earlier this year, the article was published without peer review or fact - checking, and is now circulating…

earlier this year, the article was published without peer review or fact - checking, and is now circulating widely despite inaccuracies.\nwhich choice makes the sentence most grammatically acceptable?\na no change\nb peer review, or fact - checking\nc peer review or fact - checking—\nd peer review or fact - checking

earlier this year, the article was published without peer review or fact - checking, and is now circulating widely despite inaccuracies.\nwhich choice makes the sentence most grammatically acceptable?\na no change\nb peer review, or fact - checking\nc peer review or fact - checking—\nd peer review or fact - checking

Answer

Brief Explanations:

The original sentence has a comma - splice error. A comma cannot be used to connect two independent clauses. Option C uses a dash, which is an appropriate punctuation mark to connect related ideas here. Option B still has the comma - splice issue. Option D is incorrect as it changes the meaning (the article was initially without peer review or fact - checking and then started circulating, not that it is now without them).

Answer:

C. peer review or fact - checking—