Sentence Correction

tgou008 wrote:The first thing that jumped out at me when I read the question was "it". What is it? Where is its antecendant? Is it Germany, nuclear power or energy? It's not clear.

This signalled to me that this was a pronoun sc correction problem, and that the best solution would have to fix the ambiguity related to it. In particular, the correct answer should make it clear that 'it' is actually energy derived from nuclear power within the respective country (i.e., Germany)

I then scanned the answer choices and the only one that clearly fixes this ambiguity is C. D is tempting, but was the nuclear power derived from energy produced in Germany? We're not told anything about where it was produced - perhaps it was produced in France?!

IMO C, was quite clearly the correct answer. All I had to rely on for this was the pronoun error.

your heart's in the right place, but just make sure you know that ambiguity alone doesn't make a pronoun incorrect -- there are lots and lots and lots and lots of official problems on which the correct answer contains a technically ambiguous pronoun. see here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/pronoun-ambi ... tml#305959

the real issue with the pronoun in that sentence isn't ambiguity -- it's incorrectness. there's *no* noun in that sentence that is completely logical as a replacement for "it".

p.s., I'm not familiar with the distinction between compared vs whereas. How could I have immediately knocked out compared using this rule?

i'm glad you aren't familiar with that distinction, because it's not actually a "distinction" at all; those are two completely different structures. (in general, you should *not* assume that distinctions present in the answer choices are actionable, or can producing rules, unless the different options are presented in an otherwise identical context.)

--

"whereas" is a conjunction that indicates contrast. it's a lot like "but", except, unlike "but", it can appear at the beginning of a sentence:
whereas only 10% of the employees had signed up for the program by the end of january, that number had risen to 44% by the end of february.
I speak parlache, the slang-heavy dialect of Medellín, whereas my wife speaks textbook Castilian Spanish.
(notice that "but" would work just as well in the second of these sentences, but not in the first)

--

if you have a sentence that says "compared to/with", then the purpose is (obviously) to make a comparison.

the sentence CANNOT also say a comparison word, such as more, less, greater, prefer, better, worse, etc. to use "compared to/with", you just STATE the objective statistics/facts to be compared, without using any other comparison word.

examples:
*this year's unemployment rate of 12% is three times as great compared to the rate in 1994 --> INCORRECT (redundant -- you already have "3x as great", so "compared" is superfluous)

this year's unemployment rate is 12%, compared to 4% in 1994 --> CORRECT
i.e., you just come out and SAY the statistics, and then give "compared to/with"

adilka wrote:Energy produced in France derives? Excuse me?? Isn't it grammatically incorrect?

remember that questioning the official answers is a waste of your time.
the answer to "is this official answer incorrect?" will be yes in 0% of cases. it will be no in the other 100% of cases.
therefore, this is a pointless question to ask (especially with the sort of attitude that's evident here -- that's certainly not going to help anyone, either). a better question to ask is, "why is this correct? what am i not understand here? what can i LEARN here?"
if that isn't the attitude you're taking into this, then it's going to be extremely difficult for you to improve.

--

the active verb "derive" can be used, correctly, in this way.
the meaning is relatively close to that of the passive form ("to be derived"), but there's a difference: "X derives from Y" just means that X somehow comes from Y (in whatever way -- intentionally or organically), while "X is derived from Y" specifically implies that this is effected by human beings.
e.g.
x% of the energy in France derives from nuclear power --> correct (this is the source of the energy)
x% of the energy in France is derived from nuclear power --> also correct (because this is done by human beings)
human emotions derive from our evolutionary history --> makes sense
human emotions are derived from our evolutionary history --> wrong; this is nonsense (people don't actually derive these emotions; the sentence is just supposed to say that's where the emotions come from.)