Question 14

Docile animals like antelope are easier to catch, so a predominance of their bones could suggest that hunters of the time were not capable of regularly capturing more dangerous prey.

This revision effectively connects the two sentences by indicating a causal relationship. The use of "so" suggests that the ease of catching docile animals like antelope directly relates to the implication about the hunters' capabilities.

A) catch, a

This option fails to create a meaningful connection between the two sentences. The use of a simple comma does not indicate any relationship, leaving the reader without context about why the predominance of antelope bones is significant.

B) catch, so a

This option is correct as it establishes a clear cause-and-effect relationship. It implies that because docile animals are easier to catch, their predominance in the archaeological record suggests limitations in the hunters’ abilities to capture more challenging prey.

C) catch, but a

Using "but" introduces a contrast that is not present in the original sentences. It suggests a contradiction rather than a connection, which misrepresents the intended relationship between the ease of catching antelope and the hunters' capabilities.

D) catch, for a

While "for" suggests a reason, it does not convey the direct relationship as effectively as "so." It may imply that the ease of catching antelope justifies the predominance of their bones, but it lacks the clarity of causation provided by "so."

Conclusion

The best revision is option B, as it clearly articulates the cause-and-effect relationship between the ease of capturing docile animals and the implications for hunter capabilities. The other options either fail to connect the ideas appropriately or misrepresent the intended meaning, making option B the most effective choice.