Choice C is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s
discussion of Ester Hernandez’s art. In this context, “featured” means shown
prominently. The text focuses on where Hernandez’s works have been and
continue to be displayed, explaining that her early works, which consisted of
murals, could be viewed in outdoor spaces in San Francisco. The central contrast
developed in the text is between where her early works could be viewed and
where her works can be viewed now, which is in museums across the United
States and around the world. The context therefore supports the idea that
Hernandez’s works are now shown, or featured, in museums globally

Choice A is incorrect because in this context “invented” would mean created
something for the first time, which isn’t supported since the text doesn’t discuss
where Hernandez creates her works or whether they’re original or innovative.
Choice B is incorrect because “adjusted” in this context would mean adapted.
Although the text mentions that many of Hernandez’s early works were outdoor
murals and thus it may be reasonable to infer that Hernandez altered her
approach to creating art so that her works could be displayed in indoor venues
instead, the text makes no mention of how Hernandez’s works might have been
adapted for such venues. The text focuses on where Hernandez’s works have
been and continue to be displayed, not on how she or anyone else may have
adapted, or adjusted, her works. Choice D is incorrect because “recommended” in
this context would mean endorsed or put forth as a suggestion for something that
is worth seeing. Although it may be reasonable to say that in choosing to display
certain works, museum curators believe such works are worth seeing, the text
doesn’t discuss the reasons why museums display Hernandez’s works. Instead,
the text mainly develops a contrast between where Hernandez’s early works
could once be viewed and where her work can be viewed now.

Choice D is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s
discussion of Carmen Lomas Garza’s artistic process. In this context, “inspired
by” means influenced by or motivated by. The text refers to how, regardless of the
scale of the work, Garza uses her memories of Texas and details from California
to create her art. If Garza is basing her work on her direct experiences, then they
play a part in her artistic process. This context thus suggests that Garza’s art
is inspired by the experiences of her childhood in Texas and her current life in
California

Choice A is incorrect because it wouldn’t make logical sense to indicate that
Garza is “complimented by”—or praised by—something inanimate such as
direct experience. Choice B is incorrect because describing Garza as “uncertain
about”—or unsure or doubtful of—direct experience would suggest that she had
misgivings about it. If Garza were unsure of her experiences, that would suggest
that she couldn’t recall them, and Garza wouldn’t be able to represent direct
experience in her art if she were uncertain of the memories or details. Choice C is
incorrect because describing Garza as “unbothered by”—or uninterested in—her
experience would imply the opposite of what the text suggests about Garza’s
artistic process. The text indicates that Garza’s art comes from m

Choice C is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s
discussion of Bastos’s study of a wild kea parrot. In this context, “accidental”
means unplanned or unintentional. The text first describes Bastos’s study, which
concerns a kea that is observed using small stones to preen its feathers. The
text then mentions colleagues who are skeptical (that is, they have doubt) about
Bastos’s findings, and finally describes how Bastos and her team responded
to the skepticism of those colleagues. Given that the colleagues mentioned
in the text expressed skepticism regarding Bastos’s findings, the best answer
choice must be one that completes the text in a manner such that the skeptics’
opinion regarding the kea’s use of stones disagrees with that held by Bastos and
her team. Since Bastos and her team showed that the kea’s use of stones was
deliberate (that is, intentional), the skeptics’ opinion in this context must be that
the kea’s use of stones was unintentional, or accidental.

Choice A is incorrect because the best answer choice is one that portrays
skepticism, or doubt, of Bastos’s claim that the kea’s usage of stones was
deliberate, or intentional. If the skeptics found the kea’s usage of stones
“intriguing,” or fascinating, this would not be at odds with the position of Bastos
and her team; in fact, it is reasonable to believe that someone who agreed that
the kea’s stone usage was deliberate would also find it intriguing. Choice B is
incorrect because if the skeptics believed that the kea’s usage of small stones
was “obvious,” or evident, this would not be contrary to the observation of Bastos
and her team that the kea’s usage of stones was deliberate: in fact, these opinions
would be consistent with each other. Choice D is incorrect because if the skeptics
believed that the kea’s usage of small stones was “observable,” or visible, this
would not conflict with the claim of Bastos and her team that the kea’s usage of
stones was deliberate: instead, these positions would agree.

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s
discussion of the Kelmscott Press’s books. In this context, “manifest in” means
evident or apparent from. The text states that the Kelmscott Press, which was
cofounded by William Morris, produced its books using preindustrial methods.
The text notes the similarity between those methods, which include the use
of handmade materials and intricate ornamentation, and methods used in the
creation of medieval manuscripts. This context suggests that Morris’s repudiation
of industrialization is apparent from, or manifest in, the methods and materials his
company employed.

Choice A is incorrect because there is nothing in the text to suggest that
Morris’s repudiation of industrialization is “insensible to,” or unaware of or lacking
perception of, the use of handmade materials and intricate ornamentation in
the production of the Kelmscott editions. Instead, the text suggests that the
methods and materials used to produce the Kelmscott editions are evidence
of Morris’s repudiation of industrialization. Choice C is incorrect because it
would not make sense to say that Morris’s repudiation of industrialization was
“scrutinized by,” or examined closely by, the Kelmscott editions’ use of handmade
materials and intricate ornamentation. Although creating the Kelmscott editions
may have involved examining the books closely, the text does not mention this
aspect of Morris’s work, and in any case, the action of using certain materials to
create those editions cannot scrutinize Morris’s attitude toward industrialization.
Choice D is incorrect because the text gives no indication that Morris’s
repudiation of industrialization is “complicated by,” or made more complex or
difficult by, the Kelmscott Press’s use of preindustrial methods and handcrafted
elements to produce books. Instead, the text presents those methods as
exemplifying Morris’s repudiation of industrialization

Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s
discussion of Mary Engle Pennington and Stephanie Kwolek. In this context,
“tentative” means unsettled or not definite. The text indicates a contrast between
Pennington and Kwolek in terms of their memorability (“place in our historical
memory”) and states that Kwolek “will long be remembered” for her invention of
Kevlar material. This context suggests that although Pennington had an impact
on society, she may be less likely than Kwolek to be remembered for a very
long time—in other words, that her memorability may be more tentative, or less
definite, than Kwolek’s.

Choice A is incorrect because the text establishes a contrast between
Pennington and Kwolek in terms of their “place in our historical memory” for
their achievements, and the statement that Kwolek “will be long remembered”
while Pennington’s memorability may be more “permanent,” or enduring,
wouldn’t supply a contrast; it would instead suggest that both people will remain
memorable. Choice C is incorrect because the text establishes a contrast
between Pennington and Kwolek in terms of their memorability, suggesting
that Pennington is less likely than Kwolek to be “long remembered,” but doesn’ address how “warranted,” or based on good reason, each person’s “place in our
historical memory” is. In fact, the text suggests that both Pennington and Kwolek
had significant achievements, even if one may be more memorable. Choice D
is incorrect because the text establishes a contrast between Pennington and
Kwolek in terms of their “place in our historical memory” for their achievements,
and the statement that Kwolek “will be long remembered” while Pennington’s
memorability may be more “prominent,” or widely known, wouldn’t supply a
contrast; it would instead suggest that both people are very memorable.

Choice C is the best answer because it most accurately describes the main
purpose of the text, which is to portray Francie’s determination to reach her
goal of reading all the books in the world. The text indicates that to achieve this
aim, Francie works systematically and persistently: she reads all the books in
the library in alphabetical order and devotes much time and effort to the project,
finishing one book per day over a long period of time. The text then suggests
that even though she progresses slowly (“she was still in the B’s”) and that she
struggled with some books (“some of the B’s had been hard going”), she doesn’t
give up because she thinks of herself as “a reader.” These details show Francie’s
resolve.

Choice A is incorrect. Although the text mentions several topics (bees and
buffaloes, Bermuda vacations, and Byzantine architecture) that Francie has
read about, it doesn’t indicate that any of these topics are unusual or that she
especially enjoyed reading about one of these topics in particular. If anything,
the text suggests that she may have found some of these topics to be dull,
saying that she even read the “dry ones”— that is, the boring books—and that
some of the books were “hard going,” meaning they were difficult to get through.
Choice B is incorrect because the text doesn’t discuss Francie’s involvement in
other activities, only her dedication to reading. Although it’s possible that Francie
dedicates herself to reading because she prefers it to other activities, the text
doesn’t indicate whether this is the case. Choice D is incorrect. Although the text
mentions one author (Abbott) whose book Francie has read as well as several
topics (bees and buffaloes, Bermuda vacations, and Byzantine architecture) she
has encountered, the text doesn’t say whether Francie admires any of the books
she’s read so far. Instead, the text focuses on the time and effort she devotes to
reaching her goal of reading all the books in the world—even ones she doesn’t
enjoy

Choice D is the best answer because it most accurately states the main purpose
of the text, which is to describe an experiment whose results cast doubt on an
established hypothesis. The text begins by noting that researchers have long
believed that woolly mammoths were hunted to extinction in North America by
humans using spears with Clovis points. The text then describes an experiment
conducted by an anthropologist to test this hypothesis. According to the text, the
results of the experiment led the anthropologist to conclude that hunters using
spears with Clovis points likely weren’t the primary cause of the extinction. The
anthropologist’s results cast doubt on the long-held hypothesis presented at
the beginning of the text and suggest that woolly mammoths may have become
extinct in North America due to some other cause.

Choice A is incorrect because there’s nothing in the text to suggest that
researchers have been involved in an ongoing debate. On the contrary,
the text suggests that most researchers agree on the cause of the woolly
mammoth’s extinction in North America. Choice B is incorrect because the text
never mentions any advantages or disadvantages of the method used in the
experiment, focusing instead on the results achieved using that method. Choice C
is incorrect because the text addresses only one hypothesis, that mammoths
were hunted to extinction in North America by humans using spears with Clovis
points. Rather than present a competing hypothesis, the text explains how one
anthropologist designed an experiment to test this long-held hypothesis.

Choice C is the best answer because it most effectively describes the function
of the underlined portion. The text discusses the long-standing misconception
that people in medieval Europe were uninterested in cleanliness and hygiene. As
evidence that this idea is false, the text cites historian Eleanor Janega’s assertion
that in medieval Europe, towns usually had at least one bathhouse, where people
could take immersion baths or steam baths for a fee. The underlined portion then
notes that mainly town dwellers had access to these bathhouses. The remainder
of the text explains that those who lacked such access were nonetheless able
to bathe in outdoor waterways or take sponge baths at home. Therefore, the
underlined portion concedes that some people in medieval Europe lacked access
to public bathhouses.

Choice A is incorrect. The underlined portion establishes that amenities such
as steam baths were mainly available to town dwellers, which suggests in turn
that steam baths were largely unavailable to people in rural areas. Thus, the
distinction made by the underlined portion is not between the popularity of
steam baths in towns versus their lack of popularity in rural areas but instead
between their presence in towns and absence in rural areas. Choice B is incorrect.
Although the text does explain that recent historians have disproved the idea
that medieval Europeans rarely bathed, it doesn’t attribute that misconception to
earlier historians of medieval Europe or suggest that their research was subject
to limitations. Moreover, the underlined portion addresses a limitation of life in
medieval Europe, not of historical research. Choice D is incorrect because the underlined portion doesn’t address why historian Eleanor Janega decided to
study the popularity of public bathhouses in medieval Europe—nor does any
portion of the text. The text mentions Janega in passing, but it doesn’t go into
detail about why she decided to study the popularity of public bathhouses in
medieval Europe.

Choice C is the best answer because it most accurately describes how the
underlined portion functions in the text as a whole. The text begins by mentioning
scholarly accounts of the Chicano movement, which the underlined portion
describes as tending “to focus on the most militant, outspoken figures in the
movement,” making the movement as a whole seem uniformly radical. The text
then indicates that the work of geographer Juan Herrera shows that focusing
less on such militant figures and instead paying more attention to manifestations
of the Chicano movement in less widely known neighborhood institutions and
projects would reveal that the movement’s participants embraced a range of
political orientations and approaches. Thus, the underlined portion describes a
common approach to studying the Chicano movement that, according to the text,
obscures the ideological diversity of the movement’s participants.

Choice A is incorrect. Though the underlined portion does present a trend in
scholarship on the Chicano movement, the text does not indicate that other
scholars have reevaluated their methods in light of Herrera’s work. It only
indicates that Herrera’s work suggests that the work of those other scholars
does not provide a complete picture of the Chicano movement. Choice B is
incorrect. Though the underlined portion does identify an aspect of the Chicano
movement that the text indicates has been overemphasized, the text does not
discuss the political orientations of the scholars whose work is mentioned in the
text. Choice D is incorrect. Though the underlined portion does summarize the
conventional method for analyzing the Chicano movement, the rest of the text
does not address the effectiveness of “comparatively low-pro

Choice C is the best answer because it accurately states the main idea of the text.
According to the text, contrary to what some might expect, foreign investment
is typically lower in developing countries whose economies are more dependent
on natural-resource extraction. The text explains that high reliance on naturalresource extraction can subject a developing country to economic shocks that
can destabilize the local currency and introduce economic uncertainty that tends
to keep investors away. In other words, although we may think otherwise, foreign
investors are less willing to invest in projects in developing countries whose
economies are heavily dependent on natural-resource extraction because those
economies tend to exhibit instability that investors want to avoid

Choice A is incorrect. The text does indicate that foreign investment is typically
lower in developing countries whose economies are more dependent on natural-resource extraction; the text further indicates that natural-resource
extraction requires substantial initial investments (to acquire things like required
technologies) for which there are fewer investors willing to participate at this
stage than one might think. But the text does not implicate the cost of these
initial investments as a reason why foreign investment is less widely available
than some might think. Choice B is incorrect. The text indicates that greater
dependence on natural-resource extraction makes a developing country less
appealing to foreign investors because of associated economic instability. Rather
than arguing that the goal of developing countries is to become less dependent
on foreign investment, as the phrasing of choice B suggests, the text focuses
only on why foreign investors become less involved with such countries, which
suggests that more investment would be preferable. Choice D is incorrect.
Although the text indicates that natural-resource extraction requires substantial
initial investments (to acquire things like required technologies) and that there
are fewer likely investors willing to participate at this stage than one might think,
the text does not address what investors are likely to do over time as the industry
stabilizes itself.

Choice C is the best answer because it accurately describes why the finding
about the microorganism community composition was important. The text
describes an experiment by Eva Kaštovská and her team in which they collected
plant-soil cores at one elevation and transplanted them to sites at a lower
elevation, where the mean air temperature was warmer. Kaštovská and her team
observed that microorganism-mediated nutrient cycling was accelerated in the
transplanted cores and that “crucially, microorganism community composition
was unchanged,” which allowed the team to attribute the acceleration to changes
in microorganism activity brought about by the difference in temperature. This
strongly implies that the team wouldn’t have been able to make that attribution
otherwise, meaning that a change in microorganism composition represented
another possible explanation for the acceleration that had to be ruled out.

Choice A is incorrect. Although the text says microorganism-mediated cycling
of soil nutrients increased in the transplanted cores, this is unrelated to what’s
important about the finding that the microorganism composition didn’t change—
that it allowed the team to attribute the change in activity solely to the change
in temperature. Choice B is incorrect. Although the text compares activity
in one core at two different elevations, the text doesn’t address changes in
activity at various elevations over time. Choice D is incorrect. Although different
microorganisms likely exhibit different levels of activity, the text indicates that
there was no change in microorganism composition, and there is nothing in the
text about different microorganisms having different activity levels.

Choice C is the best answer because it states a conclusion the researchers likely
agree with, given the details in the text. The text explains that a biosignature gas is
a gas that can be used as an indicator that a planet harbors some form of life and
some astronomers have proposed that NH₃ could serve as a biosignature gas.
The researchers evaluating this claim found that the atmosphere of rocky planets
would be unlikely to reach “detectably high levels” of NH₃ without biological
activity, which would support the proposal of NH₃ serving as a biosignature
gas. However, the text also states that mini-Neptune planets can produce NH₃
in the absence of biological activity. Thus, the text is structured to lead to the
conclusion that detectable levels of NH₃ in the atmospheres of rocky planets
could constitute a biosignature, but that is not the case for detectable levels of
the gas in the atmospheres of mini-Neptune planets.

Choice A is incorrect because the text indicates that biological activity likely
accounts for detectable levels of NH₃ in the atmospheres of rocky planets but
mini-Neptune planets can have detectable levels of NH₃ in their atmospheres
in the absence of biological activity. Therefore, both rocky planets and miniNeptune planets can have detectable levels of atmospheric NH₃. Choice B is
incorrect because the text states that for NH₃ to reach detectable levels in
the atmospheres of rocky planets likely means they harbor biological activity,
meaning that rocky planets with detectable NH₃ usually harbor biological activity.
However, that does not entail that every rocky planet with biological activity
will have detectable levels of NH₃ in their atmospheres. Choice D is incorrect
because the text claims only that some astronomers have proposed using NH₃ as
a biosignature gas without mentioning a minimum concentration of atmos

Choice D is the best answer because it most effectively illustrates the claim that the speaker has contradictory feelings while experiencing the sights and sounds of spring. This quotation indicates that the speaker is reclined in a grove listening to a thousand sounds. Even though the speaker is in a “sweet mood” and thinking “pleasant thoughts,” those pleasant thoughts also bring to mind “sad thoughts.” In other words, these lines illustrate the claim that the speaker is having contradictory thoughts while immersed in the sights and sounds of spring.

Choice A is incorrect. Although this quotation refers to several flowers (primroses and periwinkles) and indicates that the speaker is in a “bower,” or shady spot among the trees details which suggest that the speaker is experiencing the sights of spring—it doesn’t suggest that the speaker is having contradictory feelings, only that the speaker believes that the flowers are experiencing enjoyment. Choice B is incorrect. Although this quotation focuses on the sights of spring—namely, new leaves on nearby trees appear to be opening up (“The
budding twigs spread out their fan”) to feel the breeze—the quotation doesn’t suggest that the speaker feels conflicted about this: the statement “And I must think, do all I can” suggests the speaker’s determination to attribute feelings of pleasure to the trees, not that the speaker is experiencing contradictory feelings. Choice C is incorrect. Although this quotation indicates that the speaker isn’t certain what the birds are thinking (“Their thoughts I cannot measure”), there’s nothing to suggest that the speaker is experiencing contradictory feelings.
Rather, the quotation suggests that although the speaker is uncertain about the birds’ feelings, the speaker believes that the birds’ movements likely suggest their pleasure.

Choice A is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s
discussion of the potential effects of logging on forest conservation. The text
begins by stating that logging practices are often thought of as being contrary to
forest conservation efforts. Then, the text presents the results of a research study
examining the effect of limited logging practices on specific forest plots, finding
that the plots with limited logging may be “more robust” (healthier) than the plots
that hadn’t been logged at all. Given these results, it follows that logging may be a
useful practice for maintaining healthy forests if it is practiced in a limited way

Choice B is incorrect because the study referenced in the text only provides
information on limited logging as a potential forest management strategy. There
is no information in the text about how other forest management strategies
support forest conservation efforts. Therefore, the text does not support the
assertion that other forest management strategies are more successful than
limited logging. Choice C is incorrect because the text presents a research study
with findings that specific plots of forest with limited logging may be more robust
than the forest plots that were not logged. Rather than suggesting that it is hard
to know whether limited logging might be beneficial, the text suggests that the
practice could be useful in forest conservation efforts. Choice D is incorrect. The
text discusses the results of a research study that compares the health of forest
plots with limited logging to forest plots that were not logged. It does not take a
position on the best way to support forest health but rather presents a research
study with findings that question conventionally held thoughts regarding the
practice of logging.

Choice D is the best answer because it presents the conclusion that most
logically follows from the text’s discussion of the means authors use to write and
revise their novels. After stating that many authors still choose to draft novels by
hand even though computers are now widely used, the text acknowledges the
speculation that the opposite choice—using only a computer—would have had
an effect on such novels. However, the text then points out that every novel is
the singular result of a combination of the particular conditions surrounding its
creation. This suggests that it isn’t possible to determine the effect of any single
condition (such as the means of writing) on its own; thus, there would be no way
to reasonably evaluate how a novel would have turned out differently if it had been
written by other means.

Choice A is incorrect because the text doesn’t suggest that it’s more efficient to
write a novel on a computer than to write it by hand; it doesn’t address efficiency
at all. Therefore, it isn’t logical to conclude that authors who currently choose to
write novels largely by hand should instead work only on a computer to increase
their efficiency. Choice B is incorrect because the text doesn’t suggest anything
about how successful authors are, regardless of the means by which they choose
to write; therefore, it isn’t logical to conclude that authors who write largely by
hand are likely to be more successful than those who work only on a computer.
Choice C is incorrect because the text makes no mention of the time it takes
to produce a novel, regardless of the means by which it’s written; therefore, it
isn’t logical to conclude that novels written by hand take less time on average to
produce than those written on a computer do.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is end-of-sentence
punctuation. This choice correctly uses a question mark to punctuate the
coordinated interrogative clauses “What are atmospheric rivers” and “how do they
affect our weather,” both of which ask direct questions.

Choice A is incorrect because a period can’t be used in this way to punctuate an
interrogative clause, such as “how do they affect our weather,” at the end of a
sentence. Choice B is incorrect because the structure requires an interrogative
clause and a question mark at the end of the sentence. Choice D is incorrect
because the structure requires an interrogative clause at the end of the sentence.

Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier
placement. This choice makes the noun phrase “topological tapestries” the
subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase
“woven…grandmother.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that the
topological tapestries—and not another noun in the sentence—are being
described as woven from recycled yarn and hand tufted.

Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “Argentine textile artist Alexandra Kehayoglou” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that Kehayoglou is woven from recycled yarn and hand tufted. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the pronoun “she” and the noun phrase “Argentine textile artist Alexandra Kehayoglou” after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that Kehayoglou is woven from recycled yarn and hand tufted. Choice D
is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “Alexandra Kehayoglou” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that Kehayoglou is woven from recycled yarn and hand tufted.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the coordination of
main clauses within a sentence. This choice uses a semicolon in a conventional
way to join the first main clause (“Clear… through”) and the second main clause
(“wax…through”).

Choice A is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction
following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses. Choice B
is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses
(“Clear…through” and “wax…through”) are fused without punctuation and/or a
conjunction. Furthermore, it results in a confusing and illogical sentence that
suggests clear glass allows light to pass through wax paper, which doesn’t make
sense in this context. Choice D is incorrect because when coordinating two
longer main clauses such as these, it’s conventional to use a comma before the
coordinating conjunction.

Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of
elements in a complex series. It’s conventional to use a semicolon to separate
items in a complex series with internal punctuation, and in this choice, the
semicolon after “leaves” is conventionally used to separate the first item (“natural
debris, such as dried leaves”) and the second item (“man-made trash, such
as plastic bags”) in the series of materials used by Gavua. Further, the comma
after “trash” correctly separates the noun phrase “man-made trash” from the
supplementary phrase (“such as plastic bags”) that describes it

Choice A is incorrect because a comma after “leaves” doesn’t match the
semicolon used later to separate the second and third items in the series (“manmade…bags” and “and…glue”). Additionally, it’s not conventional to use a colon
in this way to separate a supplementary phrase (“such as plastic bags”) from
the noun phrase it modifies (“man-made trash”). Choice C is incorrect because
a comma after “leaves” doesn’t match the semicolon used later to separate
the second and third items in the series (“man-made…bags” and “and…glue”).
Choice D is incorrect because it’s not conventional to use a semicolon in this way
to separate a supplementary phrase (“such as plastic bags”) from the noun phrase
it modifies (“man-made trash”).

Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of supplementary elements within a sentence. This choice correctly uses a comma to separate the supplementary adverb “however” from the preceding main clause (“only…competitions”), and it uses a colon to introduce the list of dances that follows (“rumba…jive”). Further, placing the colon after “however” rather than before indicates that the information in the preceding main clause (only… competitions) is contrary to what might be assumed from the information in the
previous sentence (Latin America has many more dance forms).

Choice B is incorrect. The comma after “however” can’t be used in this way to introduce a series (“rumba…jive”). Choice C is incorrect because it isn’t conventional to use a semicolon in this way to introduce a series of items, such as the list of dances. Choice D is incorrect because placing the semicolon after “competitions” illogically indicates that the following list of five Latin American dances (“rumba…jive”) is contrary to the information in the previous clause (only five Latin American dances are included in international ballroom dance competitions).

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use
between two main clauses. In this choice, a colon is correctly used to mark the
boundary between one main clause (“goats are notoriously indiscriminate”) and
another main clause (“they will devour all kinds of shrubs and weeds”) and to
introduce the following explanation of goats’ nondiscriminatory behavior when it
comes to what they eat.

Choice A is incorrect because when coordinating two longer main clauses such
as these, it’s conventional to use a comma before the coordinating conjunction.
Furthermore, the conjunction “and” fails to indicate that what follows is an
explanation of goats’ nondiscriminatory behavior when it comes to their diets.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be
used in this way to join two main clauses (“goats…indiscriminate” and “they…
weeds”). Choice C is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two
main clauses (“goats…indiscriminate” and “they…weeds”) are fused without
punctuation and/or a conjunction.

Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb
agreement. The plural verb “increase” agrees in number with the plural subject
“toxins.”

Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb “is increasing” doesn’t agree in
number with the plural subject “toxins.” Choice C is incorrect because the singular
verb “increases” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “toxins.” Choice D
is incorrect because the singular verb “has increased” doesn’t agree in number
with the plural subject “toxins.”

Choice D is the best answer. “Finally” logically signals that the actions in this sentence—the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts—are the next and final steps in a process, following the previous actions of surveying, digging, recording, and mapping.

Choice A is incorrect because “for instance” illogically signals that the actions in this sentence are an example of the actions in the previous sentence. Instead, the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts are the next and final steps in a process. Choice B is incorrect because “on the contrary” illogically signals that the actions in this sentence are directly opposed to the actions in the previous sentence. Instead, the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts are the nextand final steps in a process. Choice C is incorrect because “earlier” illogically

Choice A is the best answer. “In turn” logically signals that the information in the
sentence—that the electrical currents create a protective barrier around Earth—
is a result or consequence of the previous information about the circulation of
liquid metals generating electrical currents that flow between Earth’s magnetic
poles.

Choice B is incorrect because “likewise” illogically signals that the information
in the sentence is similar to the previous information about the circulation of
liquid metals generating electrical currents that flow between Earth’s magnetic
poles. Instead, the new information about the electrical currents is a direct result
or consequence of the previous information. Choice C is incorrect because
“nevertheless” illogically signals that the information in the sentence is true
despite the previous information about the circulation of liquid metals generating
electrical currents that flow between Earth’s magnetic poles. Instead, the new
information about the electrical currents is a direct result or consequence of the
previous information. Choice D is incorrect because “in reality” illogically signals
that the information in the sentence contradicts the previous information about
the circulation of liquid metals generating electrical currents that flow between
Earth’s magnetic poles. Instead, the new information about the electrical currents
is a direct result or consequence of the previous information.

Choice B is the best answer. “In fact” logically signals that the critics’ claim at the
end of this sentence—that the two editions are essentially two different novels
altogether—offers additional emphasis in support of the previous claim that the
differences between the editions are extreme.

Choice A is incorrect because “by contrast” illogically signals that the claim at the end of this sentence contrasts with the previous claim about the differences
between the editions. Instead, the critics’ opinion offers additional emphasis in
support of that claim. Choice C is incorrect because “nevertheless” illogically
signals that the claim at the end of this sentence is true despite the previous claim
about the differences between the two editions. Instead, the critics’ opinion offers
additional emphasis in support of that claim. Choice D is incorrect because “in
other words” illogically signals that the claim at the end of this sentence is merely
paraphrasing the previous claim about the differences between the two editions.
The critics’ opinion adds new information to the previous claim rather than simply
paraphrasing it.

Choice C is the best answer. The sentence emphasizes a similarity between
the Choctaw Code Talkers and the Navajo Code Talkers by explaining that both
groups used their native languages to transmit coded messages for the military

Choice A is incorrect. The sentence describes the Choctaw Code Talkers; it
doesn’t emphasize a similarity between the Choctaw Code Talkers and the Navajo
Code Talkers. Choice B is incorrect. The sentence introduces the Navajo Code
Talkers; it doesn’t emphasize a similarity between the Choctaw Code Talkers
and the Navajo Code Talkers. Choice D is incorrect. The sentence emphasizes
a difference between the Choctaw Code Talkers and the Navajo Code Talkers; it
doesn’t emphasize a similarity.

Choice B is incorrect because “specifically” illogically signals that the soil
decontamination method described in this sentence specifies or elaborates on an
aspect of the previously described method (removing the contaminated soil from
the ground). Instead, phytoremediation is an alternative to that method. Choice C
is incorrect because “for example” illogically signals that the soil decontamination
method described in this sentence is an example of the previously described
method (removing the contaminated soil from the ground). Instead,
phytoremediation is an alternative to that method. Choice D is incorrect because
“as a result” illogically signals that the soil decontamination method described
in this sentence is a result or consequence of the previously described method
(removing the contaminated soil from the ground). Instead, phytoremediation is an
alternative to that method.