Archaeologist Maria Donnelly has investigated why ancient Pueblo communities in the Southwest abandoned their cliff dwellings around 1300 CE. Recogniz...

Let's begin by understanding the meaning of this sentence. We'll use our understanding of pause points and segment the sentence as shown - understanding and assimilating the meaning of each segment bit by bit!

Sentence Structure

• Archaeologist Maria Donnelly
  • has investigated why ancient Pueblo communities in the Southwest
    • abandoned their cliff dwellings around 1300 CE.
• Recognizing that severe droughts
  • reduced agricultural productivity during this period,
    • [Donnelly concludes / the Pueblo people relocated / etc.] (?)

Understanding the Meaning

The first sentence tells us:

• Archaeologist Maria Donnelly
  • has been investigating a historical mystery
  • specifically: why ancient Pueblo communities in the Southwest abandoned their cliff dwellings around 1300 CE

So Donnelly is a researcher studying why these communities left their homes.

Now the second sentence begins:

• "Recognizing that severe droughts reduced agricultural productivity during this period,"

This is where we have the blank. Let's look at the choices:

• Choice A: "the Pueblo people likely relocated..."
• Choice B: "Donnelly concludes that the Pueblo people..."
• Choice C: "Donnelly's conclusion is that..."
• Choice D: "the Pueblo people's relocation..."

To see what works here, let's understand what this opening phrase is doing!

• "Recognizing that severe droughts reduced agricultural productivity during this period"
  • This phrase describes someone's thought process
  • It tells us what someone is recognizing or understanding
  • It's giving us the reasoning behind a conclusion

What do we notice about the structure here?

• When a sentence starts with a describing phrase like this and then has a comma,
  • whatever comes RIGHT AFTER the comma must be the person or thing being described
  • This phrase is describing someone who is "recognizing" the drought information

• Who is doing the recognizing?
  • It's Donnelly—the archaeologist who's been studying this
  • She's the researcher who recognizes how droughts affected agriculture
  • The Pueblo people themselves aren't "recognizing" this in the sentence—Donnelly is the one drawing this conclusion from her research

So we need Donnelly to come right after the comma as the subject.

The correct answer is Choice B: "Donnelly concludes that the Pueblo people likely relocated to areas with more reliable water sources."

This properly places Donnelly as the person doing the recognizing, and then tells us what she concludes based on that recognition.

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Introductory Describing Phrases Must Match Their Subject

When a sentence begins with a describing phrase (called a participial phrase or introductory modifier in grammar terms) followed by a comma, the subject that comes immediately after the comma must be what that phrase is describing.

Pattern:

• Describing phrase: Walking down the street,
• Must be followed by: Maria noticed the new cafe
• NOT: the cafe was noticed by Maria

The phrase "Walking down the street" describes Maria (she's the one walking), so Maria must come right after the comma.

In this question:

• Describing phrase: "Recognizing that severe droughts reduced agricultural productivity during this period,"
• Must be followed by: Donnelly (she's the one recognizing)
• NOT: the Pueblo people or their relocation (they're not the ones recognizing—Donnelly is)

Why this matters:
Donnelly is the researcher who recognizes the connection between droughts and abandonment. The Pueblo people are the historical subjects of her research. When we say "Recognizing that severe droughts reduced agricultural productivity," we're describing Donnelly's research process and reasoning, so her name must come right after the comma.