Philosopher Peter Kivy was a leading figure in musical ________ evidenced by his belief that instead of evoking particular emotions,...

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

• Philosopher Peter Kivy
  • was a leading figure
    • in musical aesthetics [?]
      • evidenced by his belief
        • that instead of evoking particular emotions,
          • such as sadness or joy,
        • compositions elicit a listener's emotional response
          • to the structure and artistry of the music itself,
• Kivy's approach to the study of music
  • was decidedly formalist.

Understanding the Meaning

Let's start reading from the beginning:

'Philosopher Peter Kivy was a leading figure in musical aesthetics...'

So we're being told about Peter Kivy and his importance in the field of musical aesthetics (the study of beauty and art in music).

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

• A: "as" (no punctuation before it)
• B: "and as"
• C: ", as" (comma before "as")
• D: ". As" (period, making "As" start a new sentence)

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

The text continues: 'evidenced by his belief that instead of evoking particular emotions, such as sadness or joy, compositions elicit a listener's emotional response to the structure and artistry of the music itself,'

Breaking this down:

• This is explaining Kivy's belief about how music works
• Instead of making people feel specific emotions (like sadness or joy)
• Music gets people to respond emotionally to the structure and artistry itself
  • The craft, the technique, the formal elements

Then we see: 'Kivy's approach to the study of music was decidedly formalist.'

This is telling us the label for Kivy's approach - it was "formalist" (focused on form and structure rather than emotion).

Now let's understand the complete picture. If we use Choice D (period), we'd have TWO sentences:

Sentence 1: 'Philosopher Peter Kivy was a leading figure in musical aesthetics.'

• A complete statement about who Kivy was

Sentence 2: 'As evidenced by his belief that instead of evoking particular emotions, such as sadness or joy, compositions elicit a listener's emotional response to the structure and artistry of the music itself, Kivy's approach to the study of music was decidedly formalist.'

Let's look at this second sentence structure:

• 'As evidenced by his belief that...'
  • This part provides supporting evidence
  • It's a subordinate clause that depends on what comes after

• 'Kivy's approach to the study of music was decidedly formalist'
  • This is the main point - a complete thought with its own subject and verb
  • This can stand on its own

What do we notice about the structure here?

If we DON'T use a period after "aesthetics" (choices A, B, or C), look at what happens:

• After "itself," we currently have just a comma
• Then comes "Kivy's approach to the study of music was decidedly formalist"
  • This is a complete independent clause - it has a subject ("Kivy's approach") and a verb ("was")
  • It expresses a complete thought
• So without the period, we'd have two complete independent clauses connected by just a comma after "itself"
  • That's a comma splice - a grammar error where two complete thoughts are improperly joined

The correct answer is Choice D (". As")

We need the period to properly separate these into two distinct sentences. The first sentence states who Kivy was. The second sentence, beginning with the subordinate clause "As evidenced by...", supports that claim by explaining his formalist approach.

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Separating Complete Thoughts: Avoiding Comma Splices and Run-ons

When you have two complete independent clauses (complete thoughts that could each be their own sentence), you need to separate them properly. You cannot join them with just a comma - that creates a comma splice error (called a run-on sentence in grammar terms).

Proper ways to separate independent clauses:

Option 1: Use a period (two separate sentences)

• Incorrect: "She studied all night, she aced the exam."
• Correct: "She studied all night. She aced the exam."

Option 2: Use a semicolon

• Correct: "She studied all night; she aced the exam."

Option 3: Use a comma + coordinating conjunction (and, but, or, nor, for, yet, so)

• Correct: "She studied all night, and she aced the exam."

How this applies to our question:

In this passage, we have two independent clauses that need separation:

• "Philosopher Peter Kivy was a leading figure in musical aesthetics" (complete thought)
• "Kivy's approach to the study of music was decidedly formalist" (complete thought)

The material in between ("As evidenced by his belief...") functions as an introductory subordinate clause in the second sentence, not as something that could connect the two main clauses.

Using a period creates two clean, properly structured sentences and avoids the comma splice error.