prismlearning.academy Logo
NEUR
N

For thousands of years, humans have used domesticated goats (Capra hircus) to clear land of unwanted vegetation. When it comes...

GMAT Standard English Conventions : (Grammar) Questions

Source: Practice Test
Standard English Conventions
Boundaries
HARD
...
...
Notes
Post a Query

For thousands of years, humans have used domesticated goats (Capra hircus) to clear land of unwanted vegetation. When it comes to their diets, goats are notoriously ______ they will devour all kinds of shrubs and weeds, leaving virtually no part of any plant unconsumed.

Which choice completes the text so that it conforms to the conventions of Standard English?

A

indiscriminate and

B

indiscriminate,

C

indiscriminate

D

indiscriminate:

Solution

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

• For thousands of years,
• humans have used domesticated goats (Capra hircus)
                      to clear land of unwanted vegetation.

• When it comes to their diets,
• goats are notoriously indiscriminate [?]
• they will devour all kinds of shrubs and weeds,
                leaving virtually no part of any plant unconsumed.

Understanding the Meaning

The first sentence gives us background:
- For thousands of years, humans have used goats to clear land
  of unwanted vegetation.

Now the second sentence tells us about the goats' eating habits:
- "When it comes to their diets, goats are notoriously
  indiscriminate..."

This is where we have the blank.

Let's look at the choices:

  • They all have "indiscriminate" but differ in what comes after
  • A adds "and,"
  • B adds just a comma
  • C adds no punctuation
  • D adds a colon

To see what works here, let's read the rest of the sentence!

The sentence continues:
- "they will devour all kinds of shrubs and weeds, leaving
  virtually no part of any plant unconsumed."

Now let's understand what we have here structurally:

  • First part: "goats are notoriously indiscriminate"
    • Subject: goats
    • Verb: are
    • This is a complete thought - it could stand alone as its own sentence
  • Second part: "they will devour all kinds of shrubs and weeds, leaving virtually no part of any plant unconsumed"
    • Subject: they (referring to the goats)
    • Verb: will devour
    • This is also a complete thought - it could stand alone as its own sentence

What do we notice about how these parts relate?

  • The second part isn't just adding extra information
  • It's specifically explaining and demonstrating what "indiscriminate" means
    • It gives us the concrete evidence of their indiscriminate eating: they devour ALL kinds of plants, leaving virtually NOTHING unconsumed
    • This is the proof of why they're called indiscriminate

When we have two complete thoughts and the second one explains or illustrates the first, we use a colon to connect them.

The correct answer is D: indiscriminate:


GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Using Colons to Introduce Explanations

When you have two complete thoughts and the second one explains, elaborates on, or provides examples of the first, you can use a colon to connect them. The colon signals to the reader: "Here comes the explanation/example of what I just said."

Pattern:

  • First complete thought: [makes a statement]
  • Colon (:)
  • Second complete thought: [explains or demonstrates the first]

Examples:

Example 1 (from our question):

  • First thought: "goats are notoriously indiscriminate"
  • Colon: :
  • Explanation: "they will devour all kinds of shrubs and weeds, leaving virtually no part of any plant unconsumed"
  • The second part proves/explains WHY they're indiscriminate

Example 2:

  • First thought: "The concert was unforgettable"
  • Colon: :
  • Explanation: "the band played for three hours and performed all their greatest hits"
  • The second part explains WHY it was unforgettable

Example 3:

  • First thought: "Her training paid off"
  • Colon: :
  • Explanation: "she finished the marathon in record time"
  • The second part demonstrates HOW her training paid off

Key requirements:

  1. Both parts must be complete thoughts (could stand alone as sentences)
  2. The second part must explain, elaborate on, or exemplify the first part
  3. The colon (technically called an independent clause connector in this usage) creates a stronger connection than a period, showing the reader these ideas are closely linked
Answer Choices Explained
A

indiscriminate and

✗ Incorrect

  • The comma after "and" is incorrect - you don't place a comma after a coordinating conjunction
  • Additionally, "and" suggests these are just two equal ideas being added together, but the relationship is more specific than that - the second part explains what "indiscriminate" means
  • This doesn't capture the explanatory relationship
B

indiscriminate,

✗ Incorrect

  • A comma alone cannot connect two complete thoughts (independent clauses)
  • This creates a comma splice, which is a run-on sentence error
  • This is grammatically incorrect
C

indiscriminate

✗ Incorrect

  • No punctuation between two complete thoughts creates a fused sentence (run-on)
  • You cannot run two independent clauses together without any punctuation
  • This is grammatically incorrect
D

indiscriminate:

✓ Correct

  • Correct as explained in the solution above.
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
...
...
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Previous Attempts
Loading attempts...
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Parallel Question Generator
Create AI-generated questions with similar patterns to master this question type.