Passage Correction Questions and Answers

Answer: A

Correct answer: have known

Two things are wrong with the printed phrase, and the correction fixes both. First, know is a stative verb, describing a state rather than an activity, and stative verbs are not used in continuous tenses. The same applies to believe, understand, remember, want, like, prefer, own, belong, contain, seem and hate. Second, an acquaintance that began in the past and continues now takes the present perfect, marked here by since. So I have known him since our college days. The simple present know would be correct without since - I know him well - but cannot carry a starting point. Note that a few verbs are stative in one sense and dynamic in another: I am thinking about it is fine because think there means to consider, while I am thinking it is true is not.

Answer: E

No correction is required.

Should have thought is the correct perfect modal for a missed opportunity, and calmly sits properly between the auxiliary and the participle. Each alternative breaks the modal's form.

Answer: A

Correct answer: had studied

In a third conditional - an unreal condition in the past - the if clause takes the past perfect and the result clause takes would have with the past participle. So: If he had studied harder, he would have passed. The error is placing would in the if clause. The rule of thumb is absolute for examination purposes: would never appears in the if clause, only in the result clause. The three patterns are best held together. If it rains, we will cancel - a real future possibility. If it rained, we would cancel - hypothetical present or unlikely future. If it had rained, we would have cancelled - contrary to what actually happened. Since the examination is already over and he did not pass, only the third fits. Note that if I were, not if I was, is used in the second pattern - the surviving subjunctive.

Answer: D

Correct answer: when

Hardly is completed by when, never by than. It is no sooner that takes than. The reason for the difference is grammatical rather than arbitrary: sooner is a comparative and comparatives are completed by than, whereas hardly and scarcely are not comparatives and take the temporal when. The sentence is otherwise correctly formed. Because it opens with the restrictive adverb hardly, the subject and auxiliary are inverted - had we started, not we had started - and the earlier of the two past actions takes the past perfect while the later takes the simple past. The full set of correct pairings is small: hardly…when, scarcely…when, barely…when, and no sooner…than. Learning them as pairs is the only reliable defence, since the ear accepts either.

Answer: A

Correct answer: No correction required

The sentence is correct as printed. If any is a fixed parenthetical expression meaning if there are any at all, and it follows naturally from the negative-leaning very few. The construction relies on any being the word used in negative and interrogative contexts, while some is used in affirmative ones: I have some money against I do not have any money and do you have any money? Since very few is negative in force, any is the correct partner. The exception to that rule is worth knowing: some is used in questions that expect the answer yes or that offer something, as in would you like some tea? Note also the distinction between few and a few. Few means hardly any and is negative; a few means some and is positive. Very few people believe it and a few people still believe it say almost opposite things.

Answer: B

Correct answer: between

Between is used for two people or things; among for more than two. Since there are exactly two brothers, between themselves is correct. The distinction is not merely about number but about relationship. Between is used wherever the items are considered individually and in relation to each other, which is why it is correct even with more than two in a sentence such as a treaty between the five nations - each nation has a distinct relation to every other. Among treats the group collectively and indistinctly: the money was distributed among the villagers. Amongst is a legitimate variant of among, older and more common in British writing, but it makes no difference to the number rule and so does not fix the sentence. In between is redundant, and within would mean inside something.

Answer: D

Correct answer: hanging

The verb hang has two sets of past forms, and choosing between them depends on the meaning. For objects, the forms are hang – hung – hung: he hung the picture on the wall. For execution by hanging, they are hang – hanged – hanged: the murderer was hanged at dawn. Using hanged of a picture is therefore wrong on both counts. The sentence also needs a continuous form, because the action was in progress when the speaker came in - the past continuous is exactly what an interrupted action calls for. So he was hanging the picture when I came in. Hung alone would be the simple past and would not fit after was. A comparable split exists in lie, which has lay – lain for reclining and lied – lied for telling untruths.

Answer: D

Correct answer: has

Each is singular and takes a singular verb, so each student has been allotted. The construction here is simpler than the usual trap, since no intervening plural noun stands between the subject and the verb - which makes the singular easier to hear. Compare the harder form, each of the students has been allotted, where the plural students pulls the ear towards have. Both are singular for the same reason. Every, either, neither, everyone, anybody, somebody and nobody all behave the same way. The one arrangement that takes a plural verb is each placed after a plural subject, where it becomes adverbial: the students have each been allotted a desk. There the subject is the students. Position, not the word itself, decides the number in that case - which is what makes the pair worth learning together.

Answer: B

Correct answer: and their father

The sentence contains a mismatch between its subject and its verb. As well as is a parenthetical phrase, so the subject would be both the brothers - which is plural and would indeed take were. On that reading the sentence is defensible, but the word both sits awkwardly with a phrase that adds a third person. The natural repair is to replace as well as with and, which genuinely joins the three people into one plural subject and matches both…and as a correlative pair: both the brothers and their father were present. The wider rule is the one to carry away. And creates a plural subject; as well as, along with, together with, besides and in addition to do not - they are parenthetical and leave the number of the original subject untouched. So the father as well as his sons was present is correct, and reversing the nouns changes the verb.

Answer: A

Correct answer: me

After let, the pronoun is the object of the verb and must be in the objective case: let you and me. The error arises from over-correction. Speakers are taught that you and I is right in you and I went - where the pair is the subject - and then apply it everywhere, producing between you and I and let you and I, both wrong. The reliable test is to remove the other person: nobody would say let I settle the matter, which shows at once that me is required. The same test settles between you and me and he invited my brother and me. Myself is a reflexive pronoun and is correct only when the subject and object are the same person, as in I hurt myself; it is not a polite substitute for me. Mine is possessive and cannot be an object at all.