Question: Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge of the literatures of Europe, China, and that of Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing his literary style as much as the content of his fiction.
(A) that of Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing his literary style as much as
(B) that of Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, and it informed his literary style as well as
(C) Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style and
(D) Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, as it informed his literary style as much as
(E) Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style in addition to
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: “Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge… Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style and the content…” - Correct. The modifier “informing both his literary style and the content…” modifies the subject “knowledge” in a correct way. Moreover, the statement depicted in this answer choice is structurally parallel. It maintains a correct parallelism among Europe, China, and Japan. The expression “both his literary style and the content of his fiction” follows a correct idiomatic structure “both X and Y”. Furthermore, the use of “comma + present participle (informing) in the statement satisfies the intended meaning. The statement actually means that Ryunosuke Akutagawa’s knowledge of the European, Chinese, and Japanese literature was instrumental in his growth as a writer. It is because this knowledge informed both his literary style and the content of his fiction. Hence, option C is the correct answer since it satisfies the rules of grammar. Let’s take a look at the other options:
Option A
“Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge…that of Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing his literary style as much as the…” - Incorrect. The plural verb “were” used in this answer choice refers to the singular noun “knowledge” in an incorrect way. Moreover, Option A is not structurally parallel. It fails to sustain the parallelism among "Europe", "China", and "that of Japan”. Furthermore, the expression “as much as” is correctly used in this answer choice. Hence, option A is the incorrect answer since it does not satisfy the rules of grammar. Thus option A gets eliminated.
Option B
“Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge…that of Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, and it informed his literary style as well as the…”- Incorrect. The phrase used in this answer choice “and it informed his literary style” changes the intended meaning of the sentence. It implies that Akutagawa‘s knowledge of European, Chinese, and Japanese literature was instrumental in his growth as a writer. This knowledge acts as a separate action that informed both his literary style and the content of his fiction. However, the intended meaning is that Akutagawa’s knowledge of the European, Chinese, and Japanese literature was instrumental in his growth as a writer. It is because this knowledge informed both his literary style and the content of his fiction. Moreover, the statement stated in this option is not structurally parallel. It does not maintain parallelism among “Europe”, “China”, and “that of Japan”. Furthermore, the use of the pronoun “it” is unclear. It refers to either “knowledge or “development”. Option B is also needlessly wordy since it uses the phrase “as it informed” which leads to redundancy and awkwardness in the sentence. Hence, option B is the incorrect answer and thereby gets eliminated.
Option D
“Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge…Japan was instrumental in his development as a writer, as it informed his literary style as much as…”- Incorrect. The use of the pronoun “it” in this answer choice is unclear. It cannot be predicted whether “it” refers to “knowledge or “development”. Therefore, this answer choice makes the meaning and structure of the sentence illogical. Hence, option D is the incorrect answer since it does not satisfy the rules of grammar. Thus option D gets eliminated.
Option E
“Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge…Japan were instrumental in his development as a writer, informing both his literary style in addition to…”- Incorrect. The plural verb “were” used in this answer choice refers to the singular noun “knowledge” in an incorrect way. Moreover, option E fails to maintain an idiomatic construction. The expression “both A in addition to B” is incorrectly used in this sentence. It should be “both A and B” or “A as well as B” to make the sentence correct. Hence, option E is the incorrect answer since it does not satisfy the rules of grammar. Thus option E gets eliminated.
“Ryunosuke Akutagawa‘s knowledge of the literatures of Europe, China”- is a GMAT sentence correction question of the GMAT exam. These sorts of questions consist of grammatical errors in the underlined part of the sentence. The candidates need to verify the subject-related error, verbs, pronouns, idioms, and parallelism issues in the sentence. The candidates need to examine whether the statements satisfy the meaning of the sentence. The candidates must verify the awkwardness and redundancy in the sentence. The candidates need to choose the correct statement given in the options. The GMAT sentence correction section requires better grammar skills since the candidate has to identify common grammatical errors. GMAT sentence correction is a part of GMAT verbal.
Suggested GMAT Sentence Correction Samples
*The article might have information for the previous academic years, please refer the official website of the exam.