This sentence misuses the word "him." "Him" is the form used when the pronoun is the object of another word, but it is acting as the subject. The correct choice is "he" (the use of "his" later in the subject indicates the subject is male).

This sentence contains an error in pronoun case. The word  "whom" is only used when it functions as the object in a clause. As used, however, it functions as the subject of that clause; rewording the sentence would change "whom had written only one other novel" to "he had written only one other novel." The appropriate choice is "who." Note that "which" is inappropriate, since the word "author" presumably refers to humans. The correct choice is, "his book, the author, who had written."

The use of the present tense verb "makes" in the final, underlined portion of the sentence creates a confusing meaning. The present participle is the only verb from which appropriately connects to the main portion of the sentence. The only answer choice which correctly makes this change is "making the entire conversation unnecessary in the long run."

The use of the present participle "having" in this sentence is incorrect, as the issue is whether the defendant had possesion in the past. The verb needs to be changed to the past participle form. The only answer choice which contains the correct verb form is "ever had possession of the murder weapon."

As it is written, the sentence has the frequently-made but serious mistake of using the passive voice to describe the action taking place. Not only is active voice the preferred method in structuring a sentence, but, in this sentence, the active voice clarifies a complex sentence. As the only choice to properly use the active voice, "the brief was filed by the lawyer's associate in a neighboring jurisdiction" is the correct answer.

The use of "having" in the underlined phrase is both unnecessary and awkwardly introduces a passive voice construction. Simply by eliminating the word "having" makes the clause use an active voice construction and have a much simpler construction. "More than any other person who having held his position," is, therefore, the correct answer choice.

The example sentence is made awkward and confusing by its use of the passive voice. In a sentence that uses the passive voice, objects are acted upon by subjects ("the document was transcribed"), whereas in sentences that use the active voice, subjects act on objects ("Kevin transcribed the document"). Unnecessary use of the passive voice often confuses the reader, and usually makes sentences longer than they need to be and less smooth. When possible, direct and simple statements of fact are preferable to longer, less fluid constructions of the same idea. The most precise, concise, and grammatically functional rephrasing of the sentence reads, "Kevin transcribed the document with incredible speed."

The initial sentence is in passive voice. The correct answer conveys the proper meaning while changing it to active voice.

The central problem with the underlined words in the sentence is that the animals seem to be the ones doing the domesticating—at least until the reader gets to the phrase "by human beings," and the sentence becomes confusing. The underlined words need to convey that human beings are the ones doing the domesticating, and that the animals are the objects of that domestication. Since "Very few animals in the world" is the subject of the sentence and cannot be changed here, we need to use the passive voice to describe that domestication is the thing being done to the animals. "To be domesticated" is the correct answer choice, as it is the only answer that correctly uses passive voice and avoids introducing additional errors (like "to be domesticating," which uses present progressive tense unnecessarily and doesn't agree with the previous past-tense verb "were . . . able."

The initial sentence is wordy and in passive voice. The correct answer is concise and active.