Set 6: Boundaries (Advanced)
Explanation
PASSAGE
The philosopher argued that neither pure rationalism _______ adequately explain the complexities of human moral reasoning.
Which choice completes the text so that it conforms to the conventions of Standard English?
Detailed Answer Explanation
This question tests your understanding of sentence boundaries and punctuation. 'Neither...nor' is a correlative pair. No comma before 'nor.' With singular subjects, singular verb; 'can' matches present tense of 'argue.' To determine the correct answer, examine where complete thoughts begin and end. Look for independent clauses that need proper separation. A period, semicolon, or appropriate conjunction can correctly join or separate these ideas. When analyzing sentence boundaries, pay attention to how ideas flow from one sentence to the next. Correct punctuation ensures clarity and prevents confusion for readers. Review the options carefully to identify which choice creates proper sentence structure.
Key Evidence:
• "neither...nor (correlative)"
• "no comma before 'nor'"
Why others are wrong: C (Commas around 'nor strict empiricism' are incorrect in correlative construction.), D ('Could' changes to past/conditional which doesn't match 'argued.'), B (Comma before 'nor' is incorrect AND 'could' changes meaning.).
🎯 Keep Practicing!
Master all sections for your best SAT score