By reading the question I interpret that ’ his dubious distinction has proved something so obvious’.
Why is the question structured like this? Instead, ’ the distinction he got for proving something which no one would deny is dubious’, makes more sense.
Can someone please help me with the structuring or relevant examples?
I don’t have examples right now, but I believe I can answer your question
Gre exam tests you for your masters or PhD, at that level, the sentence structure seen in this question is the norm which you will be reading in your masters textbooks or citations everyday. The text has to be grammatically correct and syntactic analysis of your text should be logical and must provide most info in logical way.
This is a dead end question and most importantly a wrong question. Like I said above there are few standards in place for Texts in Masters or PhD. And one such wacky standard is to use ultra advanced vocabulary which no one uses in real life but only in academia
