0

Sentence Improvement

Description: Diction, Verb Tenses, Articles and Modals
Number of Questions: 20
Created by:
Tags: Diction Verb Tenses Articles and Modals Tenses Structural Errors Others Sentence Improvement Auxiliaries and Modals Parts of Speech
Attempted 0/20 Correct 0 Score 0

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

The optimist contended that since men cannot foresee the future, worry about the future is futile, and that every thing, is inevitably for the best.

  1. The optimist contended that since men

  2. The optimists contend that since men

  3. The optimist contends that, as men

  4. The optimist contends that since men

  5. The optimist contends that, since men


Correct Option: E
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The latter part of the sentence is in simple present tense, so the first part should also be in simple present tense. And also a comma is required after 'that' to mark the qualifying clause 'since men cannot foresee the future'. So, there is error of tense and punctuation in the sentence.

Explanation for (2): This option makes unnecessary change in subject from singular to plural (optimist to optimists).

Explanation for (3): This option rectifies both the errors but introduces another error by replacing 'since' by 'as'.
Explanation for (4): This option rectifies the error of tense but leaves out the error of punctuation. Explanation for (5): This option rectifies the error of tense and comma splice. Tense consistency has been maintained by changing 'contended' to 'contends', as the latter part of the sentence is in simple present tense and a comma is inserted after 'that' to mark the qualifying clause 'since men cannot foresee the future'.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Irritated by the contumacy of the chancellor, the Diet had sent a command to him to recognize the authority of the emperor.

  1. had sent a command to him to recognize the authority of the emperor.

  2. has sent a command to him to recognize the authority of the emperor.

  3. sent a command to him to recognize the authority of the emperor.

  4. sent a command to recognize the authority of the emperor.


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence bears the error of tense. The correct usage, representing concurrent action, ought to be “irritated by … the Diet sent”.

Explanation for (2): For B to be correct, the sentence has to begin with “having been irritated by …”

Explanation for (3): This option corrects the error of tense. The correct usage, representing concurrent action, is “irritated by …the Diet sent”.
Explanation for (4): This option unnecessarily omits the object of the command. Explanation for (5): This option unnecessarily omits the object of the command.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

When he had known what he wanted to know he has gone home.

  1. When he had known what he wanted to know he has gone home.

  2. When he had known what he wanted to know he had gone home.

  3. When he knew what he wanted to know he went home.

  4. When he had known what he wanted to know he went home.

  5. After he had known what he wanted to know he has gone home.


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The structure of the sentence should be maintained throughout. The first part of the sentence is in the simple past tense and the latter part' has gone' is in the present perfect. We need to change this part to 'he went home'.

Explanation for (2): He went home after knowing, not 'before'. So, 'had gone' is inappropriate.

Explanation for (3): This option corrects one error and commits another. If two events in the past are in sequence of time, the earlier event uses the past perfect tense.
Explanation for (4): The structure of the sentence should be maintained throughout. The first part of the sentence is in the simple past tense and the latter part' has gone' is in the present perfect. This option changes this part to 'he went home'. Explanation for (5): This option does not correct the error of use of tense.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Having received no reply to his call, the teacher took the students to task for their lackadaisical approach to studies.

  1. Having received no reply to his call,

  2. Having received no reply to his question,

  3. Not having received any reply to his call,

  4. Not having received reply to his call,

  5. Having received no answer to his call,


Correct Option: E
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): Error of diction. Reply is received of a question (or) query. We always 'answer' a call.

Explanation for (2): This option changes meaning of the sentence.

Explanation for (3): This option makes unwarranted changes without correcting the error of diction.
Explanation for (4): This option changes meaning of the sentence. Explanation for (5): Error of diction. Reply is received of a question (or) query. We always 'answer' a call.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Dinosaurs are traditionally classified as cold-blooded reptiles, but recent evidence based on their eating habits, posture, and skeletal structure suggested some may have been warm-blooded.

  1. eating habits, posture, and skeletal structure suggested some may have been warm-blooded.

  2. eating habits, postures, and skeletal structures suggested some may have been warm-blooded.

  3. eating habit, posture, and skeletal structure suggested some may have been warm-blooded.

  4. eating habits, posture, and skeletal structure suggested some might have been warm-blooded.

  5. eating habits, posture, and skeletal structure has suggested some may have been warm-blooded.


Correct Option: E
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): 'Skeletal structure suggested' is in past tense, whereas 'recent evidence' suggests the present.

Explanation for (2): This option makes unwarranted changes but fails to correct the error of tense.

Explanation for (3): This option makes unwarranted changes but fails to correct the error of tense.
Explanation for (4): This option makes unwarranted changes but fails to correct the error of tense. Explanation for (5): 'Skeletal structure suggested' is in past tense, whereas 'recent evidence' suggests the present. This option corrects the error.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Henry found himself behind the scenes of a theatre, and instantly begins to experience all the complex emotions which come to the layman in that situation.

  1. instantly begins to experience

  2. instantly had begun to experience

  3. instantly would begin to experience

  4. instantly began to experience

  5. instantly could begin to experience


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The tense in the underlined part has to be consistent with the non-underlined part (simple past).

Explanation for (2): The tense in the underlined part has to be consistent with the non-underlined part (simple past). There is no reason to use the past perfect.

Explanation for (3): The tense in the underlined part has to be consistent with the non-underlined part (simple past). 'Would' is as inconsistent as the auxiliary used in the given sentence,
Explanation for (4): Only this option uses the required simple past tense. All the other options change the tense. Explanation for (5): The option changes the meaning of the sentence.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Can I join you and contribute my mite for timely completion of the much delayed project?

  1. Can I join you and contribute my mite for

  2. May I join you and contribute my mite for

  3. Could I join you and contribute my mite for

  4. Can I join you and contribute my might for

  5. Whether I can join you and contribute my mite for


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): We use modal 'can' to seek permission. But the speaker here is making a polite offer for help.

Explanation for (2): We use modal 'may' to seek permission. But the speaker here is making a polite offer for help.

Explanation for (3): We use modal 'can' or 'may' to seek permission. But the speaker here is making a polite offer for help. So, the best usage is 'could'.
Explanation for (4): This option muddles up 'mite' (small contribution) and 'might' (strength). Explanation for (5): This option muddles up a modal 'could' and a conjunction 'whether'.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

The criminals fled before the police reached the spot of crime.

  1. The criminals fled before the police reached the spot of crime.

  2. The criminals fled when the police reached the spot of crime.

  3. The criminals fled had when the police had reached the spot of crime.

  4. The criminals had fled before the police reached the spot of crime.

  5. The criminals had fled before the police had reached the spot of crime.


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence bears the error of tense. When there are two actions of past tense in sequence, the action that took place earlier should be in past perfect tense.

Explanation for (2): The option changes the meaning of the sentence.

Explanation for (3): The option is grammatically incorrect as it uses past perfect tense twice for the events in sequence.
Explanation for (4): When there are two actions of past tense in sequence, the action that took place earlier should be in past perfect tense. This option rectifies the error of tense by using past perfect tense (had reached) Explanation for (5): The option does not rectify the error of faulty use of tense. In this sentence both the actions are stated in past perfect tense which is incorrect. The action that took place later should be in simple past tense.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Had he realized how near he was to qualifying, he would appear in the examination.

  1. he would appear in the examination.

  2. he would have appeared in the examination.

  3. he must appear in the examination.

  4. he could have appeared in the examination.

  5. he might have had appeared in the examination.


Correct Option: B
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence bears the error of construction of conditional sentence. A sentence beginning with 'had' should take 'would have' in another clause.

Explanation for (2): The sentence bears the error of construction of conditional sentence. A sentence beginning with 'had' should take 'would have' in another clause. This option corrects the error.

Explanation for (3): This option does not rectify the error of construction of conditional sentence. 'He must' is prescriptive, which is incorrect in context.
Explanation for (4): This option does not rectify the error of construction of conditional sentence. Explanation for (5): This option does not rectify the error of construction of conditional sentence. ('Might have' shows probability of occurrence in the past.)

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

In many of the Scandinavian countries, the growth of population has been nothing during the last two decades.

  1. growth of population has been nothing during the last two decades

  2. growth of population has been almost nothing during the last two decades

  3. growth of population has been nil during the last two decades

  4. growth of population has been none during the last two decades

  5. growth of population has been little during the last two decades


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): Error of diction. Growth can be 'nil' but not 'nothing'.

Explanation for (2): This option fails to correct the error of diction.

Explanation for (3): Error of diction. Growth can be 'nil' but not 'nothing', hence (3) is the best choice.
Explanation for (4): Growth can be 'nil' but not 'nothing'. Explanation for (5): This option changes the meaning of the sentence.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

Poecilotheria Nallamalar is a shy but lethal, palm sized ambush predator that preyed on lizards, insects and small snakes injecting them with deadly venom before sucking out their body fluids.

  1. that preyed on lizards, insects and small snakes injecting

  2. which preyed on lizards, insects and small snakes and injected

  3. which preys on lizards, insects and small snakes, injects

  4. that preys on lizards insects and small snakes to inject

  5. that preys on lizards, insects and small snakes injecting


Correct Option: E
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence has error of tense. The first part of the sentence is in the present tense, so the latter part should also be in the present tense, 'preys', not 'preyed'.

Explanation for (2): This option does not rectify the error of tense and it also introduces other errors of relative pronoun, conjunction and parallelism. Use of 'which' is incorrect because the sentence talks about a particular creature, and 'which' is a nonrestrictive pronoun. Changing 'injecting' to 'injected' creates the error of parallelism (injected; sucking).

Explanation for (3): This option rectifies the error of tense but introduces other errors of relative pronoun, conjunction and parallelism. Use of 'which' is incorrect because the sentence talks about a particular creature, and 'which' is nonrestrictive pronoun. Changing 'injecting' to 'injects' creates the error of parallelism (injects; sucking). The use of 'and' is redundant.
Explanation for (4): This option rectifies the error of tense but introduces the error of punctuation and parallelism. Comma is required between lizards and insects. Changing 'injecting' to 'to inject' creates the error of parallelism (to inject (infinitive); sucking (gerund)). Explanation for (5): The sentence has error of tense. The first part of the sentence is in the present tense, so the latter part should also be in the present tense, 'preys' not 'preyed'. This option rectifies this error.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

The duty of virtue is essentially distinguished from the duty of justice in that we are morally bound to the later, whereas the former rests on free self-restraint only.

  1. the duty of justice in that we are morally bound to the later

  2. the duty of justice in that we are morally bound to the latter

  3. the duty of justice in which we are morally bound to the later

  4. the duty of justice in which we are morally bounded to the later

  5. the duty of justice in that we are morally bounded to the latter


Correct Option: B
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence bears the error of diction: ‘later’ refers to time, whereas ‘latter’ refer to position. The sentence is about ‘the duty of justice’, that comes later in the sentence.

Explanation for (2): The sentence bears the error of diction: ‘later’ refers to time, whereas ‘latter’ refer to position. The sentence is about ‘the duty of justice’, which comes later in the sentence. This option corrects the error.

Explanation for (3): This option does not rectify the error of diction and introduces another error (‘which’ in place of ‘that’). 
Explanation for (4): This option does not rectify the error of diction and introduces other errors (‘which’ in place of ‘that’ and ‘’bounded’ in place of ‘bound’).  Explanation for (5): This option rectifies the error of diction but introduces another error (‘that’ in place of ‘which’ and ‘bounded’ in place of ‘bound).

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

This necessitated their regular keep-up and maintenance resulting in the emergence of the whole crop of crafts and mechanics.

  1. This necessitated their regular keep-up and maintenance

  2. This made necessary their regular keep-up and maintenance

  3. This necessitated their regular up-keep and maintenance

  4. This necessitated their regular keeping and maintenance

  5. This necessitated their regular keeping-up and maintenance


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence has the error of diction; keep-up means maintain pace. The correct usage ought to be upkeep, which means maintenance or preservation.

Explanation for (2): The option does not rectify the error of diction. Besides, it makes unwarranted changes.

Explanation for (3): The sentence has the error of diction; keep-up means maintain pace. The correct usage ought to be upkeep, which means maintenance or preservation. This option corrects the error.
Explanation for (4): The option does not rectify the error of diction. Explanation for (5): The option does not rectify the error of diction.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

The knee is likely to be damaged more than most other joints in the body because it cannot twist without injury.

  1. The knee is likely to be damaged more than most other joints in the body

  2. The knee is more likely to be damaged than most other joints in the body

  3. The knee is more likely to damage than most other joints in the body

  4. The knee is more than likely to be damaged than most other joints in the body

  5. The knee is liable to be damaged more than most other joints in the body


Correct Option: B
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): Error of diction. 'Damaged more' is the incorrect phrase here. It can be 'more likely to be damaged'.

Explanation for (2): Error of diction. 'Damaged more' is the incorrect phrase here. It can be 'more likely to be damaged' as in (2). Hence, (2) is the answer.

Explanation for (3): This option sounds as if knee will damage something else.
Explanation for (4): This option changes the meaning of the sentence. Explanation for (5): This option changes words without correcting the error of diction.

Directions: This question presents a sentence, all or part of which is underlined. Beneath the sentence you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is the best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose any one of the others.

The fact that the terrorists left no clue has laid credence to the apprehension in certain quarters that it may have been arranged to discredit the army.

  1. has laid credence to the apprehension

  2. has laid credence in the apprehension

  3. has laid credence for the apprehension

  4. has lent credence for the apprehension

  5. has lent credence to the apprehension


Correct Option: E
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): 'Laid' is the past tense of 'lay', (position or put something) which is inappropriate here.

Explanation for (2): 'Laid' is the past tense of 'lay', (position or put something) which is inappropriate here. Also, credence is followed by 'to' not 'in'.

Explanation for (3): 'Laid' is the past tense of 'lay', (position or put something) which is inappropriate here. Also, credence is followed by 'to' not 'for'.
Explanation for (4): The option corrects the error of diction but introduces the error of idiomatic usage. Explanation for (5):  'Laid' is the past tense of 'lay' which means to position or put something. 'Lent' is the past participle form of 'lend' and is the correct usage.

Directions: The following sentences test correctness and effectiveness of expression. Part of each sentence or the entire sentence is underlined; beneath each sentence are five ways of phrasing the underlined material. Choice A repeats the original phrasing; the other four choices are different. If you think the original phrasing produces a better sentence than any of the alternatives, select choice A. If not, select one of the other choices.

I would hesitate to tell her exactly what did I think of her.

  1. what did I think of her.

  2. what had I thought of her.

  3. what did I think about her.

  4. what I thought of her.

  5. what I think about her.


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): There is error of assertive clause in this sentence. 'Tell' her' should be followed by assertive 'what I thought', not interrogative 'what did I think'.

Explanation for (2): The option does not rectify the error of assertive clause. It incorrectly changes the tense.

Explanation for (3): The option does not rectify the error of assertive clause. It incorrectly changes the preposition.
Explanation for (4): This option corrects the error of assertive clause. 'Tell' her' should be followed by assertive 'what I thought', not interrogative 'what did I think'. Explanation for (5): The option rectifies the error of assertive clause but incorrectly changes the tense.

Directions: The following sentences test correctness and effectiveness of expression. Part of each sentence or the entire sentence is underlined; beneath each sentence are five ways of phrasing the underlined material. Choice A repeats the original phrasing; the other four choices are different. If you think the original phrasing produces a better sentence than any of the alternatives, select choice A. If not, select one of the other choices.

When Jack Wilton first had come to Marois Bay, none of us dreamed that he was a man with a hidden sorrow in his life.

  1. first had come to

  2. had been coming to

  3. would first come to

  4. first came to

  5. was first come to


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Justification for (4): This option uses the simple past tense 'came to' which is consistent with 'dreamed' in the non-underlined portion. Further, 'first' conveys the correct meaning 'in the beginning'.   

Directions: The following sentences test correctness and effectiveness of expression. Part of each sentence or the entire sentence is underlined; beneath each sentence are five ways of phrasing the underlined material. Choice A repeats the original phrasing; the other four choices are different. If you think the original phrasing produces a better sentence than any of the alternatives, select choice A. If not, select one of the other choices.

It is not easy to be sure today how accurate an observer he had been, but if we make some allowance for misprints, we find a certain consistency in his work.

  1. how accurate an observer he had been

  2. how accurate an observer had he been

  3. how accurate an observer he was

  4. how accurate an observer was he

  5. how accurate an observer he is


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): This sentence bears the error of tense. 'Not easy to be sure today' means that we are talking of the indefinite past. So, a simple past tense is required, not past perfect tense.

Explanation for (2): 'Not easy to be sure today' means that we are talking of the indefinite past. This option does not rectify the error of tense.

Explanation for (3): This sentence talks about the work done in the past for which we cannot be "sure today" so we know that we are talking of the indefinite past. So, a simple past tense is required, not past perfect tense. This option corrects the error of tense by using simple past tense.
Explanation for (4): 'Not easy to be sure today' means that we are talking of the indefinite past. This option introduces a new error. It changes the structure of the sentence by placing the verb before the subject. This happens only in a negative sentence. Explanation for (5): 'Not easy to be sure today' means that we are talking of the indefinite past. This option does not rectify the error of tense.

Directions: The following sentences test correctness and effectiveness of expression. Part of each sentence or the entire sentence is underlined; beneath each sentence are five ways of phrasing the underlined material. Choice A repeats the original phrasing; the other four choices are different. If you think the original phrasing produces a better sentence than any of the alternatives, select choice A. If not, select one of the other choices.

Not until Edward Jenner developed the first anti-smallpox serum in 1796 there was protection against this terrible disease.

  1. there was protection against this terrible disease.

  2. protection was given against this terrible disease.

  3. there had been protection against this terrible disease.

  4. was there protection against this terrible disease.

  5. was protection given available against this terrible disease.


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): Sentences beginning with negative words ought to use auxiliaries before the subject, as in the case of an interrogative sentence. 'Not until' ought to be followed by 'was there'.

Explanation for (2): Sentences beginning with negative words ought to use auxiliaries before the subject, as in the case of an interrogative sentence.

Explanation for (3): Sentences beginning with negative words ought to use auxiliaries before the subject, as in the case of an interrogative sentence.
Explanation for (4): Sentences beginning with negative words ought to use auxiliaries before the subject, as in the case of an interrogative sentence. 'Not until' ought to be followed by 'was there'. Hence, (4) Explanation for (5): Sentences beginning with negative words ought to use auxiliaries before the subject, as in the case of an interrogative sentence. This option corrects this error but sounds odd in context of the protection afforded.

Directions: The following sentences test correctness and effectiveness of expression. Part of each sentence or the entire sentence is underlined; beneath each sentence are five ways of phrasing the underlined material. Choice A repeats the original phrasing; the other four choices are different. If you think the original phrasing produces a better sentence than any of the alternatives, select choice A. If not, select one of the other choices.

He warned the government that attempts to curbing terrorism should not mean the loss of civil liberties.

  1. that attempts to curbing terrorism should

  2. that attempts at curbing terrorism should

  3. that attempt curbing terrorism should

  4. that attempts to curb terrorism should

  5. that attempts for curbing terrorism should


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

Explanation for (1): The sentence has error of the infinitive ('to curbing' is grammatically incorrect).

Explanation for (2): The option does not rectify the error, besides it introduces one more error of preposition (by using 'in' in place of 'to')

Explanation for (3): The option compounds the error by using the gerund form without the required preposition.
Explanation for (4): The sentence has error of infinitive ('to curbing' is grammatically incorrect). The option corrects the error. Explanation for (5): The option does not rectify the error.

- Hide questions