Barrons pg 313 #47,50

<p>I understood the explanations for these 2 improving sentences questions but I have a few extra questions.</p>

<ol>
<li>Examining the principal movements sweeping through the world, it can be seen that they are being accelerated by the war.</li>
</ol>

<p><a href="d">b</a>Examining the principal movements sweeping through the world, we can see<a href="e">/b</a> It can be seen examining the principal movements sweeping through the world</p>

<p>Choice D is bolded since it is the correct choice. I understood why it's the correct choice but isn't choice E also correct (atleast gramatically?). </p>

<ol>
<li>Many politicians are now trying to take uncontroversial positions on issues; the purpose being to allow them to appeal to as wide a segment of the voting population as possible.</li>
</ol>

<p><a href="b">b</a> issues in order to appeal**</p>

<p>^That's the correct choice. I can see how the original sentence is wrong but I dont specifically know why it is wrong. Can someone please explain?</p>

<p>I apologize for the slightly long thread. Thanks!</p>

<ol>
<li><p>In choice E, examining isn’t modifying anything. Besides, it’s just a lot clunkier than D.</p></li>
<li><p>A semicolon is used to divide two independent clauses, but the second clause of the sentence has no main verb.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>In 47 for choice E, what do u mean examining isnt modifying anything? Do you mean that there is no direct/explicit subject in the sentence?</p>

<p>In 48, isn’t “allow” the main verb?</p>

<p>No, “to allow” is an infinitive.</p>

<p>Being is really the verb, but it doesn’t matter. B, the answer, is a more direct way of saying it and that is why it is right. It doesn’t matter if there is an error in the original thing which sounds really funny.</p>

<p>I know but I want to know these things for other questions. I basically want to know WHEN to use a semicolon in a sentence(I don’t need that regular old explanation that is in every SAT book, I hate those terms that they use.). Can someone explain with an example or two please?(Preferably use the one from #50 in my 1st post.) Thanks!</p>

<p>You would use a semicolon when there are two clauses that can stand by themselves:</p>

<p>1) Call me tomorrow; I’ll give you an answer then.</p>

<p>You could split it into two sentences, but since they are related and can stand by themselves, you could join them with a semicolon.</p>

<p>2) Many politicians are now trying to take uncontroversial positions on issues; they want to appeal to as wide a segment of the voting population as possible.</p>

<p>Is another way to write the sentence, but the answer still sounds better and is shorter so if it were a problem on teh SAT, go with the most simple way to say it. But the sentence would still be grammatically correct with a semicolon.</p>

<p>Thanks. That was very helpful. Back to my main question though: why is the original sentence of #50 incorrect? I still don’t seem to understand too well.</p>

<p>The second clause has no verb.</p>

<p>With the revised answer for 50, you are saying the same thing, but significantly shortening the sentence, improving the coherence (being is awkward), and removing the ambiguity of “them”. Maybe there shouldn’t be a semicolon there as well (I’d put a comma). I’m not sure, though, because couldn’t “the purpose” be the subject and “being” be the verb?</p>

<p>Sometimes, nothing is grammatically incorrect, but one answer will be just a better, shorter, more coherent way to say the same thing.</p>