In 1937, Chinese American screen actor Anna May Wong, who had portrayed numerous villains and secondary characters but never a...

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

• In 1937,
  • Chinese American screen actor Anna May Wong,
    • who had portrayed numerous villains and secondary characters
      • but never a heroine,
  • finally got a starring role
    • in Paramount Pictures' Daughter of Shanghai,
      • a film that [critic (?) Stina Chyn (?) claims (?)]
        • 'expanded the range of possibilities for Asian images on screen.'

Understanding the Meaning

This sentence is telling us about Anna May Wong's career breakthrough:

• In 1937, she finally got a starring role
  • After having played only villains and secondary characters before
  • Never a heroine until this point

• The starring role was in a film called Daughter of Shanghai

Now we get to the blank - the sentence describes this film as:

• "a film that _____ 'expanded the range of possibilities for Asian images on screen.'"

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

• A. critic, Stina Chyn, claims
• B. critic, Stina Chyn, claims,
• C. critic Stina Chyn claims
• D. critic Stina Chyn, claims,

The choices show different comma placements. To see what works here, let's understand what this phrase is doing!

The structure is:

• "a film that critic Stina Chyn claims [something]"
• The sentence is telling us what a specific critic says about the film

Now let's understand the grammatical structure here:

• "critic Stina Chyn claims"
  • "critic" = a title or role
  • "Stina Chyn" = the specific name identifying which critic
  • "claims" = the verb (what this person does)

What do we notice about this structure?

• This follows the pattern: [title] + [name] + [verb]
  • Like "President Lincoln signed" or "Dr. Smith believes"

• The name "Stina Chyn" is ESSENTIAL to identifying which critic
  • It's not extra information being added
  • It's the necessary identification of who this critic is

• When a name directly follows a title as essential identification,
  • We DON'T use commas to separate them
  • They flow together: "critic Stina Chyn"

• Also, no comma should come after "claims"
  • Because "claims" introduces what the critic said (the quote that follows)
  • We don't separate the verb from what it introduces

So we need: critic Stina Chyn claims (with no commas at all)

The correct answer is Choice C.

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Using Commas with Titles and Names: Essential vs. Non-Essential Identification

When a name directly follows a title or role and is essential to identifying the specific person, we don't use commas:

Pattern: [Title] + [Name] + [Verb] = NO commas

• Example 1: President Lincoln signed the proclamation
  • "President" = title
  • "Lincoln" = essential name identifying which president
  • No commas separate them

• Example 2: Dr. Smith recommends daily exercise
  • "Dr." = title
  • "Smith" = essential name identifying which doctor
  • No commas separate them

• Example 3: critic Stina Chyn claims the film expanded possibilities
  • "critic" = title/role
  • "Stina Chyn" = essential name identifying which critic
  • No commas separate them

This is different from non-essential identification:

When the person is already fully identified and you're adding the name as extra information, you DO use commas (this is called an appositive in grammar terms):

• Example: The president, Abraham Lincoln, signed the proclamation
  • "The president" = already fully identifies the person
  • "Abraham Lincoln" = additional, non-essential information
  • Commas set off the extra information

In our question:

• "critic Stina Chyn" uses the name as essential identification
• The name isn't extra - it's necessary to know which critic
• Therefore: no commas