Hi james,

From the prompt (and most of the answer choices), we can see that this SC uses an "intervening phrase" (a phrase offset by commas). As a rule, you should be able to remove the intervening phrase and still have a complete, grammatically-correct sentence.

1) Ignoring the intervening phrase: The sentence compares "deaf children" to "hearing children", telling us that both groups are essentially equal in terms of reading and writing. We need the verb "are" ---- "deaf children....are generally.....on a par with hearing children...." Eliminate E.

2) Parallelism: Now, putting the intervening phrase back in, we need parallel verbs. The first verb is in the phrase "deaf children who IDENTIFY as deaf..." -the children do something else too - they "sign." So the verb must parallel "identify" and be introduced by the word AND. The phrase "AND USE...." is perfect. Eliminate B, C and D.

Final answer: A

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

Hi james,

Answer C treats the sentence as a "list" of 3 traits of deaf children, and it's grammatically fine up until it hits the last comma. The last part of the sentence doesn't make sense - the word "because" presents a reason for the list (and that reason does not make any sense).

Try reading the whole sentence for context:

"Studies have found that deaf children....identify.....as culturally deaf, _____, and _______, because they have been exposed to language since birth.

Why would they identify as "culturally deaf" because they were exposed to language since birth? That makes no sense. Therefore, the "intent" of the sentence CAN'T BE to present a list of 3 traits of deaf children.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich