capuchin monkeys’ abilities.

Choice D is incorrect because the text doesn’t indicate that the researchers compared results for artificial tasks with those for tasks encountered in the wild, although the tasks described in the text—sliding a panel and putting a straw in a bottle—are presumably artificial.

Work on your skimming skills by practicing more.

Choice B is the best answer because it effectively uses data from the graph to complete the statement about Rodrigo da Costa Portilho-Ramos and colleagues’ conclusion. The graph shows the ratio of manganese to calcium in L. pertusa coral samples from the Alboran Sea and the Mauritanian coast. The graph reflects time in approximate years before present: in other words, the greater the number in
years noted on the graph’s horizontal axis, the farther that moment is in the past. The text indicates that the researchers tested the samples to determine whether oxygenation played a role in the decline of L. pertusa. The text goes on to note that a change in the ratio of manganese to calcium would signal an inverse, or opposite, change in oxygenation. According to the graph, the ratio of manganese
to calcium in samples from the Alboran Sea increased from about 30 micromoles per mole 10,000 years ago to about 80 micromoles per mole 8,000 years ago, which means that oxygenation decreased between 10,000 and 8,000 years ago. Meanwhile, there was almost no discernible change in the ratio of manganese to calcium in samples from the Mauritanian coast between 12,000 and 10,000 years
ago. According to the text, the population of L. pertusa declined significantly around 9,000 years ago in the Alboran Sea and around 11,000 years ago near the Mauritanian coast. Thus, the increase in the ratio of manganese to calcium around 9,000 years ago in the Alboran Sea coincides with the decline in the L. pertusa population, suggesting an association between the decrease in oxygenation and
the decline in population of the coral. No such relationship is suggested around 11,000 years ago near the Mauritanian coast. So, oxygenation likely played a role in the L. pertusa decline in the Alboran Sea but not in the coral’s decline near the Mauritanian coast.

Choice A is incorrect because it asserts the opposite of what the graph indicates regarding oxygenation in the Alboran Sea, and it misrepresents what the graph indicates about oxygenation near the Mauritanian coast. The graph indicates that at the time of the decline in L. pertusa (approximately 9,000 years ago), the samples from the Alboran Sea contained a ratio of manganese to calcium that
was increasing. According to the text, this ratio inversely correlates with ocean oxygenation levels, so if the ratio was increasing, oxygenation was decreasing, not substantially increasing. Furthermore, the graph shows that the ratio of manganese to calcium remained relatively stable in coral samples from the Mauritanian coast during the period studied, which suggests that there was no discernible relationship between oxygenation and the coral’s population decline in that location, not that there was a substantial decrease in oxygenation corresponding to the coral’s decline.

Choice C is incorrect. Although the graph suggests that the level of oxygenation in the Alboran Sea was higher before the decline in L. pertusa than after—because the ratio of manganese to calcium inversely correlates with ocean oxygenation levels and this ratio was lower before the decline than after—the graph doesn’t support the claim that oxygenation near the Mauritanian coast was consistently low before and after the coral’s decline there. Rather, the graph indicates that relative to coral samples from the Alboran Sea, the ratio of manganese to calcium in samples from near the Mauritanian coast was consistently low, which suggests that oxygenation levels were relatively high both before and after the decline of L. pertusa.

Choice D is incorrect because it states the opposite of what the graph indicates: the graph shows that throughout the period studied, the ratio of manganese to calcium was higher in coral samples from the Alboran Sea than it was in samples from near the Mauritanian coast. Since the text indicates that the ratio of manganese to calcium inversely correlates with ocean oxygenation levels, oxygenation in the Alboran Sea was therefore lower than, not higher than, oxygenation near the Mauritanian coast during the period studied. Moreover, even if choice D did accurately represent the graph, it wouldn’t effectively complete the statement since a comparison of the ocean oxygenation levels at the two locations is not relevant to the claim that a decline in oxygenation levels was associated with the decline of L. pertusa in the Alboran Sea but not near the Mauritanian coast.

Develop fast analytical skills by practicing more. Here the key is to be able to understand the chart quickly.

Choice A is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion about Aztec (Nahua) ethics. The text indicates that, according to Purcell’s interpretation of available Aztec philosophical works, the Aztec ethical system views an individual’s actions in relation to that individual’s societal role and how the actions affect the community. The text contrasts this view with another held by some ethicists, namely that actions are morally good or bad regardless of the context in which they occur. Thus, Purcell’s analysis suggests that the Aztecs would have asserted that the morality of an individual’s actions are rooted in that person’s position in the community and the actions’ effects and therefore cannot be determined in the absence of that context.

Choice B is incorrect. Although the text indicates that morally judging an action according to Aztec ethics requires an understanding of the action’s effects and the individual’s social circumstances, it does not specify that only members of that society can acquire this information.

Choice C is incorrect because it implies that the Aztecs considered some actions good or bad regardless of the surrounding context, which contradicts the text’s claim that the Aztecs believed that the morality of an individual’s action is dependent on the action’s effects on the community and the person’s specific circumstances.

Choice D is incorrect. Although the text indicates that in Aztec ethics the morality of an action depends in part on how it affects the community, this is only one of the two factors—the other being the person’s societal role—that need to be considered. Therefore, it is possible that two actions with the same effect on the community could be considered morally distinct if they are performed by individuals in different social roles.

You must read and understand the whole paragraph, cause you need to choose an option that gives a conclusion.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is pronoun-antecedent agreement. The singular pronoun “this” agrees in number with the singular antecedent “Lê Lương Minh became the thirteenth secretary-general of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in January 2013.” The pronoun “this” is referring back to the singular event described earlier in the sentence in
which Minh became secretary-general of ASEAN.

Choice A is incorrect because the plural pronoun “these” doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent “Lê Lương Minh became the thirteenth secretary general of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in January 2013.”

Here, choice B is incorrect because the plural pronoun “those” doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent “Lê Lương Minh became the thirteenth secretary general of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in January 2013.”

Choice D is incorrect because the indefinite pronoun “some” is ambiguous in this context; the resulting sentence leaves unclear what marks the first time the organization appointed a Vietnamese leader.

This or That: We also use it to indicate a whole sentence.

Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verb forms within a sentence. A main clause requires a finite (tensed) verb to perform the action of the subject (in this case, Land), and this choice supplies the finite past tense verb “used” to indicate what Land did with the technology he had invented.

Choice B is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite perfect infinitive “to have used” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite verb.

Choice C is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite to-infinitive “to use” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite verb.

Choice D is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The nonfinite participle “using” doesn’t supply the main clause with a finite verb.

Learn Tense, Participles, Infinitive, and gerunds to answer such types of questions. You can learn Tenses from our page. Click Here

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “ensures” agrees in number with the singular subject “using.”

Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “are ensuring” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “using.”

Here, choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “have ensured” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “using.”

Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “ensure” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “using.”

Learn Tense, to answer such types of questions. You can learn Tenses from our page. Click Here

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between sentences. In this choice, the period is used correctly to mark the boundary between one sentence (“Defying…fast”) and another sentence that begins with a supplementary phrase (“During…Olympics”).

Choice A is incorrect. When a dash is present in a sentence (“ran—fast”), it’s not conventional to use another dash (“fast—during”) to mark the boundary between sentences because it creates a potentially confusing sentence. In this context, a period, semicolon, or colon would be clear and more conventional.

Choice B is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The sentences (“Defying…fast”) and (“during…Olympics”) are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction.

Choice C is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences.

The paragraph and the blank sentence are in the Past. Learn Past Tense, to answer such types of questions. You can learn Tenses from our page. Click Here

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “is” agrees in number with the singular subject “the triangle.”

Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “are” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “the triangle.”

Here, choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “have been” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “the triangle.”

Choice C is incorrect because the plural verb “were” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “the triangle.”

We choose the verb based on the Subject, which is singular. Hence we use Present Simple. You can learn Tenses from our page. Click Here

Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the coordination of main clauses within a sentence. This choice uses a semicolon in a conventional way to join the first main clause (“In 2004…sampler”) and the second main clause (“in 2014…pillars”).

Choice A is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses. The word “later” is an adverb and cannot be used to join two main clauses unless it is preceded by a conjunction.

Choice C is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses.

Choice D is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses. The word “later” is an adverb and cannot be used to join two main clauses unless it is preceded by a conjunction.

Learn Punctuation to understand it better.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the noun phrase “Julian’s 1935 synthesis” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase “named…years.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that Julian’s 1935 synthesis of the alkaloid physostigmine—and not another noun in the sentence— was named in 1999 as one of the greatest achievements by a US chemist in the past hundred years.

Choice A is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “Julian” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that Julian himself was named as one of the greatest achievements by a US chemist in the past hundred years.

Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the prepositional phrase “in 1935” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically and confusingly suggests that “in 1935” was named as one of the greatest achievements by a US chemist in the past hundred years.

Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “the alkaloid physostigmine” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically and confusingly suggests that the alkaloid physostigmine itself (not the synthesis of it) was named as one of the greatest achievements by a US chemist in the past hundred years.

Understanding of English Standards is most important.

Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of items in a complex series (a series including internal punctuation). The semicolon after “nonnative” is correctly used to separate the first item (“growing diverse plant species, both native and nonnative”) and the second item (“fostering scientific research”) in the series of things that botanical gardens are dedicated
to. Further, the comma after “species” is correctly used to separate the noun phrase “diverse plant species” and the supplementary phrase “both native and nonnative” that modifies it.

Choice A is incorrect because a comma (specifically, the comma after “nonnative”) can’t be used in this way to separate items in a complex series.

Choice C is incorrect because a semicolon can’t be used in this way to separate the noun phrase “diverse plant species” and the supplementary phrase “both native and nonnative” that modifies it. Further, a comma can’t be used in this way to separate items in a complex series.

Choice D is incorrect because it fails to use appropriate punctuation to separate the noun phrase “diverse plant species” and the supplementary phrase “both native and nonnative” that modifies it. Further, a comma can’t be used in this way to separate items in a complex series.

A comma is for tiny pauses and a semi-colon is for pauses. We cannot use two semi-colons in one sentence back to back, as you notice later there is one semi-colon already in the paragraph after the blank.

Choice D is the best answer. “Hence” logically signals that the information in this sentence about turtle shells—that people incorrectly assume they are exoskeletons—is a consequence of the shells appearing external to the animal.

Choice A is incorrect because “that being said” illogically signals that this sentence qualifies or contrasts with the previous information about turtle shells appearing external to the animal. Instead, it presents a consequence of that information.

Choice B is incorrect because “however” illogically signals that this sentence contrasts with the previous information about turtle shells appearing external to the animal. Instead, it presents a consequence of that information.

Choice C is incorrect because “for instance” illogically signals that this sentence provides an example supporting the previous information about turtle shells appearing external to the animal. Instead, it presents a consequence of that information.

Skim the paragraph and focus on your vocabulary for better understanding.

Choice D is the best answer. “Hence” logically signals that the information in this sentence about turtle shells—that people incorrectly assume they are exoskeletons—is a consequence of the shells appearing external to the animal.

Choice A is incorrect because “that being said” illogically signals that this sentence qualifies or contrasts with the previous information about turtle shells appearing external to the animal. Instead, it presents a consequence of that information.

Choice B is incorrect because “however” illogically signals that this sentence contrasts with the previous information about turtle shells appearing external to the animal. Instead, it presents a consequence of that information.

Choice C is incorrect because “for instance” illogically signals that this sentence provides an example supporting the previous information about turtle shells appearing external to the animal. Instead, it presents a consequence of that information.

You should learn Parts of Speech, especially Nouns, Articles; and Punctuation.