<p>Im pretty close to getting perfectsish on the writing section except for two small problems: tense and pronoun ambiguity. Its not even the more obvious types of ambiguity, but even more of the more wishywashy types.</p>
<p>Tense: Often in sentences with multiple verbs with different senses, I can't seem to pinpoint if there's a tense error or not. like "(Crossing and recrossing) the stream, stepping on or over slippery rocks, and (following) a trail (that grew) steeper and steeper, the hikers soon realized how (challenging) their day would be.</p>
<p>The answer for it is actually no error, but I'm always inclined to put "that grew" as the error because its past tense and part of the sentence is in present, while some of it is in past. However it sounds grammatically correct and most of the time when I get these problems wrong the sentence sounds somewhat right. If it sounds right but seems to be wrong cause it doesn"t match the tenses, do I still just say its no error? Or is there a better technique of finding the right answer. Because I'm always hesitant and it takes up a bunch of time for me.</p>
<p>Secondly for ambiguity: "(For) decades, scientists analyzed masses of public health statistics before (they) found a..."</p>
<p>The answer is no error, but can't they refer to either masses of statistics or scientists? Or is it because its completely obvious that its referring to scientists that its no error? Do I choose pronoun ambiguity only when its completely obvious that its an ambiguous error? Also how do I deal with examples of ambiguity where "it" or "they" doesn't refer to anything, or there is a noun in a sentence, but it refers to the wrong thing? Do I make a judgement call and guess if the sentence actually meant to refer to that noun?</p>
<p>Well, for the first one, the whole sentence is past (“grew,” “realized”). “Crossing and recrossing” are participles and aren’t acting as verbs.</p>
<p>For the second one, you would have to post the remainder of the sentence, but I suspect it would not make any sense if you took “they” to mean “statistics,” right?</p>
<p><a href=“Crossing%20and%20recrossing”>quote</a> the stream, stepping on or over slippery rocks, and (following) a trail (that grew) steeper and steeper, the hikers soon realized how (challenging) their day would be.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This sentence is in the past tense. “crossing and recrossing …”, “stepping on and over …”, “following …” are participial phrases. They function as adjectives. They modify the noun “hikers”. They don’t carry a sense of “time”. The verb “would be” is a conditional construction – modal. It relates “possibility” as seen by someone in the past. The action itself is in the past – i.e. “grew” and “realized”.</p>
<p><a href=“For”>quote</a> decades, scientists analyzed masses of public health statistics before (they) found a…
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There is no ambiguity in this fragment. The antecedent of they is scientists.</p>
<p>Can you provide an example where you think there is “ambiguity” and where a “judgment” call may save the day? In practice if there is ambiguity regarding the antecedent there is a grammar error. You shouldn’t ever need to make a judgment call. My sense is that your question as posed is theoretical. Provide some examples and perhaps we can help.</p>
<p>So I have to differentiate between participles/gerunds and verbs. If its a normal present tense verb (Like eat) in a sentence that has clearly past tense verbs, I can assume its wrong?</p>
<p>Another example for ambiguity: "The company has begun manufacturing dishwasher soaps in bright colors because consumers respond to (this) more eagerly than to dull, ordinary colors.</p>
<p>Is “this” wrong because it can refer to both the “manufacturing dishwasher soaps” and “bright colors”? I thought it was obvious enough that it was comparing colors to colors cause it makes a direct comparison to “dull, ordinary colors”</p>
<p>Here “this” is at best sloppy writing. “this” is compared to “dull ordinary colors”. The logical “antecedent” in the sentence is “(bright) colors”. But the writer suggests that “this” refers to what the manufacturer does. The antecedent is vague – a common and sometime acceptable usage in spoken/conversational English – but not in written English</p>
<p>Here’s a possible rewrite that’s unambiguous and grammatically correct:</p>
<p>The company has begun manufacturing dishwasher soaps in bright colors because consumers respond to appealing bright packaging more eagerly than to dull packaging.</p>
<p>Does it suggest that “this” refers to the manufacturer does because “in bright colors” is a preposition? I kind of don’t get why the sentence refers to the manufacturer instead of bright colors; or is it because it could refer to either that its wrong.</p>
<p>I’m not really having trouble identifying the error, its more of I’m not sure if its actually an error when its not.</p>