GED Language Arts Rla Quiz: Improve Sentence Structure

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Improve Sentence Structure, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for GED Language Arts Rla.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

Question 1

1. Many parks in the city offer residents a place to relax and enjoy nature. (correct answer)
2. In the city, there are many parks offering residents places for relaxing.
3. The city has many parks that exist for residents to relax and enjoy nature.
4. For residents who want to relax, many parks are in the city to enjoy nature.

Explanation: When you encounter questions about conciseness in writing, you're being tested on your ability to eliminate unnecessary words while preserving the original meaning. The goal is to express the same idea using fewer words without losing clarity or important information. Looking at the original sentence, "There are many parks in the city that offer residents a place to relax and enjoy nature," you can identify redundant elements. The phrase "There are" creates an unnecessary expletive construction that adds words without adding meaning. Choice A eliminates the wordy "There are" opening and gets straight to the point: "Many parks in the city offer residents a place to relax and enjoy nature." This revision cuts two words while maintaining all the original meaning and natural flow. Choice B changes "nature" to "relaxing," which alters the original meaning by removing the specific reference to enjoying nature. It also uses the awkward phrase "places for relaxing." Choice C actually adds words with "that exist for," making the sentence longer and more cumbersome than the original. The phrase "that exist" is completely redundant. Choice D creates confusion by restructuring the sentence poorly. The phrase "many parks are in the city to enjoy nature" suggests the parks themselves enjoy nature, creating an illogical meaning. When tackling conciseness questions, look for expletive constructions ("There are," "It is"), redundant phrases, and wordy expressions. The most concise option should preserve the original meaning while using the fewest necessary words.

Question 2

1. A candidate with years of experience in public service and a commitment to the community, she was popular.
2. With years of experience in public service and a commitment to the community as a candidate.
3. She was a candidate with years of experience in public service and a commitment to the community. (correct answer)
4. Being a candidate with years of experience in public service and a commitment to the community.

Explanation: When you encounter questions about sentence fragments, you're being tested on your ability to identify and fix incomplete sentences that lack either a subject, a verb, or a complete thought. The original sentence "A candidate with years of experience in public service and a commitment to the community" is a fragment because it has no main verb. It's just a noun phrase describing someone, but it doesn't tell us what this candidate does or what happens to them. Answer C correctly fixes this fragment by adding both a subject ("She") and a linking verb ("was"), creating the complete sentence: "She was a candidate with years of experience in public service and a commitment to the community." This gives us a subject performing an action and expresses a complete thought. Answer A creates a comma splice error by incorrectly joining two independent clauses with just a comma. The fragment is awkwardly connected to "she was popular" without proper grammar. Answer B simply rearranges the same fragment without adding the necessary verb, so it remains incomplete. Answer D creates another fragment by starting with "Being," which makes the entire construction a dangling participial phrase with no main clause. Remember this pattern: sentence fragments often look impressive with lots of descriptive phrases, but if there's no main verb telling you what the subject actually does, you don't have a complete sentence. Always check that your revision includes both a clear subject and a main verb that work together to express a complete thought.

Question 3

1. At this particular moment, your request for more funding cannot be approved by us.
2. Currently, we are unable to approve your request for additional funding. (correct answer)
3. We have made the decision at this time to deny your request for additional funding.
4. As of today, we unfortunately cannot approve the request that you made for more funding.

Explanation: When you encounter a question about making writing more concise, you're being tested on your ability to eliminate unnecessary words while preserving the original meaning. Conciseness means expressing ideas clearly and directly without redundant phrases or wordy constructions. The original sentence contains the wordy phrase "at this point in time," which can be simplified to a single word that conveys the same meaning. Choice B accomplishes this by replacing "at this point in time" with "currently," cutting four unnecessary words while maintaining the exact same meaning and professional tone. Let's examine why the other options fail to improve conciseness. Choice A uses "at this particular moment" instead of "currently" and adds the unnecessary word "particular," making it longer than needed. It also uses passive voice ("cannot be approved by us"), which is typically wordier than active voice. Choice C introduces the phrase "we have made the decision," which adds unnecessary words when "we" with an action verb would suffice. The phrase "at this time" is also redundant. Choice D contains multiple problems: "as of today" is longer than "currently," "unfortunately" adds an unnecessary qualifier, and "the request that you made" is wordier than simply "your request." When tackling conciseness questions on the GED, look for options that eliminate redundant phrases, replace wordy expressions with single words, and use active voice when possible. The most concise choice will say the same thing with fewer words, not just different words.

Question 4

1. The old house on the corner of the street, it has been abandoned for many years.
2. The old house on the corner of the street has been abandoned for many years. (correct answer)
3. The old house on the corner of the street. It has been abandoned for many years.
4. Abandoned for many years is the old house on the corner of the street.

Explanation: When you encounter sentence fragments on the GED, you need to identify incomplete thoughts and combine them into complete sentences with both a subject and a predicate. The passage contains two fragments: "The old house on the corner of the street" (has a subject but no verb) and "Which has been abandoned for many years" (a dependent clause that cannot stand alone). To fix fragments, you typically need to combine them or add missing elements to create complete thoughts. Option B correctly merges both fragments into one complete sentence: "The old house on the corner of the street has been abandoned for many years." This creates a proper subject ("The old house") with a complete predicate ("has been abandoned for many years"), forming a grammatically correct sentence. Option A creates a comma splice by incorrectly joining two independent clauses with just a comma. The phrase "it has been abandoned" makes this a run-on sentence rather than fixing the original fragments. Option C keeps the fragments as separate sentences, but "It has been abandoned for many years" is actually acceptable as a complete sentence. However, the first part remains a fragment, so this doesn't fully solve the problem. Option D, while grammatically correct, creates awkward phrasing by inverting the natural word order, making it unnecessarily confusing. Study tip: When fixing sentence fragments, look for the core subject and verb. If either is missing, you'll need to add the missing element or combine fragments to create one complete thought with both components.

Question 5

1. Many people enjoy hiking in the mountains, it is a great way to exercise and see nature.
2. Many people enjoy hiking in the mountains, which it is a great way to exercise and see nature.
3. Many people enjoy hiking in the mountains because it is a great way to exercise and see nature. (correct answer)
4. Many people enjoying hiking in the mountains, it is a great way to exercise and see nature.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to identify and correct a fused sentence (also called a run-on sentence). A fused sentence occurs when two independent clauses are joined together without proper punctuation or connecting words. Each independent clause could stand alone as a complete sentence. The original sentence contains two independent clauses: "Many people enjoy hiking in the mountains" and "it is a great way to exercise and see nature." These are incorrectly fused together without any connection. Option C correctly fixes this problem by adding the subordinating conjunction "because," which creates a logical relationship between the clauses. The word "because" turns the second clause into a dependent clause that explains why people enjoy mountain hiking, creating one grammatically correct complex sentence. Let's examine why the other options fail: Option A simply adds a comma between the independent clauses, creating a comma splice—another type of run-on sentence error. Option B attempts to use "which" but creates an awkward and grammatically incorrect construction since "which" should refer to "mountains," not introduce the entire second clause. Option D changes "enjoy" to "enjoying," creating a sentence fragment in the first clause while still maintaining the comma splice error. When you encounter fused sentences on the GED, look for options that either separate the clauses into distinct sentences, join them with appropriate coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or) plus commas, or use subordinating conjunctions (because, since, when) to create logical relationships between ideas.

Question 6

1. The historical society preserves old documents where the town's history is recorded in them.
2. The historical society preserves old documents, in them is recorded the town's history.
3. The historical society preserves old documents; the town's history is recorded in them. (correct answer)
4. The historical society preserves old documents, and the town's history is recorded in them, too.

Explanation: When you encounter questions about comma splices, you're dealing with a fundamental sentence structure error where two independent clauses are incorrectly joined by only a comma. Each clause could stand alone as a complete sentence, so they need stronger punctuation or a connecting word to join them properly. The original sentence contains two independent clauses: "The historical society preserves old documents" and "the town's history is recorded in them." These are connected by just a comma, creating a comma splice that needs correction. Option C correctly fixes this error by replacing the comma with a semicolon. Semicolons are perfect for joining two closely related independent clauses, and since both clauses discuss the same documents, this creates a smooth, logical connection. Option A creates an awkward construction with "where...in them," which is redundant and unclear. The phrase "where the town's history is recorded in them" contains unnecessary repetition since "where" and "in them" both refer to location. Option B maintains the comma splice problem and creates an unnatural word order with "in them is recorded." This inverted structure sounds forced and doesn't solve the original punctuation error. Option D adds "and" after the comma, which technically makes it grammatically correct, but the addition of "too" is unnecessary and makes the sentence wordy without adding meaning. Remember this pattern: when you see two complete thoughts joined by only a comma, look for solutions using semicolons, periods, or coordinating conjunctions with commas. Semicolons work best when the ideas are closely related.

Question 7

1. The library's new policy, requiring patrons to renew books online, this has caused confusion for some elderly members.
2. The library's new policy requires patrons to renew books online, and this has caused confusion for some elderly members. (correct answer)
3. The library's new policy requires patrons to renew books online this has caused confusion for some elderly members.
4. Because the library's new policy requires patrons to renew books online, this has caused confusion for some elderly members.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to identify and correct comma splices, one of the most common sentence errors on the GED exam. A comma splice occurs when two independent clauses (complete thoughts that could stand alone as sentences) are incorrectly joined by only a comma. The original sentence contains a comma splice: "The library's new policy requires patrons to renew books online" and "this has caused confusion for some elderly members" are both independent clauses connected by just a comma. This creates a run-on sentence that needs correction. Choice B correctly fixes this error by adding the coordinating conjunction "and" after the comma. The pattern "independent clause, and independent clause" is a standard way to join two related complete thoughts. The comma plus coordinating conjunction creates a proper compound sentence. Choice A doesn't solve the problem—it still has a comma splice between "online" and "this." The phrase "requiring patrons to renew books online" becomes a participial phrase, but the comma splice remains. Choice C actually makes the error worse by removing the comma entirely, creating a fused sentence where two independent clauses run together with no punctuation. Choice D attempts to fix the splice by adding "Because," but this creates an awkward construction where "this" lacks a clear antecedent in the dependent clause structure. When you encounter comma splice questions, remember the FANBOYS coordinating conjunctions (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so). Adding one of these after the comma, using a semicolon, or making separate sentences are your main correction options.

Question 8

1. The city plans to repair the bridge, it has been closed for a month.
2. The city plans to repair the bridge, and it has been closed for a month, so it needs repairs.
3. The city plans to repair the bridge; it has been closed for a month. (correct answer)
4. The city plans to repair the bridge and it has been closed for a month.

Explanation: When you encounter a sentence that seems to run two complete thoughts together without proper punctuation, you're dealing with a run-on sentence that needs to be corrected with appropriate punctuation or conjunctions. The original sentence contains two independent clauses: "The city plans to repair the bridge" and "it has been closed for a month." These are complete thoughts that can stand alone as sentences, so they need proper separation. Option C correctly uses a semicolon to join these two related independent clauses. Semicolons are perfect here because both clauses are complete thoughts and the second clause explains why the repair is necessary. The semicolon creates a stronger connection than a period while maintaining proper grammar. Option A uses a comma splice, which is grammatically incorrect. You cannot join two independent clauses with just a comma—this creates a run-on sentence that's difficult to read and understand. Option B is unnecessarily wordy and redundant. Adding "and" plus "so it needs repairs" makes the sentence cluttered and repetitive, since the need for repairs is already implied by mentioning the closure and repair plans. Option D creates another run-on sentence by using "and" without a comma. When joining two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction like "and," you need a comma before the conjunction. Study tip: Remember that independent clauses need proper separation. Use semicolons when the clauses are closely related, or use a comma plus coordinating conjunction (and, but, or, so). Never join independent clauses with just a comma.

Question 9

1. The report's final conclusion had a summary of the results of the study.
2. The study's results were summarized in the report's conclusion. (correct answer)
3. In the report's conclusion at the end, the results of the study were summarized.
4. The final conclusion of the report was where the results of the study were summarized.

Explanation: When you encounter questions about sentence revision on the GED, you're being tested on your ability to eliminate unnecessary words while preserving meaning and clarity. Conciseness means expressing ideas using the fewest words possible without losing important information. Let's examine why option B works best. "The study's results were summarized in the report's conclusion" eliminates redundant phrases from the original sentence. It removes "final" (since conclusions naturally come at the end) and streamlines the structure by using possessive forms ("study's results" and "report's conclusion") rather than wordy prepositional phrases. Now let's see why the other options fail. Option A rearranges the sentence but doesn't reduce wordiness—it actually adds unnecessary words like "had a summary of" instead of simply using "summarized." Option C makes the sentence longer by adding the redundant phrase "at the end," which repeats what "conclusion" already implies. Option D creates an unnecessarily wordy construction with "was where," turning a direct statement into an indirect one that uses more words to say the same thing. The key strategy for conciseness questions is to identify redundant words and phrases, then look for the option that eliminates them while maintaining the original meaning. Watch out for answers that simply rearrange words without reducing length, or that add explanatory phrases that don't provide new information. Always choose the version that says the same thing in fewer words.

Question 10

1. This meeting's purpose is to have a discussion about the quarterly budget.
2. We are meeting for the express purpose of discussing the quarterly budget.
3. In this meeting, we will be holding a discussion concerning the quarterly budget.
4. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the quarterly budget. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you encounter questions about revising sentences for clarity and conciseness, you're being tested on your ability to eliminate unnecessary words while preserving the original meaning. The goal is to express the same idea using fewer, more direct words. The correct answer is D because it transforms the wordy phrase "for the discussion of" into the simple infinitive "to discuss." This revision cuts out unnecessary words while maintaining the exact same meaning as the original sentence. The structure remains clear and professional. Let's examine why the other options are less effective. Choice A replaces "The purpose of this meeting is" with "This meeting's purpose is," but then adds the redundant phrase "to have a discussion about" instead of simply saying "to discuss." Choice B introduces unnecessary complexity with "for the express purpose of discussing" - the word "express" adds no meaningful information, and the phrase structure is more cumbersome than needed. Choice C is the wordiest option, using "we will be holding a discussion concerning" instead of the direct "to discuss," making it both longer and more awkward than the original. Remember this key strategy: when revising for conciseness, look for opportunities to replace noun phrases with verbs. Phrases like "for the discussion of," "have a discussion about," and "holding a discussion concerning" can almost always be simplified to "to discuss." This pattern appears frequently on the GED, so practice identifying these wordy constructions and converting them to more direct language.

Question 11

1. Technology has changed how we communicate, we can now talk to people instantly across the globe.
2. Technology has changed how we communicate; we can now talk to people instantly across the globe. (correct answer)
3. Technology has changed how we communicate, and how we can now talk to people instantly across the globe.
4. Technology, having changed how we communicate, we can now talk to people instantly across the globe.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to recognize and fix run-on sentences, which occur when two independent clauses (complete thoughts) are incorrectly joined together. The original sentence contains two independent clauses: "Technology has changed how we communicate" and "we can now talk to people instantly across the globe." Each could stand alone as a complete sentence, but they're improperly connected without punctuation, creating a run-on sentence. Choice B correctly fixes this by using a semicolon to separate the two independent clauses. Semicolons are perfect for joining closely related complete thoughts that could stand as separate sentences but work better together. Choice A attempts to fix the run-on with just a comma, but this creates a comma splice—another error. You cannot join two independent clauses with only a comma. Choice C uses "and how," which creates an incomplete second clause and changes the meaning awkwardly. The phrase "and how we can now talk to people" doesn't make logical sense as written. Choice D uses a participial phrase ("having changed") but then follows it with another independent clause, creating an unclear, wordy construction that doesn't properly connect the ideas. When you encounter run-on sentences on the GED, look for two complete thoughts that need proper separation. Your main options are: semicolon (;), comma plus coordinating conjunction (, and/but/so), or splitting into two sentences with a period. Semicolons work best when the ideas are closely related, as they are here.

Question 12

1. Getting a promotion at his job, Carlos worked long hours and took on extra projects.
2. He wanted to get a promotion at his job. So Carlos worked long hours and took on extra projects.
3. To get a promotion at his job, Carlos worked long hours and took on extra projects. (correct answer)
4. The sentence is correct as written.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to identify and correct sentence fragments. When you encounter punctuation and grammar revision questions, look for complete thoughts that can stand alone as sentences. The original sentence contains a fragment: "To get a promotion at his job." This is an infinitive phrase that cannot stand alone because it doesn't express a complete thought. It leaves you hanging, wondering what happened next. A complete sentence needs both a subject and a predicate that work together to form a complete idea. Choice C correctly fixes this by removing the period and adding a comma: "To get a promotion at his job, Carlos worked long hours and took on extra projects." Now the infinitive phrase "To get a promotion at his job" serves as an introductory element that explains why Carlos took those actions, and it's properly connected to the main clause. Choice A changes the meaning by using "Getting a promotion," which suggests Carlos already has the promotion while working extra hours. Choice B creates two choppy sentences and uses the informal connector "So," which isn't appropriate for formal writing. The word "He" also creates an unclear pronoun reference since Carlos wasn't mentioned in the previous sentence. Choice D is incorrect because the original contains a sentence fragment. Remember this pattern: when you see a period followed by a phrase starting with "To" (infinitive) or "-ing" (gerund), check whether that phrase can stand alone. If not, it's likely a fragment that should be connected to the nearby sentence with a comma.

Question 13

1. Meticulously researched and written over several weeks, the report.
2. The report was meticulously researched. And written over several weeks.
3. The report, which was meticulously researched and written over several weeks, was finally submitted. (correct answer)
4. Because the report was meticulously researched and written over several weeks.

Explanation: When you encounter a sentence fragment question, you need to identify what makes a complete sentence: a subject, a predicate (verb), and a complete thought. The original sentence "The report, which was meticulously researched and written over several weeks" contains a subject ("The report") but the main clause is incomplete because the relative clause "which was meticulously researched and written over several weeks" interrupts it without providing a main verb. Choice C correctly fixes this fragment by completing the main clause with "was finally submitted." This creates a complete sentence with the structure: "The report [subject] was finally submitted [main predicate]," with the relative clause properly embedded between commas as additional information. Choice A simply rearranges the fragment without adding a main verb, so it remains incomplete. The participial phrase "Meticulously researched and written over several weeks" still leaves you waiting for what happened to the report. Choice B incorrectly splits one thought into two sentences, creating another fragment. "And written over several weeks" cannot stand alone as a sentence because it lacks a subject and begins with a coordinating conjunction. Choice D creates a dependent clause fragment by adding "Because" at the beginning. This subordinating conjunction makes the entire statement dependent on another clause that isn't provided. Remember this pattern: relative clauses beginning with "which," "that," or "who" provide extra information but cannot complete a sentence on their own. Always ensure the main clause has both a subject and a complete predicate, even when descriptive clauses are embedded within it.

Question 14

1. An announcement would be made by the manager later on today at 3:00 p.m.
2. The manager's announcement, she said, would be made later today at 3:00 p.m.
3. The manager said she would make an announcement at 3:00 p.m. today. (correct answer)
4. It was said by the manager that an announcement would be made at 3:00 p.m. today.

Explanation: When you encounter questions about sentence revision and conciseness, you're being tested on your ability to eliminate wordiness while preserving the original meaning. The goal is to find the version that communicates the same information using the fewest words necessary. The original sentence contains several redundant elements: "What the manager said was that" is unnecessarily wordy when you could simply write "The manager said," and "later today" is redundant since "today" already indicates when the announcement will happen. Choice C eliminates both sources of wordiness perfectly. It cuts the verbose opening phrase and removes the redundant "later," resulting in a clean, direct sentence: "The manager said she would make an announcement at 3:00 p.m. today." Choice A converts the sentence to passive voice ("would be made by the manager"), which typically requires more words than active voice and adds the unnecessary "later on." Choice B creates an awkward construction with the inserted "she said" and keeps the redundant "later today." Choice D uses both passive voice ("It was said by the manager") and an unnecessarily complex structure ("that an announcement would be made"), making it even wordier than the original. For conciseness questions on the GED, always look for the version that uses active voice, eliminates redundant words and phrases, and avoids unnecessarily complex sentence structures. The most concise option will typically be the one that gets straight to the point without sacrificing clarity or changing the original meaning.

Question 15

1. To ensure the project was completed on schedule and under budget. (correct answer)
2. Driving carefully, he navigated the icy roads with intense concentration.
3. The team celebrated its victory after the championship game concluded.
4. Please submit your time-sheet to the payroll department by Friday afternoon.

Explanation: When you encounter sentence fragment questions, you're looking for incomplete thoughts that can't stand alone as proper sentences. A complete sentence must have both a subject and a predicate (verb) and express a complete thought. Answer choice A is a sentence fragment because it begins with the infinitive phrase "To ensure" but never completes the thought. While it contains a subject ("the project") and verb ("was completed"), the entire phrase functions as a dependent clause that leaves you hanging—to ensure this happened, then what? It needs an independent clause to complete the sentence, such as "To ensure the project was completed on schedule and under budget, the manager worked overtime." Let's examine why the other choices are complete sentences: Choice B contains a complete thought with "he navigated the icy roads" as the main clause, while "driving carefully" and "with intense concentration" provide additional descriptive information. Choice C has the subject "team" and predicate "celebrated," forming a complete independent clause with a dependent clause that adds detail. Choice D is a complete imperative sentence with an understood subject "you" and the verb "submit," expressing a complete command. The key strategy for identifying fragments is to read each choice aloud and ask: "Does this express a complete thought that could stand alone?" Fragments often begin with subordinating words like "because," "although," "to," or "when" without providing the main clause that completes the thought.

Question 16

1. Now that we have the client's approval on the design, the beginning of the construction phase can happen.
2. Considering the client approved the design, we are now able to begin construction.
3. The construction phase of the project can now begin on account of the client's design approval.
4. Since the client has approved the design, we can begin the construction phase. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you encounter questions about sentence revision for conciseness, you're being tested on your ability to eliminate unnecessary words while preserving the original meaning. The key is identifying wordy phrases that can be replaced with shorter, clearer alternatives. The original sentence uses the wordy phrase "In view of the fact that," which can be streamlined. Option D accomplishes this best by replacing that lengthy phrase with the simple word "Since." This revision maintains the exact meaning while cutting unnecessary words. The sentence flows naturally: "Since the client has approved the design, we can begin the construction phase." Option A actually makes the sentence longer and more awkward by changing "we can now begin" to "the beginning of the construction phase can happen" — this creates passive, clunky phrasing. Option B introduces an error by changing "has approved" to "approved," which shifts the tense and slightly alters the meaning. It also uses the wordy phrase "are now able to begin" instead of the simpler "can begin." Option C replaces one wordy phrase with another equally wordy one: "on account of" is no more concise than the original "in view of the fact that." When tackling concision questions on the GED, look for common wordy phrases like "in view of the fact that," "due to the fact that," or "for the reason that" — these can almost always be replaced with simple words like "since," "because," or "due to." Choose the revision that cuts the most words without changing the meaning.

Question 17

1. The company implemented a new recycling program that was very successful. (correct answer)
2. The company's new recycling program was implemented, and it was very successful.
3. The company implemented a new recycling program, it's very successful.
4. The company implemented a new recycling program; and it was very successful.

Explanation: When you encounter questions about comma splices, you're dealing with a fundamental sentence structure error. A comma splice occurs when two independent clauses (complete sentences) are incorrectly joined with only a comma. The original sentence "The company implemented a new recycling program, it was very successful" contains two complete thoughts improperly connected. The correct answer is A because it eliminates the comma splice by combining the two clauses into a single, well-structured sentence. By changing "it was very successful" to "that was very successful," the second clause becomes a dependent clause that modifies "program." This creates one flowing sentence with proper subordination. Let's examine why the other options fail: Option B still contains unnecessary wordiness and awkward construction, though it does fix the comma splice with "and." Option C actually makes the error worse by adding an apostrophe, creating "it's" (it is), which doesn't solve the fundamental structural problem. Option D incorrectly uses a semicolon followed by "and" — you should use either a semicolon alone or a comma with "and," but never both together. Remember this pattern: when you spot two complete sentences joined by just a comma, you have several fix options: combine them with subordination (like answer A), separate them with a period, join them with a semicolon, or use a comma plus coordinating conjunction. The most elegant solution often involves subordination, which creates sentence variety and improves flow.

Question 18

1. After the new software update was installed on all company computers.
2. The new software update being installed on all company computers.
3. The new software update was installed on all company computers. (correct answer)
4. A new software update, which was installed on all company computers.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to identify and fix sentence fragments, which are incomplete thoughts that cannot stand alone as sentences. The original sentence "When the new software update was installed on all company computers" is a fragment because it begins with the subordinating conjunction "when," which creates a dependent clause. A dependent clause needs an independent clause to complete the thought - it leaves you hanging, wondering "what happened when the software was installed?" Choice C fixes this problem perfectly by removing "when" and creating a complete, independent clause: "The new software update was installed on all company computers." This sentence has a subject (the new software update), a verb (was installed), and expresses a complete thought. Choice A keeps the fragment problem by replacing "when" with "after" - another subordinating conjunction that still creates a dependent clause needing completion. Choice B creates a different type of fragment using a participle phrase ("being installed") that lacks a main verb to anchor the sentence. Choice D attempts to use "which" to create a relative clause, but without an independent clause to attach to, it remains incomplete. Watch for subordinating conjunctions like "when," "because," "although," "if," and "after" at the beginning of answer choices - they often signal dependent clauses that need additional information to form complete sentences. When revising fragments, look for the option that creates a subject + verb combination expressing a complete thought.

Question 19

1. The students conducted the experiment, so the results were inconclusive.
2. The students conducted the experiment, but the results were inconclusive. (correct answer)
3. The students conducted the experiment, the results, they were inconclusive.
4. The students conducted the experiment, and the results were inconclusive.

Explanation: When you encounter a run-on sentence question, you're being tested on your ability to recognize and fix improperly connected independent clauses. A run-on occurs when two complete thoughts are joined without proper punctuation or connecting words. The original sentence "The students conducted the experiment the results were inconclusive" contains two independent clauses with no connection between them. To fix this run-on, you need to determine the logical relationship between the two ideas. The first clause tells us students did an experiment, and the second reveals the results were inconclusive. These ideas contrast with each other—you'd typically expect an experiment to yield clear results, so inconclusive results represent an unexpected or disappointing outcome. Option B correctly uses "but" to show this contrasting relationship. The word "but" signals that the second idea goes against what you might expect from the first idea, which perfectly captures the meaning here. Option A uses "so," which incorrectly suggests the inconclusive results were the intended or logical outcome of conducting the experiment. Option D uses "and," which simply adds information without showing any meaningful relationship between the ideas—it's grammatically correct but doesn't capture the contrast. Option C attempts to fix the run-on but creates awkward, unclear phrasing with "the results, they were inconclusive." When fixing run-on sentences, always consider the logical relationship between the ideas first, then choose the coordinating conjunction (and, but, or, so) that best expresses that relationship. Don't just pick any conjunction—meaning matters.

Question 20

1. The committee reviewed the proposal and decided to ask for more information before approving it.
2. The committee reviewed the proposal, then they decided to ask for more information before approving it. (correct answer)
3. The committee reviewed the proposal; they decided to ask for more information before approving it.
4. After the committee reviewed the proposal, they decided to ask for more information before approving it.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to identify and fix comma splices, which occur when two independent clauses (complete sentences) are incorrectly joined by only a comma. The original sentence "The committee reviewed the proposal, they decided to ask for more information" is a comma splice because both parts could stand alone as complete sentences. Let's examine why choice B is the incorrect revision. Option B adds "then" after the comma, creating "The committee reviewed the proposal, then they decided to ask for more information before approving it." While "then" shows the sequence of events, it doesn't fix the fundamental problem—you still have two independent clauses connected by just a comma. The word "then" is an adverb, not a coordinating conjunction, so it can't properly join these clauses. The other options correctly fix the comma splice: Choice A removes the comma and uses the coordinating conjunction "and" to join the clauses. Choice C replaces the comma with a semicolon, which is appropriate for connecting related independent clauses. Choice D restructures the sentence by making the first clause dependent with "After," eliminating the comma splice entirely. When you encounter comma splice questions on the GED, remember the three main fixes: use a coordinating conjunction (and, but, or, so), replace the comma with a semicolon, or make one clause dependent by adding a subordinating word. Simply adding transition words like "then," "however," or "therefore" after a comma won't solve the problem—you need proper conjunctions or punctuation.