Achtung! Achtung! The word "like" lurks in this sentence, and that should tell you that apples may be compared to oranges. The major error marring (A), (B), (C), and (E) is saying that the "effect" was like the "eruption". "No, the "earthquake" was like the "eruption" for a particular reason.
(D) Hence, this version is clear and direct: "The earthquake . . . was . . . like the eruption . . . ."
(A) [apples to oranges] "The effect . . . was like the eruption . . . . "
(B) Again, after rearranging the word order, "the effect was like the eruption . . . ."
(C) The confusing word order gives dominance to the word "sinking" instead of the word "earthquake", the partner of "eruption".
(E) This version seems graceful and clear after the preceding one, doesn't it? But the linkage is faulty again: " . . . the effect . . . was like the eruption . . . ."
Back to the tutorial. Go to question 32.
Copyright Notice. This tutorial has been designed for the private use