<p>yes</p>
<p>(10 char)</p>
<p>i was stumped by this question, but i'm pretty sure there's a comma. without "but," there would be two adjectives in a row, and there is a comma between the two adjectives in most cases. i think it would be, "simple, versatile boat," not, "simple versatile boat." thus, there should be a comma after simple.</p>
<p>that sounds right, hopefully i put that</p>
<p>I dont think a comma is needed. , + but needs to have a complete thought(noun + verb)</p>
<p>Kian's right...</p>
<p>If it is simple ,but </p>
<p>then the phrase should be</p>
<p>simple, but the boat is also versatile.</p>
<p>Bleh, too much over analyzing. I think I should just wait until the scores come out to worry or celebrate.</p>
<p>it does not always have to have a complete thought. consider series coordination: the car, the boat, and the truck all serve as means of transportation. we can agree that "the boat" is not a complete thought, yet it is still set of by commas. when you have two adjectives in a row, there are not too many occasions where you do not use a comma in between the two. there were two adjective in a row for that question, and the "but" is just there to throw you off.</p>
<p>your right this is just too much but... what you are doing is making a list that is totally different: 1, 2, and 3. it is correct for a fact to have more than one adjective w/o a comma</p>
<p>Is it against the rules to talk about the answers to the ACT? When they were reading the rules, I heard something about it but I wasn't paying much attention. Were they saying you just weren't allowed to during breaks? Or is it like the AP tests were you're not allowed to talk about them for something like a 24-hour period?</p>
<p>The comma is NOT necessary. There is nothing grammatically incorrect about saying "simple but versatile boat." You generally do not use commas in front of conjunctions (such as "but") unless an independent clause or a list follows; this sentence is no exception to that rule. </p>
<p>If you wanted to put commas, it would be: Simple, but versatile, boat.
[In the above example, the commas serve to indicate that the information "but versatile" is extraneous, parenthetical information. Note that this was not one of the answer choices.]</p>
<p>Another alternative would be "Simple, versatile boat."
[Obviously, this sentence contains no conjunction, so the comma is okay. Once again, not one of the answer choices on the test.]</p>
<p>With the word "but," you cannot put only one comma in the original sentence; you would use two commas or none at all (simple, yet versatile, boat).
You wouldn't say, "Simple, and versatile boat."
You'd say, "Simple and versatile boat."</p>
<p>We've established it is: "...simple but veratile boat.", right?</p>
<p>i'm still convinced that it's, "simple, but versatile boat." you can look at my previous posts for my reasoning, but this is more convincing:</p>
<p>"A different kind of series has to do with a string of adjectives modifying a single noun: 'He was a tall, strong, handsome, but stupid man.' But when the adjectives modify each other instead of the noun, then no comma is used: 'He was wearing a garish bright green tie.' A simple test: if you could logically insert 'and' between the adjectives in a series like this, you need commas."</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.wsu.edu/%7Ebrians/errors/commas.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/commas.html</a></li>
</ul>
<p>I'm pretty sure this guy knows his stuff...</p>
<p>Jeff: You're still mistaken. The quote you provided even says, "...if you could logically insert 'and' between the adjectives in a series like this, you need commas."
I might point out that the ACT question contained no series.</p>
<p>The example from the website is a list, i.e., three or more adjectives modifying a noun: He was a (1) tall, (2) strong, (3) handsome, (4) but stupid man. The comma preceding the"but" makes sense in that sentence because it is a list of three or more things. You could also replace the "but" with an "and." To get a bit more in depth, the comma is actually not needed before the final conjunction in a list; this comma is known as the "Oxford comma." </p>
<p>However, the ACT question was different. There were only TWO adjectives modifying the one noun; there was no list.
I repeat: If you were to replace "but" with "and," it would be "Simple and versatile boat"; you would NOT say "Simple, and versatile boat."</p>
<p>Your previous posts didn't contain cogent grammatical reasoning, and the link which you supplied only further disproves your argument.</p>
<p>I hate to sound argumentative or conceited, but I have gotten 35s or 36s on all English ACTs (practice or otherwise) that I've taken. I know what I'm talking about. Grammar is one of the few things I do well, so I take pride in my knowledge of it!</p>
<p>The point of contention essentially revolves around the "but." You would be correct if the sentence did not contain the conjunction "but." In that case, it would indeed be "Simple, versatile boat."</p>
<p>[By the way, your reasoning regarding the parent's vs. parents' question was spot on.]</p>
<p>Maybe they'll accept both :)</p>
<p>yea, Jeff i think you are thinking of when there is no conjunction you need a comma if you are using two adjetives to describe one thing... the ugly green house vs the ugly, green house where in the first one the ugly is describing the green but the second one is describing the house</p>
<p>Ok so was it parents' or parent's? I still don't know...</p>
<p>For which question, tennisgal89?</p>
<p>i put parent's. If anyone gives me the exact sentence i could probably give better reasoning. But i believe i put it because the noun in possession was singular (if i remember correctly). </p>
<p>Also, my princeton review book says, "Note: Don't worry too much about the plural nouns--ACT seems more interested in your ability to form singular possessives correctly" Now this doesn't prove the answer is 's (rather than s') but hey it cant hurt my argument :D</p>
<p>Which passage was this?</p>
<p>Come on, people! I've posted several times on this issue. Please click on my name to see my contributions to this thread. You'll find a grammatical explanation as to why parents' was the correct answer.</p>
<p>DankStarbursts, the "noun in possession," as you say, was supposed to be plural.
This is an extremely brief explanation, but think of it this way: Since plural words ending in the letter S tend to confuse people, choose a plural that doesn't end in S and substitute it into the sentence...</p>
<p>If you're referring to the backyards of two children (parents in the passage), would you say
**Both of my child's backyards<a href="Both%20of%20my%20parent's%20backyards">/b</a>
or
**Both of my children's backyards<a href="Both%20of%20my%20parents'%20backyards">/b</a>
?</p>
<p>The passage did not indicate that one parent owned two backyards, so you can't say "parent's backyards." The intended meaning was "the backyards of both of my parents," not "the backyards of both of my parent."</p>
<p>PLEASE trust me on this! I know what I am talking about!</p>