The fact of some fraternal twins

[srivas]

The fact of some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely they vary considerably on a spectrum of genetic relatedness.
A. The fact of some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely they vary considerably
B. That some fraternal twins resemble each other greatly while others look quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely that they vary considerably
C. With some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar, it highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely considerable variation
D. With some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar, it is a fact that highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely a considerable variation
E. Because some fraternal twins resemble each other greatly and others look quite dissimilar, this fact highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely they vary considerably

[mastbombay]

It should be B

[El Cucu]

The fact of some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely they vary considerably on a spectrum of genetic relatedness.
A. The fact of some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely they vary considerably
B. That some fraternal twins resemble each other greatly while others look quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely that they vary considerably
C. With some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar, it highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely considerable variation
D. With some fraternal twins resembling each other greatly and others looking quite dissimilar, it is a fact that highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely a considerable variation
E. Because some fraternal twins resemble each other greatly and others look quite dissimilar, this fact highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely they vary considerably

A) Forgets the contrast (and vs. while)
B) OK
C) With (wrong expression)
D) Idem
E) Is not because some f. resemble... It is a contrast, should be altough.

[lunarpower]

here are some splits.

* "namely" must be used either before a noun or before a noun phrase / clause.
you can't use it directly before an independent clause.
because of this principle, you can't say "namely they vary...". however, "namely that they vary..." and "namely considerable variation" are both fine.
this kills (a) and (e).

* "the fact of X doing Y" is universally incorrect.
this kills (a).

* the sentence openers starting with "with" are incorrect. to work properly, they'd have to be followed by a subject that's actually "with" those things.
example: with five all-state players in its backfield, ballard high looks to shut down opposing offenses completely --> this makes sense, because ballard high actually has five all-state players in its backfield, thus justifying the use of "with". there's no corresponding sense of possession / belonging here.
this kills (c) and (d).

* the structure of choice (e) indicates that "this fact" is something other than the cited fact about fraternal twins' resemblance.
that kills (e).

* "it" is a pronoun with no antecedent in (c). (by contrast, in (d), "it" is fine because it's part of the special construction "it is a fact that...", which behaves in the same manner as constructions such as "it is surprising that...").

--

the correct answer is (b).

make sure that you understand that "that X does Y" is a noun clause, and can function as a noun; indeed, it's the subject of the sentence in the correct answer choice.

[getso]

Hi Ron,

I could not follow the first point here on the usage of namely.

Could you please help me to understand better.

Thanks,
Shobha

[hrishi19884]

Thanks Ron!

A basic question here - Can a sentence start with "That"?

Can you give me some other examples of those starting with word "That"?

[hrishi19884]

@ Ron

I also thought that B is grammatically more sound than any other except for the starting phrase with "THAT"

Can you help me out with "That"?

[lunarpower]

Hi Ron,

I could not follow the first point here on the usage of namely.

Could you please help me to understand better.

Thanks,
Shobha

the first point says:
* "namely" should come before one of the following:
- a noun
- some other construction that functions as a noun (such as a gerund or noun phrase)
- a clause preceded by "that"

* "namely" should not be followed by a complete sentence ("independent clause"), by itself (without "that").

which part are you having trouble with?

[lunarpower]

@ Ron

I also thought that B is grammatically more sound than any other except for the starting phrase with "THAT"

Can you help me out with "That"?

"that CLAUSE" can basically function as a noun. that's right - the whole thing functions as a noun.

for instance, here's a sentence:
sheriffs were surprised that no one was arrested for drunk driving over the holiday weekend.

this sentence can also be expressed as
that no one was arrested for drunk driving over the holiday weekend came as a great surprise to sheriffs.

this is pretty much the only way that you're going to get a sentence to start with "that".

[hrishi19884]

@ Ron

I also thought that B is grammatically more sound than any other except for the starting phrase with "THAT"

Can you help me out with "That"?

"that CLAUSE" can basically function as a noun. that's right - the whole thing functions as a noun.

for instance, here's a sentence:
sheriffs were surprised that no one was arrested for drunk driving over the holiday weekend.

this sentence can also be expressed as
that no one was arrested for drunk driving over the holiday weekend came as a great surprise to sheriffs.

this is pretty much the only way that you're going to get a sentence to start with "that".

Thanks Ron....you ROck man!

[getso]

Hi Ron,

I could not follow the first point here on the usage of namely.

Could you please help me to understand better.

Thanks,
Shobha

the first point says:
* "namely" should come before one of the following:
- a noun
- some other construction that functions as a noun (such as a gerund or noun phrase)
- a clause preceded by "that"

* "namely" should not be followed by a complete sentence ("independent clause"), by itself (without "that").

which part are you having trouble with?

I was not aware of grammar rules on usage of "namely" as well as "with"

I was also wondering how "that "could work. But in your previous posts to Hrishi you made it clear.

Now I understand.

Thanks a lot .

Regards,
Shobha.

[kaulnikhil]

* the structure of choice (e) indicates that "this fact" is something other than the cited fact about fraternal twins' re.

Sorry for opening this dead thread..
does this mean that this cant be used for the fact about fraternal twins as it hasbeen used as a adjective rather than a demonstrative pronoun?