Correcting Sentence Fragment and Sentence Combination Errors - GMAT Verbal

The relative pronoun “who” makes this sentence into a fragment, because there is no longer a predicate. The best answer simply removes “who.”

A sentence with two independent clauses must have both clauses be able to stand as complete sentences, and be connected to each other in meaning through a conjunction. "And many students studied with him," is the only choice that fits those parameters.

There are two grammatical errors in the underlined portion of the sentence. First, the two independent clauses need to be joined by the conjunction "and." Second, the two verb forms in the two clauses should be parallel, leaving "and wanted them to," as the only correct answer choice.

As it is written, the sentence is a fragment because of the word that. The sentence is therefore corrected by removing that.

In its current state, this is a run-on sentence because it has two independent clauses that are not joined with a conjunction or semicolon. In this answer choice, the appropriate conjunction is added to the introductory clause, making the introductory clause dependent and the sentence grammatically correct.

The underlined phrase needs to be improved to make the second part of the sentence contain a complete sentence. As it is currently written, the sentence does not contain a subject. "The reduction of all stockpiles" is the only answer choice which makes the sentence complete by providing it with a subject. "All stockpiling reduction" may look like a tempting answer, but it does not convey the notion that the stockpiles are being reduced as well as does "the reduction of all stockpiles," since in "all stockpiling reduction," "stockpiling" is acting as a participle instead of as an object of a preposition.

The construction of the sentence means the second phrase, featuring the underlined portion, needs to draw a contrast with the opening clause. The correct answer must have a conjunction to separate the two parts, and still show the school's actions. Thus, "but secretly, it was investigating" is the best choice among the answers.

The error in the sentence as it is written is that there it doesn't contain a verb. "Troubling" is actually a participle, a verbal that acts like an adjective; in the sentence given, it is describing "developments." To make a participle into a verb, one needs to introduce a form of the verb "to be" immediately before it; therefore, "In every part of the world there are troubling developments in politics" is the correct answer choice, as it is the only one that correctly inserts a verb.

The answer choice that changes "troubling" to "trouble" may look like a potentially correct answer, since "trouble" can function as a verb (as in "The questions he cannot answer trouble him"), but in this case, the verb "trouble" doesn't have a plural noun to refer to; it is followed by "developments," but "trouble" is a transitive verb—you don't just "trouble," you "trouble" something, so even if it were intended to refer to "developments," it would still be grammatically incorrect from having nothing to refer to.

The underlined portion is a dependent clause, meaning it needs the rest of the sentence to complete it, but also gives meaning to the sentence. The construction of the phrase as written makes it unclear what the health problems are or how they are explained. "Which explains his later health problems," is the only choice that properly explains the sentence.

The sentence is a compound one, featuring two distinct sentences, joined by a conjunction. As such, the second phrase, beginning with the underlined portion, needs to have a subject and a verb as with any sentence; therefore, "and they were able to take" is the best choice among the answers.

The chief issue with the sentence as it is written is the lack of any verb. "Having" is a gerund, a noun formed from a verb. The best way to correct the sentence, and give it the same meaning, is to essentially reverse the phrases and add a verb in the middle. "The novelist's excellent depictions of characters demonstrate he has a command of details." is the best answer choice.

The underlined portion of the sentence contains an inappropriate use of the verb "overload." The use in the sentence needs to acknowledge the fact the final phrase is a fragment on its own. "Overloading" appropriately ties the phrase to the subject of "good ideas."

Only the verb in the past tense is necessary here. If “who” is used, the second part of the sentence becomes a relative clause modifying the subject, leaving us with a fragment—a subject, an appositive phrase, and a relative clause, but no predicate. The answers "and who died" and "and who has died" are both incorrect for the same reason; the answers "she died" and "she has died" introduce the pronoun "she," which is unnecessary (and grammatically incorrect) because the sentence already has a subject.

The sentence in question contains a comma splice, or two independent clauses connected by a comma. Independent clauses should be connected using a semicolon or a comma followed by a conjunction. We can ignore the answer choice that uses a parenthetical to enclose the second clause because it does not use a semicolon or a comma followed by a conjunction, and the resulting sentence is awkward. While "protestors, but they" and "protestor, so they" each employ a comma followed by a conjunction, the word "but" sets the two clauses in opposition to one another, which is not an accurate representation of the sentence's content, and the word "so" introduces a cause-and-effect relationship between the two clauses that does not work with the sentence's content either. So, the best answer choice is "protestors; they."

The use of the verb form "acted" makes the final part of the sentence an incomplete thought not connected to the first part of the sentence. The secondary clause must be joined with the main body of the sentence, either with a conjunction or a verb form that can connect the two. "Acting out each part based on extensive research," using the past participle, is the correct answer choice.

The underlined portion of the sentence stands oddly next to the preceding phrase, as it is in no way connected to the preceding phrase. The phrase needs to be changed so that it appropriately links with the first part of the sentence. "With vendors finding their profits increasing with each event" is the correct answer choice.

The sentence is a compound sentence, or two sentences put together to show their relationship to each other. All such sentences need to have their two parts separated by either a comma and a conjunction or a semi-colon. "Recent phenomenon; just a little" is the only answer choice that does either.

The initial sentence contains a sentence fragment. The correct answer is the most concise and most complete.

The initial sentence contains an incomplete thought. The correct answer is by far the most direct, concise, and complete.

The sentence is a compound sentence, meaning it is two complete thoughts joined together to show the relationship between them. Since the conjunction "but" is already connecting the two, inserting a comma before "but" is the only change that needs to be made to make the sentence grammatically correct.