Ryunosuke Akutagawa's knowledge of the literatures of Europe, China and that of Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing his literary style as much as the content of his fiction.
a)that of Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing his literary style as much as
b)that of Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, and it informed his literary style as well as
c)Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style and
d)Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, as it informed his literary style as much as
e)Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style in addition to
Hi Expert,
Here is the correct sentence:
Ryunosuke Akutagawa's knowledge of the literatures of Europe, China and Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style and the content of his fiction.
It seems from the non-underlined part that Europe, China and X (unknown) is not the list of 3 things because there is no COMMA before the final AND. As the correct answer is C, China and Japan simultaneously modify 'knowledge of the literatures of Europe'. If "China and Japan" simultaneously modify "knowledge of blah blah blah", I can surely say that "China and Japan" is a modifier. So, there should have a COMMA after the word "Japan", right? If there is NO COMMA after "Japan", then "was instrumental in his development as a writer" will be the modifier along with "China and Japan". If "China and Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer" is a modifier, then the "adverbial modifier (informing)" will not make the Cause and effect situation. So, how can we legitimate answer option C as correct?
An Insight from Ron:
x, y, and z are the list of 3 things.
But, (x, y and z) are not the list of 3 things. Alternately, "y and z" simultaneously modify 'X'
Thank you.
