<ol>
<li><p>Why shouldn't "None of the fish in the aquarium IS native" be "None of the fish in the aquarium ARE native?"</p></li>
<li><p>Why is "The civil engineers who designed the city's streets in the 1800s could NEVER HAVE FORESEEN" better than "The civil engineers who designed the city's streets in the 1800s could HAVE NEVER FORESEEN?"</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<ol>
<li>Why shouldn’t “None of the fish in the aquarium IS native” be “None of the fish in the aquarium ARE native?”</li>
</ol>
<p>Take out all of the prepositional phrases in the sentence (the test writers try to hide errors by stuffing the sentence full of prepositional/other phrases):
“None are native.”</p>
<p>None is just short for “No one.” Does it make sense to say that “No one are native” ?</p>
<ol>
<li>Why is “The civil engineers who designed the city’s streets in the 1800s could NEVER HAVE FORESEEN” better than “The civil engineers who designed the city’s streets in the 1800s could HAVE NEVER FORESEEN?”</li>
</ol>
<p>Neither choice is “better” than the other (and I doubt that both of these were answer choices). You probably thought, “Oh, this sentence can be better worded this way.” Remember: just because you can think of a different wording for a sentence doesn’t make that sentence grammatically incorrect.</p>
<ol>
<li>“None of…” is ALWAYS singular. </li>
</ol>
<p>[none</a> of them are/is - WordReference Forums](<a href=“none of them are/is | WordReference Forums”>none of them are/is | WordReference Forums)</p>
<ol>
<li>Can you post the actual question this is in? Sometimes other factors in the sentences also make it wrong.</li>
</ol>
<p>“have forseen”</p>
<p>I think it is better not to split it with the word “never” so I think could “never have forseen” is better than could “have never forseen”</p>
<p>The entire second question:</p>
<p>The civil engineers who designed the city’s streets in the 1800s could never have foreseen the sprawling metropolis that the town would have soon become.</p>
<p>(A) never have foreseen the sprawling metropolis that the town would have soon become
(B) never have foreseen that the small twon would soon become a sprawling metropolis
(C) have not foreseen the small town turning into a sprawling metropolis
(D) not have foreseen the sprawling metropolis that the small town became
(E) have never foreseen the small town being such a sprawling metropolis</p>
<p>PR says right answer is B.</p>
<p>(E) it’s the verb being that’s the problem I’m assuming. It’s not being a metropolis, that doesn’t make sense. It’s becomes one.</p>
<p>(D) verb problem, second part should be in future tense i’m thinking. Otherwise not is the problem, but i’m pretty sure not
ever are interchangeable.
(C)runon it looks like.</p>
<p>A - would have soon become and never have forseen disagree. Not sure on this though. But there’s some issue with the verb.</p>
<p>Hope someone with more grammatical knowledge can reply.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Trying to make sense of the proposed answers of PR is hopeless and futile.</p>