Learn English – “the distinction of …” or “the distinction that…”

content-clausesprepositionsrelative-clausesto-infinitive

The following is August 13's SAT question of the day.

Part or all of the following sentence is bold typed; beneath the sentence are five ways of phrasing the bold typed material. Select the option that produces the best sentence. If you think the original phrasing produces a better sentence than any of the alternatives, select choice A.

A Raisin in the Sun won for its author Lorraine Hansberry the distinction of being the first African American to receive the New York Drama Critics’ Circle Award.

(A)of being the first African American to receive

(B)to be the first African American receiving

(C)of the first African American to receive

(D)that she had been the first African American to receive

(E)that she was to be the first African American having received

A hint is given for this question

Note that the sentence describes a particular distinction won by Lorraine Hansberry.

And the answer is

Choice (A) is correct. It avoids the errors of the other options by using the idiomatic “distinction of being” to express what the play “won for its author Lorraine Hansberry.”

I think (D) is incorrect since it indicates that the winning the award happened before the publication of A Raisin in the Sun. Am I right?
As for the other options, to me they seems all correct. Could someone tell me why they are not?

Best Answer

B is wrong because "to be receiving" is a present tense and "won for its author" is something that has occurred in the past.

C is wrong because of ambiguity due to a risk that the interpretation could be possessive. To me, "the distinction of the first African American" is equivalent to "the first African American's distinction." "The distinction of being ..." cannot be confused like that, though.

D has a tense issue as @TRomano says. Had been implies there was, or could be someone else who could have later been another "first", which doesn't make sense.

E is wrong because was to be talks about an event that "will" happen (in the past) after another event (also in the past) - of course it's all in the past, but that's the idea. However, the sentence, when simiplified, says she X won Y a distinction - so this is a single event, not two events.

Related Topic