Help with a writing section answer? 700+ Takers only

<p>Princeton University officials first broke with
a tradition of awarding
honorary degrees only
to men
when they awarded it
to author Willa
Cather. </p>

<p>The answer is apparently "it" as being incorrect. Why is "it" incorrect? I realize that "it" is referring to the degrees (plural), but she received only one so I don't understand! </p>

<p>I also don't think it was ambiguous because it was the only object that the direct pronoun could be referring to. Can someone please elucidate when third person pronoun is ambiguous or not? </p>

<p>thanks</p>

<p>Since the sentence states ‘degrees’ then changes to ‘it,’ the sentence becomes unclear. The award was not referred to as ‘a degree’ and then used as ‘it,’ and the change from plural to singular makes it ambiguous as to what is being referenced. Just my two cents.</p>

<p>ok it is becoming clear, but wouldn’t saying “when they awarded them to author Willa…” be wrong as well? It now agrees, but does the “to men” part make it ambiguous?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It would be wrong unless they awarded her more than one. You could say “when they awarded one to author Willa Cather.”</p>

<p>I might not have gotten a 700+ on my writing section, but I don’t need to have to explain this question: the “it” refers to “honorary degrees,” but you can see that “it” is singular while “degrees” is plural. To use “it” the thing which it refers to would have to be singular. So if they had conferred “The Michelson Award” on Ms. Cather, it would have been correct because would only be only one of those. The correct word would be “(…) when they awarded one to …” This topic is called Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement: [Pronoun-Antecedent</a> Agreement](<a href=“http://www.towson.edu/ows/pro_antagree.htm]Pronoun-Antecedent”>Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement)</p>

<p>Lol nice discriminatory title…
But anyone could’ve explained this to you.
What they said.</p>