Long attributed to Jacques-Louis David, the preeminent Neoclassical painter of his day, the 1801 painting Marie Joséphine Charlotte du Val...
GMAT Standard English Conventions : (Grammar) Questions
Long attributed to Jacques-Louis David, the preeminent Neoclassical painter of his day, the 1801 painting Marie Joséphine Charlotte du Val d'Ognes gained fresh attention in the 1990s when art historians discovered that the painting —which depicts a solitary young woman sketching—was actually the work of little-known French portrait ______ Marie-Denise Villers (1774–1821).
Which choice completes the text so that it conforms to the conventions of Standard English?
artist—
artist
artist:
artist,
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
- Long attributed to Jacques-Louis David,
- the preeminent Neoclassical painter of his day,
- the 1801 painting Marie Joséphine Charlotte du Val d'Ognes
- gained fresh attention in the 1990s
- when art historians discovered
- that the painting
- —which depicts a solitary young woman sketching—
- was actually the work of little-known French portrait artist[?] Marie-Denise Villers (1774–1821).
- that the painting
- when art historians discovered
- gained fresh attention in the 1990s
Where [?] = what varies in our choices (em dash, nothing, colon, or comma)
Understanding the Meaning
Let's start reading:
The sentence opens with background about the painting:
- 'Long attributed to Jacques-Louis David, the preeminent Neoclassical painter of his day'
- This tells us people long thought David painted this work
- He was the top Neoclassical painter of that time
The subject of the sentence:
- 'the 1801 painting Marie Joséphine Charlotte du Val d'Ognes'
- This is the specific painting we're talking about
What happened to this painting:
- 'gained fresh attention in the 1990s'
- People became interested in it again in the 1990s
Why did it gain attention?
- 'when art historians discovered that the painting—which depicts a solitary young woman sketching—was actually the work of...'
- Art historians made a discovery
- The painting shows a young woman alone, drawing
- It was actually made by someone else, not David
This is where we have the blank.
Let's look at the choices:
- A: artist— (with em dash)
- B: artist (no punctuation)
- C: artist: (with colon)
- D: artist, (with comma)
To see what works here, let's read the complete phrase:
- 'was actually the work of little-known French portrait artist[?] Marie-Denise Villers (1774–1821)'
Now let's understand what this structure is telling us:
- 'little-known French portrait artist'
- This describes someone's profession and type of work
- It's telling us what kind of artist this person was
- 'Marie-Denise Villers'
- This is the person's actual name
- It identifies specifically WHO this artist was
What do we notice about the structure here?
- We have a descriptive noun phrase followed directly by a proper name:
- 'artist' = the profession/description
- 'Marie-Denise Villers' = the specific person's name
- This is like saying 'author Jane Austen' or 'President Lincoln' or 'painter Picasso'
- The descriptive word and the name work together as one unit
- The name identifies which specific artist we're talking about
- When a descriptive noun directly identifies a person through their proper name, no punctuation is needed between them.
- They form one continuous noun phrase
- The name isn't extra information—it's the essential identification
So we need: artist Marie-Denise Villers (no punctuation)
The correct answer is Choice B.
GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED
No Punctuation Between Descriptive Nouns and Proper Names
When a descriptive noun (like a title, profession, or role) is directly followed by a proper name that identifies the specific person, no punctuation is needed between them. They work together as one noun phrase where the descriptive noun categorizes or modifies the proper name.
Pattern: descriptive noun + proper name = no punctuation
Examples:
- Profession + Name:
- Correct: "The painting was created by artist Marie-Denise Villers"
- Incorrect: "The painting was created by artist, Marie-Denise Villers"
- Title + Name:
- Correct: "We studied the works of author Jane Austen"
- Incorrect: "We studied the works of author: Jane Austen"
- Role + Name:
- Correct: "The speech was given by President Lincoln"
- Incorrect: "The speech was given by President— Lincoln"
In this question:
- "little-known French portrait artist" is the descriptive noun phrase
- "Marie-Denise Villers" is the proper name that identifies which artist
- They combine into one noun phrase: "little-known French portrait artist Marie-Denise Villers"
- No punctuation needed between them
Note: This is different from an appositive (additional descriptive information set off by commas). Here, the name isn't additional information—it's the direct identification of the person being described.
artist—
✗ Incorrect
- The em dash creates unnecessary separation between the description and the name
- An em dash sets off additional or parenthetical information, but Marie-Denise Villers' name isn't additional—it's the direct identification of which artist we're discussing
- The dash makes it seem like her name is a separate element rather than the essential identification
artist
✓ Correct
- Correct as explained in the solution above.
artist:
✗ Incorrect
- A colon introduces a list, explanation, or elaboration of what came before
- "Marie-Denise Villers" isn't an explanation or list—it's simply the name of the person being referred to
- The colon creates an incorrect relationship between the description and the name
artist,
✗ Incorrect
- A comma would set off "Marie-Denise Villers" as additional, non-essential information
- But her name is essential—we need to know which specific artist we're talking about
- The comma incorrectly suggests we could remove the name and still have a complete idea
- This would work if we were adding extra description (like "artist, who was little-known at the time"), but not when directly naming the person