1 : I reasoned with him P : but could not disabuse him Q : that the lawyer R : for an hour S : of the notion 6 : who had his case in hand was incompetent. The Proper sequence should be:

The correct answer is: A. PRSQ

The sentence is about a man who tried to convince another man that his lawyer was incompetent, but was unsuccessful. The sentence can be broken down into the following clauses:

• I reasoned with him.
• I could not disabuse him of the notion.
• The lawyer who had his case in hand was incompetent.

The correct order of the clauses is:

1. I reasoned with him.
2. But could not disabuse him of the notion.
3. That the lawyer who had his case in hand was incompetent.

The first clause, “I reasoned with him,” introduces the main idea of the sentence, which is that the man tried to convince the other man that his lawyer was incompetent. The second clause, “But could not disabuse him of the notion,” provides more information about the man’s attempt to convince the other man, and explains that he was unsuccessful. The third clause, “That the lawyer who had his case in hand was incompetent,” provides the evidence that the man used to try to convince the other man, and states the reason why he believed that the lawyer was incompetent.

The other options are incorrect because they do not follow the correct order of the clauses. Option B, QPSR, puts the second clause first, which does not make sense because the second clause provides information about the first clause. Option C, RPSQ, puts the third clause first, which does not make sense because the third clause provides evidence to support the first clause. Option D, SRPQ, puts the first and third clauses in the correct order, but puts the second clause in the wrong order.