Supported by biochemical analyses of over 2,000 skeletons from the Middle Ages, ______
GMAT Standard English Conventions : (Grammar) Questions
Supported by biochemical analyses of over 2,000 skeletons from the Middle Ages, ______
Which choice completes the text so that it conforms to the conventions of Standard English?
vegetables and grains were, a 2022 study found, the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets.
early medieval rulers' diets were found, in a 2022 study, to have primarily consisted of vegetables and grains.
the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets were vegetables and grains, according to a 2022 study.
findings from a 2022 study suggested that vegetables and grains were the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets.
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
- Supported by biochemical analyses
- of over 2,000 skeletons
- from the Middle Ages,
- ______ (?)
Understanding the Meaning
The sentence starts with an introductory phrase:
- "Supported by biochemical analyses of over 2,000 skeletons from the Middle Ages"
- This is describing something - telling us that whatever comes next has backing from these analyses of medieval skeletons.
This is where we have the blank.
Let's look at the choices to see what we're deciding:
- Choice A starts with: "vegetables and grains were..."
- Choice B starts with: "early medieval rulers' diets were found..."
- Choice C starts with: "the primary components... were..."
- Choice D starts with: "findings from a 2022 study suggested..."
So we're choosing what subject should come right after that opening phrase.
To see what works here, let's think about what that opening phrase means!
The phrase "Supported by biochemical analyses" means "backed up by evidence from" or "substantiated by" these analyses.
Now, what do we notice about the structure here?
- The opening phrase is a modifier - it's describing whatever comes next
- Whatever subject follows the comma must be something that can logically be "supported by biochemical analyses"
Let's think about what can be "supported by analyses":
- Can vegetables and grains be supported?
- No - vegetables and grains are physical foods, not claims
- Can diets be supported?
- No - diets are eating patterns that existed, not claims
- Can components be supported?
- No - components are the physical things themselves
- Can findings be supported?
- YES! Findings are conclusions or claims that can be backed up by evidence
So we need Choice D: "findings from a 2022 study suggested that vegetables and grains were the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets."
This makes logical sense: The findings/conclusions are what get supported by the biochemical analyses.
GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED
Introductory Modifiers Must Logically Match Their Subjects
When a sentence begins with a descriptive phrase (called an introductory modifier in grammar terms), that phrase must logically describe the subject that comes immediately after the comma.
The pattern works like this:
Modifier + comma + Subject (that the modifier describes)
Example 1:
- Wrong: "Located in Paris, many tourists visit the Eiffel Tower."
- Problem: Tourists aren't located in Paris (well, some might be, but that's not what we mean)
- Correct: "Located in Paris, the Eiffel Tower attracts many tourists."
- The tower is what's located in Paris
Example 2:
- Wrong: "Based on the data, the experiment was successful."
- Problem: The experiment wasn't based on the data
- Correct: "Based on the data, scientists concluded the experiment was successful."
- The conclusion is what's based on the data
In this question:
- Wrong: "Supported by biochemical analyses... vegetables and grains were..."
- Physical foods can't be "supported" by evidence
- Correct: "Supported by biochemical analyses... findings from a 2022 study suggested..."
- Findings ARE what get supported by evidence
The key insight: Ask yourself whether the opening phrase can logically describe the subject that follows. If the relationship doesn't make sense, you've found a modifier error!
vegetables and grains were, a 2022 study found, the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets.
"vegetables and grains were, a 2022 study found, the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets."
✗ Incorrect
- Creates a modifier mismatch
- Would make the sentence say that vegetables and grains were "supported by biochemical analyses"
- Vegetables and grains are physical foods, not claims or findings that can be supported by evidence
- The modifier doesn't logically describe the subject
early medieval rulers' diets were found, in a 2022 study, to have primarily consisted of vegetables and grains.
"early medieval rulers' diets were found, in a 2022 study, to have primarily consisted of vegetables and grains."
✗ Incorrect
- Creates a modifier mismatch
- Would make the sentence say that the diets themselves were "supported by biochemical analyses"
- Diets are historical eating patterns, not claims that need evidential support
- The modifier doesn't logically describe the subject
the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets were vegetables and grains, according to a 2022 study.
"the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets were vegetables and grains, according to a 2022 study."
✗ Incorrect
- Creates a modifier mismatch
- Would make the sentence say that the components were "supported by biochemical analyses"
- Components refer to the physical foods, not to conclusions or findings
- The modifier doesn't logically describe the subject
findings from a 2022 study suggested that vegetables and grains were the primary components of early medieval rulers' diets.
✓ Correct
Correct as explained in the solution above.