In early 1700s England, it was legal for shops to sell prints of artists' engravings without the artists' permission. This...

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 early 1700s England,
  • it was legal
    • for shops to sell prints of artists' engravings
      • without the artists' permission.

• This changed in 1735
  • with the passage of the Engravers' Copyright Act [?]
    • gave engravers control
      • over the distribution and sale
        • of all prints
          • made from their designs.

Understanding the Meaning

The first sentence gives us historical context:

• In early 1700s England, shops could legally sell prints of artists' engravings without asking the artists' permission
  • Artists had no protection or control over their work

Now the second sentence tells us about a change:

• 'This changed in 1735 with the passage of the Engravers' Copyright Act'
  • This is telling us WHEN the change happened (1735)
  • And HOW it happened (through the passage of this Act)
  • 'This changed' with 'passage of the Act' forms a complete thought

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

• A gives us: Act, which
• B gives us: Act; which
• C gives us: Act. Which
• D gives us: Act (and stops there)

To see what works here, let's read the rest of the sentence and understand what it's saying!

The text continues: 'gave engravers control over the distribution and sale of all prints made from their designs.'

Now let's understand what this is telling us:

• This part explains what the Act DID
• It tells us the Act gave engravers control over how their prints were distributed and sold
• This is additional descriptive information ABOUT the Act

What do we notice about the structure here?

We have a complete sentence: 'This changed in 1735 with the passage of the Engravers' Copyright Act'

Then we need to add extra information about what that Act did.

The word 'which' signals that we're about to describe something we just mentioned:

• 'which' refers back to the 'Act'
• 'which gave engravers control...' tells us what the Act did
• This is giving us a description of the Act, not starting a new complete thought

When we want to add this kind of descriptive information about something we just named, we use a comma before 'which':

• The comma signals: 'here comes some extra information about what I just mentioned'
• 'Act, which gave engravers control...' flows naturally

So we need Choice A: Act, which

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Using Commas with Descriptive "Which" Phrases

When you want to add extra descriptive information about something you just mentioned, you can use "which" to introduce that information. You need a comma before "which" to signal that you're adding a description:

Pattern: Noun, which [description of that noun]

Example 1:

• Without description: The museum acquired a rare painting.
• With description added: The museum acquired a rare painting, which dates back to the 15th century.
• "painting" = the noun we're describing
• ", which dates back to the 15th century" = extra information about that painting

Example 2:

• Without description: Scientists discovered a new species.
• With description added: Scientists discovered a new species, which lives only in deep ocean caves.
• "species" = the noun we're describing
• ", which lives only in deep ocean caves" = extra information about that species

In our question:

• "Engravers' Copyright Act" = the noun
• ", which gave engravers control over the distribution and sale of all prints made from their designs" = extra information about what that Act did

This type of descriptive phrase (called a non-restrictive relative clause in grammar terms) adds information but isn't essential to identify what we're talking about. It always needs a comma to separate it from the noun it describes.