Over 75% of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, while in Germany it is just over 33%.
A) while in Germany it is just over 33%
B) compared to Germany, which uses just over 33%
C) whereas nuclear poweraccounts for just over 33% of the energy produced in Germany
D) whereas just over 33% of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany
E) compared with the energy from nuclear power in Germany, where it is just over 33%

OA is C. Would you be able to explain the right answer choice and why the others are wrong?

the pronoun "it" doesn't have a legitimate antecedent.

here, "it" would have to stand for something like "the percentage/proportion/fraction of energy provided by nukes". there is no such noun in the sentence, so "it" is an orphan.



EVERYTHING here is wrong.

"compared to germany" isn't a valid comparison, because it's not parallel to anything.
france is tethered to the prepositional phrase "IN france", so it can't be compared to just "germany".

also, the sentence doesn't say that france "uses" anything.

finally, "uses" isn't used logically here. germany "uses" the nuclear energy, but it also "uses" the energy that isn't nuclear!



this sentence is correct.

it doesn't use any particularly difficult or obscure constructions, so i think i can let it stand without explanation.
if there's anything you don't understand about it, post back.



this sentence is written in a way whose meaning is at best ambiguous and at worst incorrect.

one possible meaning, if not the meaning, is that 33% of "the energy" (we don't know where this energy is, or where it's used) comes from "nuclear power in germany". i.e., the power itself is in germany (whatever that means), but "the energy" is we-don't-know-where.



first, false comparison: the earlier part doesn't mention "the energy from nuclear power in france", so this isn't parallel. (the earlier part mentions a percentage of ALL power in france.)

second, and more obviously, the pronoun "it" doesn't have a legitimate antecedent, for essentially the same reason as in (a).

Thanks for the comprehensive response - makes sense!

: )

I still don't understand as to why D is ambiguous ?

I narrowed down to C and D and then chose D b/c there was some parallelism ..
75% of the energy produced in france .... just over 33% of the energy ..in germany..

I see what you are saying and you are just comparing the structure as it seems and concluding that D is parallel but D is ambiguous.

Over 75% of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power

Here we have a clear indication that this is happening in France and that 75% or more of the total energy is derived from NP

whereas just over 33% of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany

This does not answer where this 33% is happening. It might seem that it is happening in Germany but who knows. All that we know is that nuclear power is in Germany but we dont have the complete relation ship of 33% of the whole.

All said, I agree that this is wicked :)

We've already described "energy" in France. To now say "the energy" sounds as though we are describing that energy. If we wish to be clear in referring to German energy, we must use some words to signal the transition.

Hi, instructors,

I have a question about choice A. "while in Germany it is just over 33%"

I think in choice A, the "it" is not ambiguous because "it" is in a subordinate clause, and it will clearly refer the subject of the main clause.

Can you clarify it?

I agree. I think that the pronoun "it" in both options A and E refer to a subject since "it" in both sentences is a subject. There's only one subject in each of the sentences -- and that subject is "the energy. Would you please clarify?
thanks!

this is not a grammar issue -- there's NO noun, anywhere in the sentence, that makes a legitimate antecedent for "it".

pronouns must LITERALLY STAND FOR nouns. this means that, if you SUBSTITUTE the noun (with appropriate case changes if necessary), then the sentence must make literal sense.

therefore, as i already stated in this post --
"it" would have to stand for something like "the percentage/proportion/fraction of energy provided by nukes" -- a noun that doesn't appear anywhere in the sentence.

it can't stand for "the energy", because, upon substitution, that would create a sentence that says ...
in germany the energy is just over 33%
... which is nonsense.

Ron,

Can you please explain the usage of whereas?

please clarify this question -- i don't know what you're asking. are you asking what it means? are you asking how to use it grammatically? etc.

thanks

Hi Ron,
Could you elaborate on the parallelism in the sentence, once option C is inserted into it?

Over 75% of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, whereas nuclear power accounts for just over 33 percent of the energy produced in Germany

How are "Over 75% of the energy.." and "nuclear power accounts" parallel?

when you have two entire clauses in parallel, the clauses don't have to be written with all of their elements in exactly the same order! that would make any writing at best tedious, and at worst impossible.
the point is that the individual elements that are parallel to each other should be written in similar ways. here, that means that "33 percent of the energy produced in Germany" and "75 percent of the energy produced in France" should be written in the same way, or at least as close to the same as possible.

It might be easier to see choice D as such (33 has been substituted with 25):

Over 75 percent of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, whereas just over 25 percent of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany.

Still a bad sentence needlessly to say, but the meaning is ambiguous and the sentence can easily be interpreted in a way different from its intention. Is it 75% of France's nuclear energy from France itself and the remaining 25% from Germany? Or is it merely stating a contrast of nuclear production between two countries?

Now, substitute with 33 with 25 in choice C and you will still retain the original intention of the sentence.