Because she knew many of the leaders of colonial America and the American Revolution personally, Mercy Otis Warren was continually at or near the center of political events from 1765 to 1789, a vantage point combining with her talent for writing to make her one of the most valuable historians of the era.
(A) a vantage point combining with her talent for writing to make
(B) a vantage point, when combined with her talent for writing, that made
(C) a vantage point that combined with her talent for writing, and it made
(D) and this vantage point, which combined with her talent for writing to make
(E) and this vantage point, combined with her talent for writing, made
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Because she knew many of the leaders of colonial America
This topic has expert replies
-
BTGmoderatorDC
- Moderator
- Posts: 7187
- Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
- Followed by:23 members
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
-
deloitte247
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2214
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:22 pm
- Followed by:5 members
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
Let's keep in mind that the aim of this process is getting a suitable and logical argument to support the underlined statement from the available options below;
From Option A - INCORRECT. It'd be seen that irrespective of the fact that the option is same as the question raised, it also lacks proper punctuation. There should have been a sentence breaker in the form of a ''comma'' to separate the wording.
Looking through Option B - INCORRECT. It'd be seen that there's partial punctuation of the sentence in a bid to giving it a clear head way but then, it's still would have made much sense if the adverb ''when'' hasn't been misplaced.
In Option C - INCORRECT. Here, the sentence is too long before the statement was broken up nevertheless, there is no clear reason as to why the writer would want to use a ''comma'' and at the same time ''and'' when he's not joining two things together. It's still the same item of statement.
Here in Option D - INCORRECT. It appears the advantages of the write-up is/has been previously talked about even before it appeared in the second paragraph. The demonstrative pronoun ''that'' is not a fitting word in this context.
Finally, we've arrived to the last solution in Option E - CORRECT, which appears the most correct in that it's got the best punctuation in it. It made the statement more comprehensive and interesting to read. Clearly, the response that matters.
From Option A - INCORRECT. It'd be seen that irrespective of the fact that the option is same as the question raised, it also lacks proper punctuation. There should have been a sentence breaker in the form of a ''comma'' to separate the wording.
Looking through Option B - INCORRECT. It'd be seen that there's partial punctuation of the sentence in a bid to giving it a clear head way but then, it's still would have made much sense if the adverb ''when'' hasn't been misplaced.
In Option C - INCORRECT. Here, the sentence is too long before the statement was broken up nevertheless, there is no clear reason as to why the writer would want to use a ''comma'' and at the same time ''and'' when he's not joining two things together. It's still the same item of statement.
Here in Option D - INCORRECT. It appears the advantages of the write-up is/has been previously talked about even before it appeared in the second paragraph. The demonstrative pronoun ''that'' is not a fitting word in this context.
Finally, we've arrived to the last solution in Option E - CORRECT, which appears the most correct in that it's got the best punctuation in it. It made the statement more comprehensive and interesting to read. Clearly, the response that matters.
