<p>together with the ones that were fewer than two of course.</p>
<p>Do you remember what you got? Did you include two sections? Was there a section in the pe chart with no calls? I only got the sections with 2 calls and 1 call. And was this section experimental?</p>
<p>no it wasn’t experimental but I included the section with no calls.</p>
<p>@Nikitaari I chose “to some” too. It means to refer to “to some people”, but the word “people” is missing. This case is acceptable only if there is word “people” in the sentence. A similar Improving Sentence question occurs in the big blue book; it reads “The Islands are world-famous because many can catch fish using the traditional method”, or something like that, and “many” is wrong because it can only refer to “many islands” in this case, and the correct answer changes it to “many people”. Any idea?</p>
<p>For the piechart question, I included families with no call, too, together with two calls and one call. I obscurely remember that the answer was 55.5 percent, or near, but I’m sure it contained “.5”. Hope it can help.</p>
<p>@zth0908123</p>
<p>can u tell me more about that pie question? Was it less than two calls or 2 calls or less?
I don’t remember what I put. It’s an easy question but i might have made a mistake.</p>
<p>Woaah thank god I have some support here!! Even I have chosen ‘to some’ and I thought I was crazy for doing so!</p>
<p>“To some” isn’t wrong there–unlike the BB “islands” question, it doesn’t have another possible antecedent, so it’s fine.</p>
<p>For the pie chart question on the grid section, the one with 2p<x<3p,
will 40 work ??</p>
<p>@zth0908123 </p>
<p>Yeah it helped, thanks. I do not remember getting a decimal, but a number above 55.5%, so I guess I need to lurk the March 2009 sat thread and see if they can jog my memory…</p>
<p>@bastion39
I think it should be above 40 because 2p<x<3p means that x should be greater than 40 and less than 60, but if x is 40, it will be equal to 2y, which is 40.</p>
<p>@thejavaduke nope I got that section, not experimental. Don’t remember my answer though</p>
<p>Does anyone remember the answer with</p>
<p>5/12 or 12/5 ??</p>
<p>I was looking back at the 2009 US Forum and they were talking about this question.</p>
<p>What was the question?</p>
<p>@kdengg</p>
<p>Is it not possible for more than one country or test center to have the same experimental section? How many math sections did you have?</p>
<p>It did take some efforts to skim all the 45 pages at the 2009 forum for CR discussion.
Here I got a list of unsettled CR question
- Lion Short Passage: “lion doesn’t rent; it owns” it is said - metaphor vs warn readers (but I chose neither)
- INDIAN: MT’s second quote “difference between lightning and lightning bug” - profound vs perplexing (other choices:manageable, incomprehensible)
- MUSEUMS: Both Passages agree which statement about museums: acknowledge provisional nature of science knowledge / use questionable means (another possible answer:factual inaccuracy)</p>
<p>and most heatly debated ones.
DINOSAUR MUSEUM
- Ah-something-uh-saurus: bewilderment to the change
- they’re everything she’s not: admiration
- ultimately problematic
INDIAN WRITER - mark twain first quote: pertinent observation vs further explanation
- italicized each and every: pervasive phenomenon vs redundancy</p>
<p>@JavaDuke :: will 54 work in that 2p<x<3p question?</p>
<p>Btw that ahsomething saurus is not bewilderment. It shows her inability to keep up her interest in that subject.</p>
<p>@sweetalice10
54 doesn’t work.
Only the number between 40 and 50 will work.</p>
<p>Can’t that italicized thing be to show the impact of an action?</p>
<p>@sweetalice10</p>
<p>No, 40 < x < 50, but its a grid-in, so you wont get penalized.</p>
<p>Probably not. The only options mentioned were redundancy and pervasive, and most people agreed with pervasive. In the context, the indian writer doesn’t mention any action, just the phenomenon of misunderstanding of words in his work.</p>