Can you answer these 7 level 5 writing questions?

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>Okay guys the title was an attention grabber, my endeavor to stimulate your inner "ego" per se. But my main purpose is to get help and clear some of my dubious thoughts. I shall first list the 7 questions and I deplore anyone who answers these to elaborate on the reasoning and thought processes that went into formulating your answers. I shall not tell you the source (thought it should be pretty obvious after the questions are seen) so that not temptation of looking at the pre-existing answer exists. Well, here they are.</p>

<p>1). The valuable stringed (instruments in) this display (all more than) 300 years old, were<br>
carefully crafted by (artisans famous) in their day but (long since) forgotten. (No error)</p>

<p>2). Mediators were standing by, prepared (to intervene) the labour dispute (even though) both sides had (refused) earlier offers (for) assistance. (No error)</p>

<p>3). An amateur potter (herself), the accountant offered (to help) the artist with his business accounts, complicated (as they were) (by) his unusual system of record keeping. (No error)</p>

<p>4). Twice as many bird species inhabit Ecuador (as in) North America.</p>

<p>(A). as in
(B). as inhabit
(C). instead of in
(D). when compared to
(E). than</p>

<p>5). Both her work on community service projects and her dedication (to learning) (has gained) Ms. Stevens the (respect) of the entire faculty. (No error)</p>

<p>6). In (those cities) (in which) public transportation is adequate, fewer traffic problems occur and pedestrians (are rarely) (involved in) accidents. (No error)</p>

<p>7). Intense preoccupation (on) technique (appears to be) (the one) trait that great pianists (have in) common. (No error)</p>

<p>Okay, you caught me. Numbers 4 and 5 aren't level 5 but they are level 4. But, they bring up interesting issues that may be used in formulating potentially tricky questions on future SAT's. Therefore, for the sake of being holistic, I have listed them there. I would appreciate if you could answer each question with an a,b,c,d,or e (corresponding to the parenthesis of course) with an explanation following each. Good luck and in advance, happy discussion!</p>

2

<p>

You might want to look up the definition of deplore. I think you meant implore. ;)</p>

3

<ol>
<li>NE?</li>
<li>offers for–> offers of?</li>
<li>NE?</li>
<li>as inhabit. Parallelism.</li>
<li>has gained–> have gained</li>
<li>NE?</li>
<li>on –> with (Idiomatic misuse)</li>
</ol>

4

<p>LOL deplore</p>

<p>btw I made some changes on my prev. post. sry if i confused u all.</p>

5

<p>Pardon my amusing mistake guys (but thanks for pointing it out). Anyways, I’ll wait for more people to answer (with explanations) before posting the answers and my doubts regarding them.</p>

6

<p>Sakata is correct for all of them. I think I saw them in QAS’s before.</p>

7

<p>

The answer is No error. (You made a transcription error, by the way: there should be a comma before “all,” since “all more than 300 years old” is a parenthetical phrase modifying “valuable stringed instruments.”])</p>

<p>I am going to assume that the main point of interest here is D (“long since”).</p>

<p>Both “long” and “since” are adverbs. “forgotten” is the past participle that comes from the verb forgot, which is, in effect, modified by the two preceding adverbs. “since” means “ago” in this case (see entry #2: [Since</a> - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary](<a href=“http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/since]Since”>Since Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster)). Thus, something that is “long since forgotten” can be described simply as “forgotten,” but in order to be more detailed, I can use the adverbial phrase “long [ago]” to describe and modify the forgetting. Something that has been forgotten for a long time is “long since forgotten.” Similarly, an apple that has been eaten long ago is an apple “long since eaten” or “long since gone.”

D is the correct answer; “offers for assistance” should be “offers of assistance.”</p>

<p>In this sentence, “offers” is a noun that is connected with the verb offer. If you offer something, you are making an offer. The word offer essentially refers to the act, or instance, of offering. Similarly, the word drinking refers to the act of drinking. To attach an object (that which is being offered, or being drunk), you use the preposition “of”: “The drinking of the water” implies that the water is what is drunk, and “the offers of assistance” implies that assistance is what is offered. If I offer you money, then you refer to the associated act as an “offer of money.” If I eat an apple, then you refer to the associated act as an “eating of an apple” (although you could probably phrase it in a better sounding way). Fundamentally, “offers for assistance” is wrong in the same way “eating for an apple” is wrong. “Offers for” can be write in other contexts like “offers for college students.” Prepositions are versatile.

No error. (A) “herself” is grammatical. Herself or himself is used for emphasis, as in Although he always accused others of wrongdoing, he himself was the guilty one this time. (B) “to help” is grammatical, and, I hope, for known reasons. (C) “as they were” is also grammatical. The relevant definition of “as” and usage of “as they were” is in entry #9 here: [As</a> | Define As at Dictionary.com](<a href=“http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/as]As”>AS Definition & Usage Examples | Dictionary.com). Lastly, (D) “complicated . . . by . . . his unusual system of record keeping” is grammatical because it tells us that the thing causing the complication is the unusual (unideal) system of record keeping. If I murdered you, then you were murdered by me. If a system complicated things, then things were complicated by a system.

The answer is (B) “as inhabit.” Bird species inhabit Ecuador. Bird species inhabit North America. The bird species that inhabit Ecuador are twice as many as the bird species that inhabit North America. Twice as many bird species inhabit Ecuador as inhabit North America. What can be omitted (rather than repeated) depends on what is being compared. I’ll offer 2 examples with the distinctions, and leave it at that:
[indent]Better basketball players play in Boston than play in Los Angeles.<a href=“%22basketball%20players%22%20is%20omitted%20since%20%22better%22%20modifies%20it”>/indent</a>
[indent]Basketball players play better in Boston than in Los Angeles.<a href=“%22play%22%20is%20omitted%20since%20%22better%22%20modifies%20it”>/indent</a>
It’s better to try to become more familiar with the phrases than to try to memorize the “rule” and the different constructions possible.

The answer is “has gained,” which should be “have gained” because the subject is plural and thus the verb must also be plural. “Both her work . . . and her dedication” is plural, as evidence by “both,” which has a distinguishing aspect to it: “Both babies weigh 7 pounds” implies that each weigh 7 pounds, for a total of 14 pounds. If you want two nouns (connected by “and”) to act as a singular element–and thus allow for a singular verb to be used–then you have to avoid “both” and at the same time make sure the two nouns are closely related, as in My work ethic and drive makes me capable for success. Both my work ethic and drive makes would be wrong, and something like both my work ethic and my wife makes would be doubly wrong.

No error. “in which” is roughly the same as “where,” so it’s grammatical and standard, and everything else in the sentence is standard.

Answer is (A) “on.” Try substituting “preoccupation” with a word like obsession.</p>

8

<p>

can be write–>can be right…?</p>

9

<p>First of all, thank you Crazy Bandit and Sakata for answering. Bandit, your explanations were very in-depth and I appreciate it. Yet, I still have a few lingering doubts. In the first sentence isn’t “long since forgotten” a bit ambiguous. For example, the artists could be forgotten, the instruments could be forgotten, and even the 300 years could be forgotten? Could you please clarify on this? </p>

<p>For number 4, am I erroneous to formulate a general rule such that whenever there is a verb preceded by as, there should be another verb preceded by as in the same tense (or something to that effect?)</p>

<p>Also, for number 5, can I say that whenever “both” is used in that context (starting off a compound subject), the verb should always be plural? Can you give me more examples of when a singular verb is used for a compound subject? Do the subjects have to be related as you said Bandit?</p>

<p>For number 6, wouldn’t “those” be redundant because which is already being used. For example, wouldn’t the sentence still imply the same meaning if the sentence had begun with the clause “In cities in which” instead of “In those cities in which?”</p>

<p>I once again thank you for your help and I shall post a further 7 tough questions.</p>

10

<p>^Don’t you have the answer sheets for those questions ??!! For, as far as I can remember, those are Real SATs and there is no book which contains such materials and lacks their answers!!!</p>

11

<p>

Yes, . . . a typo at 2:45 in the morning. :slight_smile:

“Long since forgotten” clearly describes “artisans.” Here is the structure: “instruments . . . were carefully crafted by artisans famous in their day but long since forgotten.”
“Famous in their day” comes right after “artisans,” so you know it modifies that. You normally would say “famous artisans,” but since “famous in their day” is a longer description, it comes after the noun “artisans.” You wouldn’t say “famous in their day artisans”; you would say “artisans famous in their day.” The word “but” allows you to continue the description by stating another adjective which is contradictory to “famous.” It is similar to “and”: “I ate a watermelon red on the inside and green on the outside.” “I ate a watermelon cold on the inside but warm on the outside.” Obviously both underlined phrases in each sentence modifies/describes “watermelon.”

In that context, yes, but “as” has different definitions and usages so not always. Look the word up in the dictionary if you want to be more familiar with them.

Yes, whenever “both” is used to describe two nouns in a compound subject, the verb must always be plural. This is because “both” is only used to emphasize and at the same time distinguish two things. Of course, sometimes reduced rules are subject to exceptions, but I can’t think of any exceptions (if they exist), so I’ll leave it at that.

When it comes to a structure where a singular verb is used with a seemingly plural subject, the subjects do have to be related in the sense that neither the first element nor the second element should be able to stand by itself. One and one equal two and, more illustratively, Both one and one equal two imply that one (the first element of the compound subject) equals two and one (the second element of the compound subject) equals two, a case which is obviously not true. “One and one” contains two elements which are important to each other and thus should and could act as a singular element in whole. The correct form would be One and one equals two or One plus one equals two. A singular verb may be used for a subject with two nouns connected by and also when the subject starts with “each” or “every” (to the contrary of “both”): “Each/every boy and girl is equal.” Also, like I said before, if the nouns of the compound subject are very related in meaning, you can use a singular verb. I don’t know the exact rules, and the topic probably will never be tested directly on the SAT, but here are a few examples to allow you to get a “hunch” for it:
[indent]A house and a car is what I want.<a href=“%22A%20house%20and%20a%20car%20are%20what%20I%20want%22%20makes%20sense,%20too,%20but%20it%20is%20different%20in%20meaning.%20If%20you%20use%20%22are,%22%20you%20are%20distinguishing%20between%20the%20house%20and%20the%20car,%20meaning%20you%20aren’t%20necessarily%20in%20need%20of%20the%20entire%20package%20%5Bboth%20the%20house%20and%20the%20car%5D%20and%20would%20be%20satisfied%20with%20one%20of%20the%20two.%20If%20you%20use%20%22is,%22%20you%20are%20combining%20%22a%20house%20and%20a%20car%22%20into%20an%20entire%20package%20that%20you%20want.”>/indent</a>
[indent]Our God and Lord is holy.<a href=“Both%20nouns%20refer%20to%20the%20same%20thing,%20so%20it%20sounds%20ridiculous%20to%20use” title=“are” instead of “is.”>/indent</a>

No, the “in which . . .” clause exemplifies something that is in the cities while “those” exemplifies the cities themselves. “In those cities which” does sound a bit wordy, though, but “In those cities in which” or “In those cities where” seems fine to me.</p>

12

<p>Great explanations, crazybandit :)</p>

13

<p>Crazybandit, once again, thank you for your lucid explanations. You have probably heard it before, but the way you explain grammar with all your detail, etc really make it easy to absorb. Anyways, here are some more questions from past QAS. Once again, I shall not answer them but I do have doubts regarding them.</p>

<p>1). Despite research (on the diagnosis of) heart disease and the use of (increasingly) sophisticated technology (in its treatment), the condition of coronary arteries (is) still difficult to assess precisely. (No error)</p>

<p>2). No one (but) a fool would (readily) lend money to a person who (is known) (to be) a frequent gambler. (No error)</p>

<p>3). It was obvious that all of the candidates had planned (carefully) for this televised debate, (for each) (answer to) the opening question showed evidence of (having been) rehearsed.</p>

<p>4). (For) any mayor of a vast metropolitan area, an (understanding of) current issues in all districts (is) not only (desirous) but also vital. (No error)</p>

<p>5). (Because of) the (exceptionally) hilly terrain, the final miles of the racecourse (were difficult) for the other runners and (me). (No error)</p>

<p>6). The seven-month-old baby was considered precocious (to her family) because she was (already able) to grasp tiny items (delicately) (between her thumb) and forefinger. (No error)</p>

<p>7). (To those of us) who (had heard) the principal of the high school talk (about) the budget, the news of the staff cuts (was not) surprising. (No error)</p>

<p>Once again, these are all level 5. Happy answering!</p>

14

<p>I suck :(</p>

<p>1) No error?
2) No error?
3) No error?
4) desirous –> desirable?
5) No error?
6) to her family –> by her family?
7) No error?</p>

15

<p>

E, No error. I will evaluate the answer choices in order.</p>

<p>(A) “on the diagnosis” is the proper prepositional phrase following “research” (the phrase research on is proper).</p>

<p>(B) “increasingly” properly modifies “sophisticated”: the rate of the technology’s becoming sophisticated is positive–i.e., the technology is increasing in sophistication, so it is *increasingly-sophisticated<a href=“hyphen%20used%20for%20illustration”>/i</a>.</p>

<p>(C) “in its treatment” is grammatically correct because “in” properly follows “the use of . . . technology” (where is it used? it is used in the treatment of heart disease) and “its” is not ambiguous because it logically refers to “heart disease.” The words “diagnosis” and “treatment” are very similar words, so it’s not clumsy at all to follow “diagnosis of heart disease” with “its treatment.” The use of “its” is very logical in this sentence, so it isn’t really problematic. There isn’t really a clear line drawn concerning whether a pronoun is ambiguous or not: you just have to have a “feel” for it. Don’t over-analyze, but at the same time learn to recognize any obvious errors. (Just because there are multiple singular pronouns preceding “it” does not mean that “it” is necessarily ambiguous.)</p>

<p>(D) “is” is grammatical because it is singular and follows “condition,” which is also singular.

E, No error. </p>

<p>(A) “but” means “except” or “besides.” “No one but a fool” encompasses only a fool, and no one else.</p>

<p>(B) “readily” means “promptly” or “immediately.” No one but a fool would lend money in an instant, as if it were warranted. . . .</p>

<p>(C) “is known” is grammatical; it is a predicate (e.g., in John is big, “is big” is the predicate) with a past participle (“known”). </p>

<p>(D) “to be” is grammatical after “known.” “known as” works, too. I don’t know how to explain it.

E, No error.</p>

<p>(A) “carefully” properly modifies “planned”: The way in which they planned is careful.</p>

<p>(B) “for each” is grammatical. “for” is a coordinating conjunction, meaning “because”: It was obvious that the candidates planned carefully for the debate, because. . . .</p>

<p>(C) “answer to” is grammatical because it follows “each” (hence is “answer” grammatical) and precedes “the opening question” (“to the . . . question” is proper).</p>

<p>(D) “having been” is grammatical. It refers roughly to the instance of finishing rehearsal and being good to go for the debate. If you have studied, then you finished studying and are presumably ready for the exam. If the answer to “each answer to the opening question showed evidence of having been rehearsed,” then each answer has been rehearsed and was ready to be made before the debate.

[quote]
4). (For) any mayor of a vast metropolitan area, an (understanding of) current issues in all districts (is) not only (desirous) but also vital. (No error)<a href=“D”>/quote</a>, “desirous.” “Desirous” should be “desirable.” “Desirous” modifies the subject of the desire: The people are desirous of peace. “Desirable” modifies the object of the desire: Peace is desirable.

No error.</p>

<p>(A) “because of” is proper because it is an introductory adverbial phrase that logically extends from the clause “the final miles . . . were difficult.” They were difficult because of X. Because of X, they were difficult.</p>

<p>(B) “exceptionally” properly modifies “hilly.” The terrain’s feature of having many hills is exceptional.</p>

<p>(C) “were difficult” is proper because “were” is plural as is “miles.” Miles can be difficult.</p>

<p>(D) “me” is grammatical because it is in the objective form, as required by the preposition “for.” You say for me, not for I, because a preposition requires the objective form of a noun, called the object of the preposition.

A, “to her family.” It should be “by her family.” It follows “considered,” which comes from the verb consider. Who did the considering? The family. Therefore, the baby was considered precocious by her family. “To” doesn’t fit because it denotes some sort of direction of the consideration, rather than an expression of the agent, or doer, of the consideration (i.e., who did it).

No error.</p>

<p>(A) “To those of us” is proper. “Us” is objective as required by the preposition “to.” “Those of us” is a proper prepositional phrase.</p>

<p>(B) “had heard” is proper. The past perfect form is logical since it logically follows the simple past “the news . . . was not surprising.” It is used to differentiate between the two past actions: We know the “hearing” (“had heard”) came before the news.</p>

<p>(C) is proper: “talk about” is proper.</p>

<p>(D) “was not” is grammatical because “news” takes a singular verb, at least in America. (Whether some words take singular or plural verbs generally may vary in different parts of the world.) The news was not surprising is proper; The news were not surprising is improper.</p>

16

<p>oh so are my answers all right?</p>