In 1952, American editor Saxe Commins published a revised edition of William Faulkner's novel. Commins's careful editing restored several controversia...

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 1952,
  • American editor Saxe Commins
    • published a revised edition
      • of William Faulkner's novel.
• Commins's careful editing
  • restored several controversial passages
    • that censors [?]
      • from the original 1929 version.

Understanding the Meaning

Let's start reading from the beginning:

In 1952, American editor Saxe Commins published a revised edition of William Faulkner's novel.

So we have a clear time marker - 1952 - and we know that Commins published a revised (meaning updated or changed) edition of a Faulkner novel.

Now the second sentence tells us more:

Commins's careful editing restored several controversial passages...

• 'Restored' means brought back - so Commins brought back some controversial passages that weren't in previous versions.

Now here's where we have the blank:

• 'that censors _____ from the original 1929 version.'

Let's look at our choices:

• will remove (future tense)
• had removed (past perfect)
• are removing (present continuous)
• removes (simple present)

To see what works here, I need to think about the timeline. Let me map out what happened when:

Timeline of events:

• 1929: The original version of the novel was published
• Around 1929: Censors removed controversial passages from that original version
• 1952: Commins published a revised edition that restored those passages

What do we notice about the sequence here?

• We have TWO past actions:
  • The censors removing passages - this happened FIRST (to the 1929 version)
  • Commins restoring passages - this happened LATER (in 1952)
• The later action (Commins restoring) uses simple past: "restored"
• When we have two past actions and one happened BEFORE the other past action,
  • we use past perfect (had + past participle) for the EARLIER action
  • to show it happened even further back in time

So we need: had removed

The censors HAD removed these passages from the 1929 version (earlier past), and then in 1952, Commins restored them (later past).

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Using Past Perfect to Show Sequence of Past Events

When you're narrating events that all happened in the past, but you need to show that one happened BEFORE another past event, you use the past perfect tense (had + past participle) for the earlier action:

The Pattern:

• Earlier past action: had + past participle (called past perfect in grammar terms)
• Later past action: simple past tense

Example 1:

• By the time we arrived at the theater (later past), the movie had started (earlier past).
• Starting happened first
• Arriving happened second
• Both are past, but "had started" shows which came first

Example 2:

• The archaeologists discovered artifacts that ancient civilizations had created thousands of years earlier.
• Creating happened first (ancient times)
• Discovering happened second (recent past)
• "Had created" shows the creating was even further back

In this question:

• Censors had removed passages (1929 - earlier past)
• Commins restored passages (1952 - later past)
• The "had removed" signals that the removal happened before the restoration

This tense relationship helps readers understand the correct sequence of events, especially when the sentence doesn't present them in chronological order.