SAT Boundaries (Hard) - English – Real Collegeboard Practice Questions with Answers and Explanations

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between a name and title and between a subject and a verb. No punctuation is needed between the proper noun “Heather Grab” and “entomologist,” the title that describes Grab. Additionally, no punctuation is needed between the sentence’s subject (“Entomologist Heather Grab”) and the main verb (“found”) that indicates what Grab did. Choice A is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb. Choice B is incorrect because no punctuation is needed. Setting the entomologist’s name off with commas suggests that it could be removed without affecting the coherence of the sentence, which isn’t the case. Choice D is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb.

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between a main clause and a supplementary phrase. This choice correctly uses a comma to mark the boundary between the main clause (“The haiku-like…writers”) and the supplementary phrase (“among…Cole”) that specifies a contemporary writer who has praised Tomas Tranströmer’s haiku-like poems. Choice A is incorrect because it results in a rhetorically unacceptable sentence fragment beginning with “among.” Choice B is incorrect because it fails to mark the boundary between the main clause and the supplementary phrase with appropriate punctuation. Choice C is incorrect because a semicolon can’t be used in this way to join the main clause (“The haiku-like… writers”) and the supplementary phrase (“among…Cole”).

Choice B is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of elements in a complex series. It’s conventional to use a semicolon to separate items in a complex series with internal punctuation, and in this choice, the semicolon after "time" is conventionally used to separate the first item ("offered…time") and the second ("celebrated… holiday") in the series of activities that librarian Pura Belpré offered. Moreover, the semicolon after "time" matches the semicolon used later to separate the second item ("celebrated...holiday") and the third ("and...folktales") in the series. Choice A is incorrect because it fails to use appropriate punctuation to separate the first item and the second item in the complex series. Furthermore, a comma isn’t needed between the noun "practice" and the prepositional phrase "at the time" because the prepositional phrase is essential to the full meaning of the phrase "an uncommon practice at the time." Choice C is incorrect because a comma after "time" doesn’t match the semicolon used later to separate the second ("celebrated...holiday") and third ("and...folktales") items in the series. Furthermore, a comma isn’t needed between the noun "practice" and the prepositional phrase "at the time" because the prepositional phrase is essential to the full meaning of the phrase "an uncommon practice at the time." Choice D is incorrect because a comma after "time" doesn’t match the semicolon used later to separate the second ("celebrated...holiday") and third ("and...folktales") items in the series.

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between a main clause and a supplementary phrase. In this choice, a colon is correctly used to mark the boundary between the main clause ("there...on") and the supplementary phrase ("openness to experience") and to introduce the information that identifies which personality trait participants scored especially high on. Choice A is incorrect because it results in a rhetorically unacceptable sentence fragment beginning with "on" and separates a necessary preposition from the clause beginning with "there." Choice B is incorrect because a semicolon can’t be used in this way to join the main clause ("there...on") and the supplementary phrase ("openness to experience"). A semicolon is conventionally used to join two main clauses, whereas a colon is conventionally used to introduce an element that explains or amplifies the information in the preceding clause, making the colon the better choice in this context. Choice C is incorrect because it fails to mark the boundary between the main clause ("there...on") and the supplementary phrase ("openness to experience").

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of a supplementary element within a sentence. The dash after “Ecuador” and the closing parenthesis pairs with the dash after “territories” to separate the supplementary element (“New…Ecuador”) from the rest of the sentence. The supplementary element specifies the three South American territories that Simón Bolívar liberated, and the pair of dashes indicates that this element could be removed without affecting the grammatical coherence of the sentence. Choice A is incorrect because it fails to use appropriate punctuation to separate the supplementary element from the rest of the sentence. Furthermore, punctuation isn’t needed between “Ecuador” and the closing parenthesis. Choice B is incorrect because it fails to use appropriate punctuation to separate the supplementary element from the rest of the sentence. Choice C is incorrect because a comma can’t be paired with a dash to separate the supplementary element from the rest of the sentence.

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation between coordinates in a sentence. The two elements "how…regions" and "what…ocean" work together as coordinates to complete the description of what the team was able to determine. Because there are only two coordinates in this case (as opposed to a series of three or more), no punctuation is needed between them. Choice A is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the coordinates "how…regions" and "what…ocean." Choice B is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the coordinates "how…regions" and "what…ocean." Choice C is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the coordinates "how…regions" and "what…ocean."

Choice D is the best answer. The independent clauses "researcher Lin Zhi…silk" and "by dissolving…2 GPa" can be grammatically separated by a period. They can stand alone as sentences, and this is the only choice that lets them do that. Choice A is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error called a comma splice. "Researcher Lin Zhi…silk" and "by dissolving…2 GPa" are both independent clauses. They need to either be separated with punctuation like a period or a semicolon, or they need to be connected by a comma and a coordinating conjunction like "and." A comma alone isn’t enough. Choice B is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error called a run-on sentence. "Researcher Lin Zhi…silk" and "by dissolving…2 GPa" are both independent clauses. They need to either be separated with punctuation like a period or a semicolon, or they need to be connected by a comma and a coordinating conjunction like "and." Choice C is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error called a run-on sentence. "Researcher Lin Zhi…silk" and "by dissolving…2 GPa" are both independent clauses. The coordinating conjunction "and" isn’t enough to link them by itself. We need a comma, too.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the coordination of main clauses within a sentence. This choice correctly uses a semicolon to join a main clause (“Saville...novel”) and a second main clause (“she’s...it”) preceded by supplementary elements (“rather...narrative”). Choice A is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, the comma after “novel” can’t be used in this way to join the two main clauses.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between sentences. In this choice, the period is used correctly to mark the boundary between the first sentence (“On…temperature”) and the second sentence (“Adding… effect”). The gerund phrase beginning with “adding” is the subject of the second sentence, and the verb phrase “helps combat this effect” describes what adding a light-colored covering can do. Choice A is incorrect because a semicolon can’t be used in this way to join the sentence “On...temperature” and the supplementary phrases that follow. Doing so leaves the verb phrase “helps combat” without a subject and thus results in a grammatically unconventional sentence. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences. Choice D is incorrect. This choice results in a confusing and illogical sentence that suggests that adding a light-colored covering to an existing dark roof raises the temperature of the surrounding air. Furthermore, it creates ambiguity by leaving the verb phrase “helps combat” without a subject (so it isn’t clear what helps combat the effect).

Choice A is the best answer. This choice uses a semicolon to join two independent clauses ("Nakalembe doesn’t just… though" and "she also shares..."). This choice also appropriately includes "though" in the first clause, where it logically belongs. Choice B is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error called a comma splice. It incorrectly joins two independent clauses with only a comma instead of a comma and a coordinating conjunction like "and" or "but." "Though" is a transition word, but it’s not a coordinating conjunction. Choice C is incorrect. This choice results in a punctuation error. A semicolon can only be used to link two independent clauses. However, if "though" is included in the second clause, it turns the second clause into a dependent clause, so a semicolon can’t be used after "information." Choice D is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error called a comma splice. It incorrectly joins two independent clauses with only a comma instead of a comma and a coordinating conjunction like "and" or "but."

Choice A is the best answer. This choice uses a comma and a coordinating conjunction (“and”) to join two independent clauses (“The Tantaquidgeon…Tribe” and “Today…country”). Choice B is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error known as a run-on sentence. The clauses before and after “Tribe” are both independent, so they need to be separated with some sort of punctuation. Choice C is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error known as a run-on sentence. The clauses before and after “and” are both independent, so they can’t be linked with just a conjunction. A comma would also be required. Choice D is incorrect. This choice results in a grammar error called a comma splice. The clauses before and after “Tribe” are both independent, so they can’t be linked with just a comma. A coordinating conjunction like “and” or “but” would also be required.

Choice D is the best answer. The clause “Like an Elvis impersonator…real thing” and the clause “it is…look-alike” are both independent clauses, so making them into two separate sentences is grammatically correct. Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a run-on sentence error. The clause “Like an Elvis impersonator…real thing” and the clause “it is…look-alike” are both independent clauses, so they need to be separated with at least a comma + a coordinating conjunction. This choice provides the coordinating conjunction “but,” but it’s missing a comma. Choice B is incorrect. This choice creates a run-on sentence error. The clause “Like an Elvis impersonator…real thing” and the clause “it is…look-alike” are both independent clauses, so they need to be separated with a semicolon, a colon, a dash, a period, or a comma + a coordinating conjunction. Choice C is incorrect. This choice creates a run-on sentence error. The clause “Like an Elvis impersonator…real thing” and the clause “it is…look-alike” are both independent clauses, so they need to be separated with at least a comma + a coordinating conjunction. This choice provides a comma, but it’s missing a coordinating conjunction.

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between sentences. In this choice, the period is used correctly to mark the boundary between one sentence ("In…Panchali") and another ("A quiet…time"). The phrase beginning with "a quiet" modifies the subject of the next sentence, "Ray’s film." Choice A is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The sentences are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences.

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between sentences. In this choice, the period is used correctly to mark the boundary between one sentence ("The poem…exclamation") and another sentence that begins with a supplementary element ("Translated…poem"). The supplementary element "translated as ‘hark!’ or ‘listen!’ in some versions" modifies the subject of the second sentence, "the word" (referring to hwæt). Choice A is incorrect because it results in a comma splice after "exclamation." A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences. Choice B is incorrect. Without a comma preceding it, the conjunction "and" can’t be used in this way to join sentences. Choice C is incorrect because it results in a comma splice after "versions." A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences.

Choice B is the best answer. “Marie tharp” is essential information that completes the first clause — the first clause doesn’t function without it. So we don’t want to separate it with punctuation. Choice A is incorrect. This choice creates a punctuation error. “The field of geological oceanography owes much to American geologist” is unclear: which geologist are we talking about? We need the “Marie Tharp” for clarity, which means it’s essential information and should not be separated by a comma. Choice C is incorrect. This choice creates a punctuation error. “The field of geological oceanography owes much to American geologist” is unclear: which geologist are we talking about? We need the “Marie Tharp” for clarity, which means it’s essential information and should not be separated by a semicolon. Choice D is incorrect. This choice creates a punctuation error. “The field of geological oceanography owes much to American geologist” is unclear: which geologist are we talking about? We need the “Marie Tharp” for clarity, which means it’s essential information and should not be separated by a colon.

Choice B is the best answer. This choice uses paired punctuation in the form of two commas to set off the nonessential phrase "in the process." Choice A is incorrect. The phrase "in the process" is a nonessential element and needs to be set off with paired punctuation. We need a comma after "and" to match the one after "process." Choice C is incorrect. The phrase "in the process" is a nonessential element and needs to be set off with paired punctuation, so we would need a dash after "and" to match the one following "process." Choice D is incorrect. The phrase "in the process" is a nonessential element and needs to be set off with paired punctuation. We would need a comma after "process" to match the one following "and."

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the coordination of main clauses within a sentence. This choice correctly uses a comma and the coordinating conjunction "and" to join the first main clause ("In 1919 Larrazolo was elected governor of New Mexico") and the second main clause ("in 1928 he became the nation’s first Hispanic US Senator"). Choice A is incorrect because when coordinating two longer main clauses such as these, it’s conventional to use a comma before the coordinating conjunction. Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses. Choice D is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction.

Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation between a subject and a verb. No punctuation is needed when the subject of a sentence is immediately followed by a main verb. In this case, the sentence’s subject (“the innovative works of Congolese sculptor and architect Bodys Isek Kingelez”) is followed by the main verb “were featured,” and no punctuation should come between them. Choice A is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb. Choice B is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb. Choice D is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the subject and the verb.

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of punctuation between titles and proper nouns. No punctuation is needed to set off the proper noun "Wakako Yamauchi" from the title that describes Yamauchi, "pioneering playwright." Because "Wakako Yamauchi" is essential information identifying the "pioneering playwright," no punctuation is necessary. Choice A is incorrect because no punctuation is needed before or after the proper noun "Wakako Yamauchi." Setting the playwright’s name off with commas suggests that it could be removed without affecting the coherence of the sentence, which isn’t the case. Choice B is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the title "pioneering playwright" and the proper noun "Wakako Yamauchi." Choice C is incorrect because no punctuation is needed between the proper noun "Wakako Yamauchi" and the verb "compares."

Choice B is the best answer. The text uses a dash to introduce a nonessential element that explains the acronym FESTAC. The dash matches the dash that comes after “known,” ending the descriptive aside. Choice A is incorrect. A colon can only come after an independent clause, which isn’t the case here. Choice C is incorrect. While punctuation is required to set off “or FESTAC…known” from the rest of the sentence, nonessential elements must be separated from the sentence with matching punctuation. Since a dash appears on the other side of the element, we can’t use a comma here. Choice D is incorrect. The descriptive aside “or FESTAC…known” is a nonessential element that must be separated with punctuation from the rest of the sentence. This choice fails to add the necessary punctuation before the nonessential element.