In 1962, Rachel Carson, already a renowned marine biologist and author, published Silent Spring to expose the environmental dangers of...

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 1962,
• Rachel Carson,
  • already a renowned marine biologist and author,
• published Silent Spring
  • to expose the environmental dangers of synthetic pesticides [?]
• transformed public awareness of ecological threats
• and
• catalyzed the modern conservation movement.

Understanding the Meaning

Let's start reading from the beginning:

In 1962, Rachel Carson - and we get a quick descriptive note about her:

• 'already a renowned marine biologist and author'

So we know she was already well-known in her field when she:

• 'published Silent Spring'

And the purpose of this book was:

• 'to expose the environmental dangers of synthetic pesticides'

Now we've reached the blank. Let's look at our choices:

1. pesticides, she
2. pesticides. She
3. pesticides and she
4. pesticides she

So we're deciding how to connect "pesticides" with what comes next. To see what works here, let's read the rest of the sentence!

The sentence continues with:

• 'transformed public awareness of ecological threats'
• 'and catalyzed the modern conservation movement'

So the complete picture is telling us two things about Rachel Carson in 1962:

• First, she published Silent Spring to expose pesticide dangers
• Second, she (or the book) transformed public awareness and catalyzed the conservation movement

What do we notice about the structure here?

Let's look at the two parts on either side of the blank:

Part 1: 'Rachel Carson published Silent Spring to expose the environmental dangers of synthetic pesticides'

• This is a complete thought that could stand on its own
• It has a subject (Rachel Carson), a verb (published), and expresses a complete idea

Part 2: '[She] transformed public awareness of ecological threats and catalyzed the modern conservation movement'

• This is also a complete thought that could stand on its own
• It has a subject (she), verbs (transformed and catalyzed), and expresses a complete idea

So we have two complete thoughts - two statements that could each be their own sentence.

When we have two complete thoughts like this, we can't just connect them with a comma or smash them together with no punctuation. The clearest solution is to separate them into two distinct sentences.

The correct answer is B. pesticides. She - using a period to create two separate, complete sentences.

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Connecting or Separating Complete Thoughts

When you have two complete thoughts (called independent clauses in grammar terms) - statements that each have a subject and verb and could stand alone as sentences - you have several options for handling them, but you cannot just join them with a comma or no punctuation:

What doesn't work:

• Just a comma: Rachel Carson published Silent Spring, she transformed public awareness.
  • This is a comma splice - grammatically incorrect
• No punctuation: Rachel Carson published Silent Spring she transformed public awareness.
  • This is a run-on sentence - grammatically incorrect

What does work:

• Separate sentences with a period: Rachel Carson published Silent Spring. She transformed public awareness.
  • This is the clearest and most direct solution
• Semicolon: Rachel Carson published Silent Spring; she transformed public awareness.
  • This shows the ideas are closely related
• Comma + coordinating conjunction: Rachel Carson published Silent Spring, and it transformed public awareness.
  • The coordinating conjunctions are: and, but, or, nor, for, so, yet
  • You need BOTH the comma AND the conjunction

In this question: We have two complete thoughts about Rachel Carson's accomplishments in 1962. The clearest solution is to separate them into two distinct sentences with a period: "pesticides. She"