ACT English › Other Pronoun-Antecedent Errors
Adapted from "The Ephemera: An Emblem of Human Life" by Benjamin Franklin (1778)
You may remember, my dear friend, that when we lately spent that happy day in the delightful garden and sweet society of the Moulin Joly, I stopped a little in one of our walks, and stay some time behind the company. We had been shown numberless skeletons of a kind of little fly, called an ephemera, whose successive generations, we were told, were bred and expired within the day. I happened to see a living company of them on a leaf, who appeared to be engaged in conversation. You know I understand all the inferior animal tongues. My too great application to the study of them is the best excuse I can give for the little progress I have made in your charming language. I listened through curiosity to the discourse of these little creatures; but as they, in their national vivacity, spoke three or four together, I could make but little of their conversation. I found however by some broken expressions that I heard now and then, they were disputing warmly on the merit of two foreign musicians, one a "cousin," the other a "moscheto": in which dispute they spent their time, seemingly as regardless of the shortness of life as if they had been sure of living a month. Happy people! thought I; you are certainly under a wise just and mild government, since you have no public grievances to complain of, nor any subject of contention but the perfections and imperfections of foreign music. I turned my head from them to an old gray-headed one, who was single on another leaf, and talking to himself. Being amused with his soliloquy, I put it down in writing, in hopes it will likewise amuse her to who I am so much indebted for the most pleasing of all amusements, her delicious company and heavenly harmony.
Which of the following antecedents does the underlined pronoun "who" refer to?
the flies
the leaf
Franklin's companions
the skeletons
In the independent clause of the sentence containing the underlined "who," Franklin refers to "a living company" of the flies sitting on a leaf. So, the "who" refers to them.
“Bach and German Hymnody”
\[31\] The great German composer, Johann Sebastian Bach was a member of a prodigiously talented musical family. \[32\] A significant number of Johann Sebastians ancestors and descendants were musicians of various levels of talent. \[33\] Although he was known for music of a variety of forms, one of his most enduring legacies is the repertoire of chorale music by which he improved and solidified the world of German congregational singing.
During the period after the Protestant Reformation, a number of hymns were written for use in the common worship of the Christians of the time. \[34\] The structured form of these compositions werewell suited for congregational singing although theywould sound strange to our contemporary ears. \[35\] The harmonies and meters of these hymns are very close in character to the music with which we are familiar. They lack some of the standard structural elements that we take for granted in this form of organized \[36\] Western music, these small differences would stand out to our sensibilities.
It was the great glory of Johann Sebastian Bach to have harmonized a great number of these hymns, often penning multiple such harmonies. \[37\] One solitary single melody might be made by Bach into three, four, or even five different harmonic compositions. \[38\] This amazing feat of musical prowess is no smalladdition to the original behest of Lutheran hymns that Bach had inherited from his fellow religious brethren. \[39\] Many of these harmonies remain to this day as classic renditions of these songs. \[40\] They are sung not only in the German world but inProtestant and Catholic services. \[41\] Indeed they are even sung in wholly secular concerts thanks to their great beauty!
Interestingly enough, Bach was more recognized as a talented performer, rather than composer, of music in his own lifetime. While he was still composing, knowledge of Bach’s work was limited to music connoisseurs who happened to be physically near places \[42\] he lived and worked. It was not until the early 19th century, when the first biography of Bach was published, that academic and popular interest \[43\] truly picked up steam. In the two centuries that followed, his works have continued to proliferate in both religious and purely musical contexts.
This great diffusion of one mans’ work is a testament to his prodigious talent. \[44\] It also stands as a testament to the fact that Bach’s work came at a pivotal time when the Protestant hymnody was crystallizing, as well as when Western harmonies were coming into a particular expression that is known as the Baroque. \[45\]
Choose the answer that best corrects section \[39\].
NO CHANGE
Many of these harmonies remain, to this day, as classic renditions of these songs.
Many of these harmonies remains to this day as classic renditions of these songs.
Many of those harmonies remain to this day as classic renditions of these songs.
As written, there is no issue with this sentence. One option adds commas, but these do not help to clarify the content in any significant way. (Indeed, they only make it more confusing.) Another option changes the verb to a singular form of the verb—i.e. to "remain." This is not acceptable, given the plural subject. The sentence is a simple declaration, so no exclamation point is needed. Finally, it is not necessary to change "these" to "those." This is an inappropriate shift in how we are referring to the songs. There really has been no distinction between "these" and "those" throughout the passage.
Adapted from The Sorrows of Young Werther by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1774; trans. Boylan 1854)
That the life of man is but a dream, many a man has surmised heretofore. I, too, am everywhere pursued by this feeling. When I consider the narrow limits within which our active and inquiring faculties are confined, I am silent. Likewise, when I see how all our energies are wasted in providing for mere necessities, which again has no further end than to prolong a wretched existence, I find myself to be silenced. Indeed, discovering that all our satisfaction concerning certain subjects of investigation ends in nothing better than a passive resignation, while we amuse ourselves painting our prison-walls with bright figures and brilliant landscapes—when I consider all this Wilhelm—I am silent. I examine my own being, and find there a world, but a world rather of imagination and dim desires, than of distinctness and living power. Then, everything swims before my senses, and I smile and dream while pursuing my way through the world.
All learned professors and doctors are agreed that children do not comprehend the cause of their desires; however, nobody is willing to acknowledge that the grown-ups should wander about this earth like children, without knowing whence they come or whither they go, influenced as little by fixed motives but, instead, guided like them by biscuits, sugar-plums, and the rod.
I know what you will say in reply. Indeed, I am ready to admit that they are happiest, who, like children, amuse themselves with their playthings, dress and undress their dolls. They are happiest, who attentively watch the cupboard, where mamma has locked up her sweet things, and, when at last they get a delicious morsel, eat it greedily, and exclaim, "More!" These are certainly happy beings; but others also are objects of envy, who dignify their paltry employments (and sometimes even their passions) with pompous titles, representing them to mankind as gigantic achievements performed for their welfare and glory. However, the man who humbly acknowledges the vanity of all this, who observes with what pleasure the thriving citizen converts his little garden into a paradise, and how patiently even the poor man pursues his weary way under his burden, and how all wish equally to behold the light of the sun a little longer—yes, such a man is at peace, and creates his own world within himself. Indeed, he is also happy precisely because he is a man. And then, however limited his sphere, he still preserves in his bosom the sweet feeling of liberty and knows that he can quit his prison whenever he likes.
What is the best form of the bolded pronoun "myself"?
NO CHANGE
me
mine
I
The verb "to find" is being used reflexively in this sentence. The subject is not finding something else outside of himself. Instead, he is finding (i.e. discovering) himself to be in a certain state—to be silenced. Such a use of the verb requires the reflexive pronoun "myself."
The house stood, at the bottom of a hill, making it hard to see from the street. The owner wants it that way, as he had no use for any of his neighbors. “Nosy sneaks and cheats” he would to say to his son. Not that his son ever really listening. The old man did not see him very much, either at his home or going anywhere else. Every time he did see him, his son would just complain about how his house was dark musty, and filthy. The old man did not need such criticism, especially from only his blood relative. He had lived in that house for fifty years, and planned to live there as long as he possibly could. While he lived there, his neighbors would never see him or his house if he could help it. He could take care of him, and steadfastly refused to allow anyone to help. In his tiny house, at the bottom of the hill, the old man was content to be alone, and believed he was living perfect.
Choose the answer that best corrects the bolded portion of the passage. If the bolded portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
He could take care of himself,
NO CHANGE
He could taking care of him,
He can take care of him,
The use of the simple objective pronoun "him" in the underlined sentence is confusing, as it could refer to either of the two men discussed in the passage. By replacing "him" with the reflexive pronoun "himself," which can properly refer back to the subject of the sentence, this confusion is clarified. Therefore, the correct answer choice is the only one that uses the reflexive pronoun "himself," "He could take care of himself."
Travelling can be both fun stressful. If you leaves the country, you should always keep your passport with you. A domestic trip may be more palatable to the xenophobic. However, even a short road trip can be scary than staying at home. People would be wise to simply treat them to a movie.
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the passage. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
People would be wise to simply treat themselves to a movie.
People would be wise to simply treat themself to a movie.
People would be wise to simply treat ourself to a movie.
People would be wise to simply treat yourself to a movie.
NO CHANGE
Reflexive pronouns are used to refer back to the subject of the sentence. The subject is "people," which is plural, so the reflexive pronoun must also be plural. "Ourself" and "yourself" do not refer to "people."
“On the Nature of Belief”
Belief and faith often are critiqued in a scientific culture. It can seem that mere belief is a replacement for science made available to soothe the ignorant masses. There is some truth to such accusations, and many people do use belief as a screen to cover their own ignorance about the truths of reality. Everyone should be aware, however, that almost every single human being have these kinds of “blind spots.” We all live with many things that we merely believe, all of which are so central to ones world view.
Even if we set aside all such types of beliefs, there still remains a broad terrain of human life in which faith and belief remain—even if we ignore all religious matters whatsoever. Imagine the scientist who’s work on brain neurons depends upon many discoveries made by many other people. Yes, if it were possible, it would be better for such a person to know all of the details that they accept merely at the word of other scientists. In all cases, seeing directly is more fulfilling than merely hearing about something.
However, is the scientist better off when he or she knows only what they have experienced directly. Although it is preferable that he or she knows such facts. However, it is impossible to investigate everything. Sometimes, one must extend one’s own vision with the vision of someone else. In a way, the person who thus “takes it on faith” gains a further vision.
Such faith always relies upon the credibility of the person who shares the experience, of course. For one person to believe on faith what another person says, it is presupposed that the other person is not a liar and actually could have experienced the matter in question. This means that even the “scientific believer” must take the risk of placing credibility in someone who has witnessed things that he or she has not seen. While this does not vindicate every kind of faith that people have had, it does provide a telling sign that faith, as such, is not always the refuge of the ignorant. Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientists, who’s daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!
Choose the answer that best corrects the bolded and underlined portion of the passage. If the bolded and underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientists, whose daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!
NO CHANGE
Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientists', who’s daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!
Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientist's, who’s daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!
Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientist's, whose daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!
The error here is the misuse of the possessive form of the relative pronoun "who." The correct form is "whose." This is needed for linking "scientists" to "daring and investigative work." Notice that "scientists" is merely meant to be a plural noun. Therefore, do not change it into a possessive form like "scientist's" or "scientists'." These alterations are not correct.
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
Fourth Period is the class where I can relax and enjoy some time with my friends without feeling stressed by projects and exams.
time when
NO CHANGE
place where
room in which
class where
"Fourth Period" refers to a time, not a place; thus, the pronoun "when" is appropriate here.
As a child the only thing I wanted to be was a race car driver. My mothers family all lived in central Indiana, and I went to the Indianapolis 500 every year growing up. Between the colors on the cars the speed of the race and the enthusiasm of the crowd, nothing in the world seemed more exciting to a child. I would lay awake at night thinking about getting behind the wheel of my own race car. My bedroom walls were adorned with posters of the all great racers from all over the world.
When I was a teenager, I had the opportunity to race go karts on small tracks against other kids my age. Very quickly I realized I am the terrible driver. Any bumping with another driver was too much for me to handle, and I could not take the turns quick enough to keep pace with the best drivers. None of this diminished my love of racing, however, because just being at the track was such a thrill. The noise, the speed, and rushing were all more exciting from the pits than from the grandstand. If I could never be in the driver’s seat, then I would place myself behind the scenes.
With this new focus, I began studying mechanical engineering and automotive design. I might not have been able to drive a race car; but now I could design a car, build a car, and engineer it to win a race. The drivers still get all the credit for the championships, but everyone knows they would never win without the people like myself.
Choose the answer that best corrects the bolded portion of the passage. If the bolded portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
without the people like me
NO CHANGE
without the persons like myself
without people like myself
The use of the reflexive pronoun "myself" in this sentence is wrong, as a reflexive pronoun needs a previous use of the simple pronoun to refer back to. The sentence works perfectly well with the simple first person objective pronoun, making the correct answer choice "without the people like me."
There once was a shepherd boy whom sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. He was hot and exhausted fanning himself, rapidly in a feeble attempt to cool himself down. On top of that, he had never been so bored before.
To amuse himself, he decided to play a joke. He put his hands around his mouth and yelled in a loud voice, "Wolf! Wolf! A wolf is chasing the sheep!”
They came running. They asked the boy, “What’s going on? Did you yell ‘A wolf is chasing the sheep?’ ”
The boy laughed. “It was just a joke, everyone.”
The people fumed, but they all returned to their homes.
The next day, the boy bored again decided to amuse himself again. He bellowed, “Wolf! Wolf!”
Again, the townspeople came running. Once they arrived and witnessed the laughing boy, they realized they’d been tricked a second time. Nonetheless, they returned home and irritated resolved to never fall for the trick again for third time.
The next day, the boy was watching his sheep. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a wolf appeared from behind the bushes. With its teeth bared, the boy cowered as the wolf approached the sheep. Terrified, he called, “Help! A wolf! A wolf is here!”
The people ignored his cries. “That mischievous boy,” they all said to one another. “He must think he can fool us again.” But not one of them came running.
No one was there to witness as the wolf ate every last sheep on the hillside, as the boy helplessly cowered behind a bush. As the boy hid, he shook his head. “I shall never fib again,” he resolved to himself.
In the sentence, "There once was a shepherd boy whom sat on the hillside watching the village sheep," choose the best alternative for the underlined portion.
who
NO CHANGE
he
was
that
In this sentence, "who" is used to add a phrase modify the subject, which is the boy. "Whom" would be used if the boy was the indirect object of the sentence, but he is not. "He," "was," and "that" do not introduce the modifying phrase correctly. "Who" does introduce a modifying phrase and refers to the subject of the sentence, so it is the correct choice.
“The Common Good: The United Aim of Many” \[23\]
Among the many topics that are misunderstood \[16\] in political science, and political philosophy, the notion of the “common good” ranks foremost. Often, we think of the common good as being nothing more than getting “the most things for the most people.” For example, when a person makes multiple millions of dollars, people will often say, \[17\] “He should give back some of that money, for the sake of the common good.” Whether or not such people \[18\] should do this with his money, this is really an improper use of the expression the common good.
A better way to understand the common good is to think about common ends or common goals. An example will help to explain this. Think of a group of musicians on a stage. If all of these people came together to practice in the same room, we wouldn’t call them a symphony. \[19\] A mass of people just playing any music whatsoever are not a symphony. A symphony is an organized group; a mass of people is just a mass of people. Nothing physically differs regarding the mass of people and the symphony. \[20\] They are both made up of the same “stuff,” namely a group of musicians.
However, a common good changes \[21\] this mass into something that they never could be without that common good. \[22\] When these musicians come together to play the Dies Irae of Mozart, they become something that they never were as individuals. Each member of the group uses his or her personal skill for the sake of a new, common performance. Perhaps the tuba player loves to play loudly. Perhaps the lead violinist loves playing quickly. These preferences must be channeled and limited for the sake of the common enterprise of playing Mozart’s stirring piece of music. \[23\] The desires of the individual instrumentalists, whom play the music, no longer reigns supreme.
The common good unites this group. If you were to ask the tuba player, what are you doing, he would answer, “Taking part in the symphonic playing of the Dies Irae.” \[24\] Then, if you were to ask any other musician the same question, he or she would answer in the same way. The answer would not be, “playing the Dies Irae my way.” If that were the answer, the musician would not be part of the symphony. He or she would be doing something private, not something that is truly common.
How should underlined selection \[23\] be changed?
The desires of the individual instrumentalists, who play the music, no longer reign supreme.
The desires of the individual instrumentalists, who play the music, no longer reigns supreme.
The desires of the individual instrumentalists, whom play the music, no longer reign supreme.
NO CHANGE
There are two errors in this sentence. First, the relative pronoun "whom" should be "who." This is because it does not play the part of an object in the relative clause that it introduces. Instead, "who" indicates the subject of the clause. It stands in for "instrumentalists" and indicates the subject for "play." Second, the main subject is "desires." This requires a verb that does not have an s at the end. Therefore, reigns should become reign.