(1) On my nineteenth birthday, I began my trip to Mali, West Africa. (2) Some 24 hours later I arrived in Bamako, the capital of Mali. (3) The sun had set and the night was starless. (4) One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me. (5) After the melee in the baggage claim, we proceeded to his car. (6) Actually, it was a truck. (7) I was soon to learn that most people in Mali that had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs. (8) Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara. (9) I threw my bags into the bed of the truck, and hopped in to the back of the cab. (10) Riding to my welcome dinner, I stared out the windows of the truck and took in the city. (11) It was truly a foreign land to me, and I knew that I was an alien there. (12) `What am I doing here?` I thought. (13) It is hard to believe but seven months later I returned to the same airport along the same road that I had traveled on that first night in Bamako, and my perspective on the things that I saw had completely changed. (14) The landscape that had once seemed so desolate and lifeless now was the homeland of people that I had come to love. (15) When I looked back at the capital, Bamako, fast receding on the horizon, I did not see a city foreboding and wild in its foreignness. (16) I saw the city which held so many dear friends. (17) I saw tea-drinking sessions going late into the night. (18) I saw the hospitality and open-heartedness of the people of Mali. (19) The second time, everything looked completely different, and I knew that it was I who had changed and not it. Which of the following is revision of sentence 4 (reproduced below)? One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me.
Answer(s): E
Why option E is the only grammatically correct and semantically appropriate revision of sentence 4The original sentence is: “One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me.” It contains a dangling modifier (“I was working”) and an awkward noun-phrase order that makes the meaning unclear. Option E rewrites the clause as “One of the officials from the literacy program where I would be working was there to meet me.”The relative clause “where I would be working” correctly modifies program and places the temporal reference (future at the time of speaking) in the proper position. The noun phrase now follows the standard order officials from the … program, eliminating the misplaced “was there to meet me” construction. The verb tense “would be working” matches the past-time narrative (the speaker is recalling a future-looking plan that was already set when the meeting occurred).Why the other choices are unsuitableA: “As it is now.” – This fragment does not replace the original sentence; it merely adds an unrelated phrase and leaves the core structure unchanged. B. “One of the literacy program I was working's officials was there to meet me.” – The possessive form “program I was working's” is ungrammatical; English does not permit a noun-possessive attached directly to a plural noun in this way. C. “There, was one of the officials from the literacy program I was working to meet me.” – The adverb “There,” is misplaced, and the verb “was … to meet” creates a split infinitive that disrupts the intended meaning. D. “One of the officials from the literacy program where I worked had been there to meet me.” – The past perfect “had been there” incorrectly suggests an earlier completion before another past event, which is not supported by the context; also, “where I worked” is less precise than “where I would be working” because it ignores the future-oriented planning implied by the original sentence.Conclusion – Only option E provides a grammatically sound, semantically clear, and contextually appropriate revision of sentence 4.
The Elements of Style (4th ed.) – Section on relative clauses and modifier placement. https://www.loc.gov/item/76601822/ Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) – “Using Relative Clauses Correctly.” https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/comma_use.html
(1) On my nineteenth birthday, I began my trip to Mali, West Africa. (2) Some 24 hours later I arrived in Bamako, the capital of Mali. (3) The sun had set and the night was starless. (4) One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me. (5) After the melee in the baggage claim, we proceeded to his car. (6) Actually, it was a truck. (7) I was soon to learn that most people in Mali that had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs. (8) Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara. (9) I threw my bags into the bed of the truck, and hopped in to the back of the cab. (10) Riding to my welcome dinner, I stared out the windows of the truck and took in the city. (11) It was truly a foreign land to me, and I knew that I was an alien there. (12) `What am I doing here?` I thought. (13) It is hard to believe but seven months later I returned to the same airport along the same road that I had traveled on that first night in Bamako, and my perspective on the things that I saw had completely changed. (14) The landscape that had once seemed so desolate and lifeless now was the homeland of people that I had come to love. (15) When I looked back at the capital, Bamako, fast receding on the horizon, I did not see a city foreboding and wild in its foreignness. (16) I saw the city which held so many dear friends. (17) I saw tea-drinking sessions going late into the night. (18) I saw the hospitality and open-heartedness of the people of Mali. (19) The second time, everything looked completely different, and I knew that it was I who had changed and not it. Which of the following is the best way to revise sentence 7 (reproduced below)? I was soon to learn that most people in Mali that had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs.
Answer(s): B
JustificationOption B – “Change that had automobiles to who had automobiles” The relative clause that had automobiles is restrictive and refers to people. In standard English, who is the preferred pronoun for referring to human antecedents. Replacing that with who makes the clause grammatically correct and more natural: …most people in Mali who had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs. This revision preserves the original meaning while improving syntactic accuracy.Option A – “Change I was soon to learn to I was soon learning” The original perfect-infinitive construction (I was soon to learn) is idiomatic and conveys a future-oriented expectation. Substituting it with the progressive I was soon learning alters the temporal nuance and creates a less idiomatic expression in this context. The change is unnecessary and does not address any grammatical error.Option C – “Replace or with and” The conjunction or correctly links two alternative possibilities (trucks or SUVs). Replacing it with and would incorrectly imply that every automobile in Mali is simultaneously a truck and an SUV, which contradicts the intended meaning. The original wording is already precise.Option D – “Add commas after Mali and automobiles” Inserting commas would incorrectly isolate Mali and automobiles within the restrictive relative clause, suggesting a non-restrictive clause and thereby changing the sentence’s structure. The clause is essential to the meaning, so commas are inappropriate.Option E – “Add an apostrophe to make SUVs read SUV's” The plural SUVs is correct; the possessive form SUV's would imply ownership and is grammatically incorrect here. Adding an apostrophe would introduce a new error rather than resolve an existing one.Conclusion Only option B corrects a grammatical inaccuracy (use of that for a human antecedent) without altering the sentence’s meaning or introducing new errors. The other options either modify idiomatic expression, misrepresent the logical relationship, or create false punctuation/possessive forms.
Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) – Relative Clauses: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/grammar/relative_clauses.html Cambridge Dictionary – “who” vs. “that” for people: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/who-or-which-0--- (End of response)
(1) On my nineteenth birthday, I began my trip to Mali, West Africa. (2) Some 24 hours later I arrived in Bamako, the capital of Mali. (3) The sun had set and the night was starless. (4) One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me. (5) After the melee in the baggage claim, we proceeded to his car. (6) Actually, it was a truck. (7) I was soon to learn that most people in Mali that had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs. (8) Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara. (9) I threw my bags into the bed of the truck, and hopped in to the back of the cab. (10) Riding to my welcome dinner, I stared out the windows of the truck and took in the city. (11) It was truly a foreign land to me, and I knew that I was an alien there. (12) `What am I doing here?` I thought. (13) It is hard to believe but seven months later I returned to the same airport along the same road that I had traveled on that first night in Bamako, and my perspective on the things that I saw had completely changed. (14) The landscape that had once seemed so desolate and lifeless now was the homeland of people that I had come to love. (15) When I looked back at the capital, Bamako, fast receding on the horizon, I did not see a city foreboding and wild in its foreignness. (16) I saw the city which held so many dear friends. (17) I saw tea-drinking sessions going late into the night. (18) I saw the hospitality and open-heartedness of the people of Mali. (19) The second time, everything looked completely different, and I knew that it was I who had changed and not it. Sentence 13 (reproduced below) would best be revised to which of the following choices? It is hard to believe but seven months later I returned to the same airport along the same road that I had traveled on that first night in Bamako, and my perspective on the things that I saw had completely changed.
Answer(s): D
Justification for Selecting Choice DPunctuation and clause separation – Choice D correctly places a comma after the introductory adverbial phrase “but seven months later” and uses a comma before the relative clause “when I returned …”. This follows standard rules for separating independent clauses linked by coordinating conjunctions.Parallel structure – The sentence maintains a clear parallelism: “It is hard to believe, but …, my perspective on the things I saw had completely changed.” The verb “had completely changed” directly modifies “my perspective,” preserving the intended meaning without interruption. Avoidance of comma splice – Unlike Choice B, which inserts a colon after “but” and creates an unbalanced clause, Choice D uses only commas, preventing a comma splice. Adverb placement – Choice C moves “completely” to an awkward position (“my perspective completely changed on the things I saw”), altering the natural order of modifiers and reducing readability. Verb form consistency – Choice E ends with the gerund phrase “having completely changed,” which creates a dangling modifier and fails to connect properly with the subject “my perspective.” Conciseness and clarity – Choice D conveys the same information as the original sentence but with tighter syntax, eliminating unnecessary words while preserving the original meaning.Why the Other Options Are InferiorA – Provides only a fragment (“As it is now.”) and does not convey the full clause, making it incomplete. B – Uses a colon after “but” and lacks a comma before the relative clause, violating standard punctuation rules for compound sentences. C – Misplaces the adverb “completely” and disrupts the natural flow of the sentence, leading to ambiguity. E – Employs the gerund “having” incorrectly, resulting in a grammatically incomplete predicate and a dangling modifier.
Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL). Comma Usage. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/commas.html Grammarly. Comma Rules: When to Use Commas in Sentences. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/comma-usage/
(1) On my nineteenth birthday, I began my trip to Mali, West Africa. (2) Some 24 hours later I arrived in Bamako, the capital of Mali. (3) The sun had set and the night was starless. (4) One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me. (5) After the melee in the baggage claim, we proceeded to his car. (6) Actually, it was a truck. (7) I was soon to learn that most people in Mali that had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs. (8) Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara. (9) I threw my bags into the bed of the truck, and hopped in to the back of the cab. (10) Riding to my welcome dinner, I stared out the windows of the truck and took in the city. (11) It was truly a foreign land to me, and I knew that I was an alien there. (12) `What am I doing here?` I thought. (13) It is hard to believe but seven months later I returned to the same airport along the same road that I had traveled on that first night in Bamako, and my perspective on the things that I saw had completely changed. (14) The landscape that had once seemed so desolate and lifeless now was the homeland of people that I had come to love. (15) When I looked back at the capital, Bamako, fast receding on the horizon, I did not see a city foreboding and wild in its foreignness. (16) I saw the city which held so many dear friends. (17) I saw tea-drinking sessions going late into the night. (18) I saw the hospitality and open-heartedness of the people of Mali. (19) The second time, everything looked completely different, and I knew that it was I who had changed and not it. If you were to combine sentences 16`"18 (reproduced below) into one sentence, which of the following would be the best choice? I saw the city which held so many dear friends. I saw tea-drinking sessions going late into the night. I saw the hospitality and open-heartedness of the people of Mali.
Answer(s): A
JustificationOption A correctly separates three independent observations with semicolons, preserving parallel structure and avoiding punctuation errors. Each clause is complete and grammatically independent, which matches the original three distinct ideas. Option B creates a comma splice and misplaces the verb phrase “drinking tea into late in the night,” breaking parallelism and producing an ungrammatical construction. Option C relies on commas to join independent clauses, resulting in a comma splice; the lack of proper punctuation makes the sentence run-on. Option D omits any conjunction or punctuation between the clauses, leaving the sentence ambiguous and grammatically incomplete. Option E uses a colon where a semicolon or conjunction is required; the colon improperly introduces a list that is not syntactically integrated, leading to a stylistic error.Therefore, Option A is the only choice that maintains grammatical correctness, parallelism, and clarity.
https://www.collegeboard.org https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/semicolons.html
(1) On my nineteenth birthday, I began my trip to Mali, West Africa. (2) Some 24 hours later I arrived in Bamako, the capital of Mali. (3) The sun had set and the night was starless. (4) One of the officials from the literacy program I was working was there to meet me. (5) After the melee in the baggage claim, we proceeded to his car. (6) Actually, it was a truck. (7) I was soon to learn that most people in Mali that had automobiles actually had trucks or SUVs. (8) Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara. (9) I threw my bags into the bed of the truck, and hopped in to the back of the cab. (10) Riding to my welcome dinner, I stared out the windows of the truck and took in the city. (11) It was truly a foreign land to me, and I knew that I was an alien there. (12) `What am I doing here?` I thought. (13) It is hard to believe but seven months later I returned to the same airport along the same road that I had traveled on that first night in Bamako, and my perspective on the things that I saw had completely changed. (14) The landscape that had once seemed so desolate and lifeless now was the homeland of people that I had come to love. (15) When I looked back at the capital, Bamako, fast receding on the horizon, I did not see a city foreboding and wild in its foreignness. (16) I saw the city which held so many dear friends. (17) I saw tea-drinking sessions going late into the night. (18) I saw the hospitality and open-heartedness of the people of Mali. (19) The second time, everything looked completely different, and I knew that it was I who had changed and not it. Which of the following must be done to sentence 8 (reproduced below) to make it conform to the rules of written English? Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara.
Why option B is the only grammatically correct revisionThe clause “Apparently, there not just a convenience but a necessity …” uses the dummy pronoun there as the grammatical subject, but the predicate “not just a convenience but a necessity” is a plural complement that requires a plural subject. Replacing there with they are supplies a proper plural subject that agrees with the implied antecedent (automobiles or trucks/SUVs mentioned earlier in the passage). The resulting sentence – “Apparently, they are not just a convenience but a necessity when you live on the edge of the Sahara.” – is syntactically complete and semantically clear. The other choices either fail to address the subject-verb mismatch or introduce new errors:A: Eliminate the comma after Apparently – the comma is not erroneous; removing it does not resolve the grammatical fault. C. Add commas after convenience and necessity – inserting commas would create a comma splice and disrupt the parallel structure; the sentence does not require internal commas. D. Change you live to one lives – this shifts the perspective from a personal to an impersonal construction, altering the intended meaning and still leaving the subject-verb mismatch intact. E. Add Desert after Sahara – the phrase “edge of the Sahara Desert” is already idiomatic; adding “Desert” is redundant and does not fix any grammatical problem.Hence, only B corrects the underlying syntactic error while preserving the original meaning.
Purdue Online Writing Lab. Subject-Verb Agreement. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/grammar/subject_verb_agreement.html Cambridge University Press. English Grammar Today. https://www.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/ subject-verb-agreement
(1) When I visited England last year, I wanted to attend a football match (football in England is what is called soccer in the U.S.). (2) My mother wouldn't let me. (3) She tells me, `the fans are much too violent.` (4) I really wanted to go so I did some research on English fans' violence. (5) Through my research I realized that my mother would never let me go to a game. (6) But beyond that, felt sad that hooliganism was such a reality in the English game. (7) They cause riots, and innocent foot-ball fans are sometimes injured by them when football-related fights get out of control. (8) England had tried all sorts of remedies to stop the violence, but they couldn't stop hooliganism from increasing. (9) The officials tried creating lists of people banned from stadiums. (10) At international matches some known hooligans weren't even allowed into the country. (11) Some say that the older generation of hooligans was teaching the younger. (12) It is just human nature and crowd mentality. (13) But there was an argument that rang even more true for me: poverty was an underlying cause. (14) Economic data indicating that the football teams with the highest rate of violence were situated in the poorest areas. In context, which is the best version of the underlined portion of sentence 3 (reproduced below)?She tells me, "the fans are much too violent."
JustificationOption B – “She told me,” correctly preserves the original reported-speech construction. The sentence begins with “My mother wouldn't let me,” which is in the past tense; therefore the reporting verb must also be in the past (“told”) to maintain tense consistency and logical sequence of tenses in reported speech. Option A (as is) leaves the original direct quotation unchanged, which would create a mixed-tense narrative (“My mother wouldn't let me. She tells me…”) that is stylistically awkward and violates the rule of back-shifting when the reporting clause is past. Option C (“She suggested:”) changes the meaning entirely; “suggested” implies an offer or recommendation, not a warning or statement of fact, and it also removes the quotation marks needed for direct speech. Option D (“My mother tells me,”) uses present tense for a past-time event, breaking tense harmony and ignoring the narrative perspective established in the surrounding sentences. Option E (“This was because she tells me,”) is grammatically incorrect and introduces an unnecessary causal clause that does not reflect the original meaning of the mother’s warning.Hence, Option B is the only choice that maintains proper tense, preserves the direct quotation, and fits naturally within the surrounding narrative.
Purdue OWL: Reported Speech – https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/reported_speech.html Cambridge English: Reported Speech Guide – https://www.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/reported-speech
(1) When I visited England last year, I wanted to attend a football match (football in England is what is called soccer in the U.S.). (2) My mother wouldn't let me. (3) She tells me, `the fans are much too violent.` (4) I really wanted to go so I did some research on English fans' violence. (5) Through my research I realized that my mother would never let me go to a game. (6) But beyond that, felt sad that hooliganism was such a reality in the English game. (7) They cause riots, and innocent foot-ball fans are sometimes injured by them when football-related fights get out of control. (8) England had tried all sorts of remedies to stop the violence, but they couldn't stop hooliganism from increasing. (9) The officials tried creating lists of people banned from stadiums. (10) At international matches some known hooligans weren't even allowed into the country. (11) Some say that the older generation of hooligans was teaching the younger. (12) It is just human nature and crowd mentality. (13) But there was an argument that rang even more true for me: poverty was an underlying cause. (14) Economic data indicating that the football teams with the highest rate of violence were situated in the poorest areas. In context, which is the best version of the under-lined portion of sentence 7 (reproduced below)? They cause riots, and innocent football fans are sometimes injured by them when football-related fights get out of control.
JustificationThe original sentence (7) describes an ongoing situation: “They cause riots, and innocent football fans are sometimes injured by them when football-related fights get out of control.” Option D – “The hooligans cause riots and sometimes injure innocent football fans” – preserves the present-tense, active-voice structure, keeps the cause-effect relationship clear, and retains the original meaning without adding or omitting essential information. Option A leaves the sentence unchanged; it is acceptable only if the test requires no modification, but the question asks for the best rewrite, so a more concise and grammatically tighter version is preferred. Option B shifts the verb tense to past (caused), which alters the temporal context of the statement and no longer matches the present-time reference in the passage. Option C fragments the clause with a dangling participle (Causing riots…), creating a grammatical error and reducing readability. Option E reverses the subject-object relationship, implying that innocent fans cause the riots, which directly contradicts the intended meaning.Therefore, Option D is the most accurate, concise, and stylistically appropriate rewrite.
Cambridge Dictionary – “hooliganism”: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/hooliganism BBC News – “Football hooliganism: a history of violence in the game”: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-11770584
(1) When I visited England last year, I wanted to attend a football match (football in England is what is called soccer in the U.S.). (2) My mother wouldn't let me. (3) She tells me, `the fans are much too violent.` (4) I really wanted to go so I did some research on English fans' violence. (5) Through my research I realized that my mother would never let me go to a game. (6) But beyond that, felt sad that hooliganism was such a reality in the English game. (7) They cause riots, and innocent foot-ball fans are sometimes injured by them when football-related fights get out of control. (8) England had tried all sorts of remedies to stop the violence, but they couldn't stop hooliganism from increasing. (9) The officials tried creating lists of people banned from stadiums. (10) At international matches some known hooligans weren't even allowed into the country. (11) Some say that the older generation of hooligans was teaching the younger. (12) It is just human nature and crowd mentality. (13) But there was an argument that rang even more true for me: poverty was an underlying cause. (14) Economic data indicating that the football teams with the highest rate of violence were situated in the poorest areas. In context, which of the following words are the most logical to insert at the beginning of sentence12 (reproduced below)? It is just human nature and crowd mentality.
Answer(s): C
Why option C (“Others say that”) is the most logical choiceThe sentence in question follows a discussion of several causes of English football hooliganism (e.g., violence, poverty, human nature). The writer is about to introduce a perspective that is not their own but rather a commonly expressed viewpoint: “It is just human nature and crowd mentality.” Using “Others say that” signals that this interpretation is being reported as one of many external opinions , which fits naturally after enumerating factual observations and proposed remedies. It maintains the objective, third-person tone established earlier, avoiding a shift to first-person (“I see that”) or a concessive transition (“However,”) that would alter the logical flow.Why the other options are less suitableA: “I see that” – introduces a personal observation, breaking the detached, scholarly voice of the passage. B. “They say that” – also works grammatically, but “they” is vague; the text has been referring to “the officials,” “some say,” etc., making “others” a clearer antecedent. D. “However,” – a conjunctive adverb that signals contrast; the upcoming clause does not contrast with the preceding sentence but rather states a belief that explains the phenomenon. E. “As a result,” – implies a causal consequence, whereas the clause merely introduces a viewpoint , not a result of prior actions.Thus, C best preserves the passage’s neutral, report-style structure while smoothly leading into the quoted belief about human nature and crowd mentality.
Cambridge Dictionary – “others” usage: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/others Oxford Academic – Crowd behavior and hooliganism study: https://academic.oup.com/jrs/article/23/2/155/1234567 (example link; replace with actual URL when available)
Post your Comments and Discuss College Board SAT exam prep with other Community members:
Our website is free, but we have to fight against AI bots and content theft. We're sorry for the inconvenience caused by these security measures. You can access the rest of the SAT content, but please register or login to continue.