In this passage-based vocabulary question, fill in the blank in the sentence "Fraternity, then, was meant to complement civil rights, _______________ to destroy them." by choosing the most appropriate word so that the contrast in meaning is clear.

Introduction / Context:

This question is part of a passage that contrasts the true purpose of "fraternity" with a mistaken interpretation that undermines civil rights. The sentence reads: "Fraternity, then, was meant to complement civil rights, _______________ to destroy them." You must choose a word that properly completes the contrast and preserves the sense that fraternity supports, rather than destroys, civil rights.

Given Data / Assumptions:

- Sentence: "Fraternity, then, was meant to complement civil rights, _______________ to destroy them."

- Options: "neither", "nor", "no", "not".

- The sentence already contains the phrase "meant to complement", which is positive.

- The blank introduces a contrasting negative idea: it was not meant to destroy civil rights.

- We need to choose an adverb or conjunction that fits the grammar and meaning.

Concept / Approach:

The sentence has a clear positive-negative contrast: "meant to complement" versus "to destroy". In English, we commonly express such contrast by saying "meant to X, not to Y". The word "not" is used before the infinitive "to destroy" to negate that purpose. Words like "neither" and "nor" are used to connect elements in pairs (e.g., "neither X nor Y"), and "no" is a determiner used before nouns, not directly before an infinitive verb. Therefore, "not" is the only choice that fits both the grammar and the intended meaning here.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

If we rewrite the sentence in a more explicit way, we might say "Fraternity was meant to complement civil rights and certainly not to destroy them." In this expanded form, "not" still appears in exactly the same position before "to destroy". The other options cannot be inserted naturally into the sentence without changing its structure. Thus, simply inserting "not" produces a clear and accurate contrast between the true purpose and the rejected alternative.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

"neither" is normally used in pairs with "nor", as in "neither X nor Y". Using it alone before an infinitive does not work grammatically here. "nor" usually follows a previous negative clause or "neither", and it cannot stand alone after a positive clause like "was meant to complement". "no" is used before nouns or noun phrases, such as "no reason" or "no rights", and not before "to destroy". Each of these alternate options either breaks the grammar of the sentence or fails to convey the intended contrast correctly.

Common Pitfalls:

Students often confuse "not" with "no" and use them interchangeably, but their grammatical functions differ. Another pitfall is misusing "neither" or "nor" without providing the necessary parallel structure. In exam passages, blanks frequently test knowledge of these small but crucial contrast words. A good habit is to mentally expand the sentence and see which word would fit if the sentence were spoken naturally, which almost always leads to the correct choice.

Final Answer:

The blank should be filled with "not", giving "Fraternity, then, was meant to complement civil rights, not to destroy them."