<p>For the second one, choice B is correct. All the other options are either awkwardly phrased or contained the ambiguous pronoun “they”. We don’t know if they is referring to the scientists or legislators.</p>
<p>I really, really suggest that you read over silverturtle’s guide. These are elementary concepts.</p>
<p>hey johnny why isn’t choice E correct for that question though? what’s wrong with that sentence, the subject isn’t at the beginning? passive voice?</p>
<p>From a quick look, and I would really have to see this on actual paper to give you a better answer, choice B just looks and sounds way better than choice E. I think, from the looks of it, that both can be grammatically correct. However, B just makes the most sense… there’s no need to say things like “in conjuction” when we can just say “work with”… there’s also no need to add a comma when we can arrange it so that there’s one clause only… and finally, there’s no comma splice error or anything that would necessarily trigger a comma, so why put one there… </p>
<p>that’s why I pick B over E.</p>
<p>EDIT: Just saw something that’s so obvious that I can’t believe it flew over my head… that’s why I need to see this on paper ;)</p>
<p>The purpose of the whole sentence is to show the reason they work together. Notice that every option except E contains either the words “so that” or “in order to”. Choice D, although painfully wrong, even contains the words “this is why”. From all of this, I deduce that there’s a cause and effect situation here… </p>
<p>Legislators and scientists work together SO THAT they can design x policies. I don’t know if this is actually cause and effect, but this should be clear enough: the sentence is giving us the reason why they work together / the purpose of them working together. Choice E makes perfect grammatical sense but does not imply the reason why they work together, it merely joins 2 clauses with a comma. </p>