Incorrect. “It’s” is a contraction of “it is” or “it has,” while “its” is the possessive adjective. Here, a possessive meaning is required to modify “economy,” so “it’s” should be replaced with “its.” Example: “The country reformed its economy.” (Not: “The country reformed it’s economy.”)

Incorrect. The sentence lacks a finite verb in the main clause. The participles “coming” and “promising” create a sentence fragment. The phrase “promising economic benefit” should be replaced with “promises economic benefits” to provide a proper predicate. Example: “The policy announced by the ministry promises economic benefits.” (Not: “The policy announced by the ministry promising economic benefit.”)

Incorrect. The word “there” is an adverb indicating location. The sentence requires the relative adverb “where” to introduce a clause modifying “country.” Therefore, “there” should be replaced with “where.” Example: “This is the place where the incident occurred.” (Not: “This is the place there the incident occurred.”)

Incorrect. The noun “energy” in this context is uncountable and does not require the indefinite article “an.” Therefore, “an energy” should be replaced with “the energy” or simply “energy.” Example: “She has energy to complete the task.” (Not: “She has an energy to complete the task.”)

Incorrect. The sentence is grammatically correct. The verb “looks” agrees with the singular subject “regulator,” the infinitive “to introduce” is properly used, and the clause “how climate change or efforts to fight it may affect their business” is correctly structured. Example: “The agency appears ready to implement new regulations.” (similar correct structure).

Incorrect. When a specific number like “30” is used before a countable noun, the noun must be in its plural form. Therefore, “constituency” should be replaced with “constituencies.” Example: “People across 50 constituencies will vote today.” (Not: “People across 50 constituency will vote today.”)

Incorrect. The phrase “the second behind” is idiomatically incorrect. The correct expression is “the second after” when referring to sequence. Therefore, “behind” should be replaced with “after.” Example: “This is the second match after the finals last month.” (Not: “This is the second match behind the finals last month.”)

Incorrect. The present perfect or past perfect tense requires “has/have/had + past participle.” The past participle of “show” is “shown,” but the auxiliary verb “has” is missing. Therefore, “which shown” should be replaced with “which has shown” or “which showed.” Example: “The party which has shown improvement will win.” (Not: “The party which shown improvement will win.”)

Incorrect. The verb “emerge” should be followed by an adjective, not a gerund. The correct word is “victorious,” not “vanquishing.” Therefore, “vanquishing” should be replaced with “victorious.” Example: “The team emerged victorious in the tournament.” (Not: “The team emerged vanquishing in the tournament.”)

Incorrect. The preposition “over” is incorrect in this context. When referring to “interest rates” related to specific schemes, the correct preposition is “on” or “for.” Therefore, “over small savings schemes” should be replaced with “on small savings schemes.” Example: “The bank reduced interest rates on savings accounts.” (Not: “The bank reduced interest rates over savings accounts.”)

Incorrect. The possessive pronoun “its” incorrectly refers to “luggage,” but the intended reference is to the passenger’s final destination. Additionally, “residing place” is not idiomatic; the correct phrase is “residence” or “destination.” Therefore, “its final residing place” should be replaced with “the passenger’s final destination.” Example: “The luggage was delivered to the passenger’s final destination.” (Not: “The luggage was delivered to its final residing place.”)

Incorrect. The passive voice requires “has/have been + past participle,” not “has been + present participle.” The past participle of “empanel” is “empanelled.” Therefore, “has been empanelling” should be replaced with “has been empanelled.” Example: “The company has been empanelled by the government.” (Not: “The company has been empanelling by the government.”)

Incorrect. The pronoun “their” is ambiguous here. It could refer to the unions or the pilots. Since the context indicates the salary reductions apply to the pilots, “their” should be replaced with “pilots'” for clarity. Additionally, “salary” should be plural “salaries” since it refers to multiple pilots. Example: “The unions urged the management to roll back the reductions in the pilots’ salaries.” (Not: “The unions urged the management to roll back the reductions in their salary.”)

Incorrect. The sentence is grammatically correct. The verb “were” agrees with the plural subject “stores,” the participial phrase “resulting in” is properly used, and the overall structure is logical and error-free. Example: “Many outlets were closed, resulting in significant losses, but the market recovered later.” (similar correct structure).

Incorrect. The subject “Five boys” is plural, so the auxiliary verb must also be plural. Therefore, “has” should be replaced with “have.” Example: “Five boys have been arrested by the police.” (Not: “Five boys has been arrested by the police.”)

Incorrect. The correlative conjunction pair is “between… and,” not “between… or.” Therefore, “or” should be replaced with “and.” Example: “There is a link between diet and health.” (Not: “There is a link between diet or health.”)

Incorrect. The phrase “as much as” is used with uncountable nouns, while “as many as” is used with countable nouns like “personnel.” Therefore, “as much as” should be replaced with “as many as.” Example: “As many as 500 soldiers were deployed.” (Not: “As much as 500 soldiers were deployed.”)

Incorrect. When two singular subjects are joined by “neither… nor,” the verb must be singular because it refers to each subject individually. Therefore, “were” should be replaced with “was.” Example: “Neither the teacher nor the student was present.” (Not: “Neither the teacher nor the student were present.”)

Incorrect. The correct word order is “adjective + enough,” not “enough + adjective.” Therefore, “enough good” should be replaced with “good enough.” Example: “She is tall enough to reach the shelf.” (Not: “She is enough tall to reach the shelf.”)

Incorrect. The word “convicted” is a past participle used as an adjective, but it is incorrectly placed. The sentence requires a noun to serve as the subject. Therefore, “convicted” should be replaced with “convict,” which is the noun form meaning a person found guilty of a crime. Example: “The convict wrote a book from prison.” (Not: “The convicted wrote a book from prison.”)