Sentence Correction

It was the coincidence of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria that first drew attention to the possibility that the sickle cell gene might confer resistance to the disease.

(A)

(B) It was the geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria that

(C) The geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria was what

(D) The geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria coinciding was what

(E) It was that the geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident that


I think D. urs?
OA -> missing

IMO A: It was the coincidence ..... that drew ... perfect.

B: coinciding with malaria, not right tense
C: was what that drew .. definetly not concise...

D: Not make much sense, sickle cell and malaria coiciding was what first drew...
E: Several issues including tense.

allfta wrote:It was the coincidence of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria that first drew attention to the possibility that the sickle cell gene might confer resistance to the disease.

(A)

(B) It was the geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria that

(C) The geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria was what

(D) The geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria coinciding was what

(E) It was that the geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident that


I think D. urs?
OA -> missing

A. Incorrect, coincidence cannot be related to the geographic range and malaria - Malaria is a disease and geographic range is a scientific term
B. Incorrect, logical introduction of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene - the same as in A
C. Incorrect, see A, B
D. Incorrect "what" used as sub-clause connector
E. Correct, precise "it+to be ... that ..." form; geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident

allfta wrote:It was the coincidence of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria that first drew attention to the possibility that the sickle cell gene might confer resistance to the disease.

(A)

(B) It was the geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria that

(C) The geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria was what

(D) The geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria coinciding was what

(E) It was that the geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident that


I think D. urs?
OA -> missing

Night rider, did u noticed beginning of E, "it was that" what is th epurpose of this convoluted start? Is it concise? No. An wrong option only based on this one. Do not forget there is another "that" to conenct them.

On the contrary A is clean; the coincidence is not related to the geographic ranges, those thing are just for obfucation, marked with of. Coincidence is related with "that", it was the coincidence ...that...

Night reader wrote:A. Incorrect, coincidence cannot be related to the geographic range and malaria - Malaria is a disease and geographic range is a scientific term
B. Incorrect, logical introduction of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene - the same as in A
C. Incorrect, see A, B
D. Incorrect "what" used as sub-clause connector
E. Correct, precise "it+to be ... that ..." form; geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident

allfta wrote:It was the coincidence of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria that first drew attention to the possibility that the sickle cell gene might confer resistance to the disease.

(A)

(B) It was the geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria that

(C) The geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria was what

(D) The geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria coinciding was what

(E) It was that the geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident that


I think D. urs?
OA -> missing

oh, i missed there's that in E- it makes this choice awkward

nevertheless A ignores coincidence of two possibilities and instead suggests one possibility - i.e. one geographical range. How one can occur simultaneously with itself?

@maihuna: what do you mean by coincidence is not related to geographic ranges ? - these two words are connected with preposition of to inform that they are directly linked

maihuna wrote:Night rider, did u noticed beginning of E, "it was that" what is th epurpose of this convoluted start? Is it concise? No. An wrong option only based on this one. Do not forget there is another "that" to conenct them.

On the contrary A is clean; the coincidence is not related to the geographic ranges, those thing are just for obfucation, marked with of. Coincidence is related with "that", it was the coincidence ...that...

Night reader wrote:A. Incorrect, coincidence cannot be related to the geographic range and malaria - Malaria is a disease and geographic range is a scientific term
B. Incorrect, logical introduction of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene - the same as in A
C. Incorrect, see A, B
D. Incorrect "what" used as sub-clause connector
E. Correct, precise "it+to be ... that ..." form; geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident

allfta wrote:It was the coincidence of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria that first drew attention to the possibility that the sickle cell gene might confer resistance to the disease.

(A)

(B) It was the geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria that

(C) The geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria was what

(D) The geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria coinciding was what

(E) It was that the geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident that


I think D. urs?
OA -> missing

somehow I am not convinced between C and D also because
in C & D there should have been "that" with "what" but its missing.

me not sure but out of A and B I would have gone for A.............

Wats the OA???

Night Rider, I tried to expose the skelton, to discover the skelton we normally read without such constructs as prepositional phrases/clauses, here "it is coincidence that first drew attention" is the skelton over which other info's are laden such as the one with of construct.

Night reader wrote:@maihuna: what do you mean by coincidence is not related to geographic ranges ? - these two words are connected with preposition of to inform that they are directly linked

maihuna wrote:Night rider, did u noticed beginning of E, "it was that" what is th epurpose of this convoluted start? Is it concise? No. An wrong option only based on this one. Do not forget there is another "that" to conenct them.

On the contrary A is clean; the coincidence is not related to the geographic ranges, those thing are just for obfucation, marked with of. Coincidence is related with "that", it was the coincidence ...that...

Night reader wrote:A. Incorrect, coincidence cannot be related to the geographic range and malaria - Malaria is a disease and geographic range is a scientific term
B. Incorrect, logical introduction of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene - the same as in A
C. Incorrect, see A, B
D. Incorrect "what" used as sub-clause connector
E. Correct, precise "it+to be ... that ..." form; geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident

allfta wrote:It was the coincidence of the geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria that first drew attention to the possibility that the sickle cell gene might confer resistance to the disease.

(A)

(B) It was the geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria that

(C) The geographic range of the sickle cell gene coinciding with malaria was what

(D) The geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria coinciding was what

(E) It was that the geographic ranges of the sickle cell gene and malaria were coincident that


I think D. urs?
OA -> missing

I am not able to understand the meaning of this sentence. Can someone please explain it.

If geographic range of the sickle cell gene and malaria was the same, should it not mean that sickle cell gene and malaria occur together?

Then, how is the sentence concluding that sickle cell gene is resistant to the disease (which disease??).