<p>In the writing 35 questions, were there 2 error identification questions after each other (I think 22 and 23) with no error</p>
<p>
Ah okay, looks like I misread the option :(</p>
<p>Wait, what’s the answer to Q29 of the writing section?</p>
<p>So (for use in) isn’t wrong preposition. Coz I thought it was (to use in) instead</p>
<p>Why would the focus of passage 2 be about helping children with their interests? What interests are we talking of here? Academic? Professional? If anything, I thought the passage was attacking the narrow-mindedness of those who assert that college is only about intellectual and professional development and emphasized instead the power of college to create civil and morally sounds individuals. Hence, all that crap about voting and voluteering.</p>
<p>I helped create a tool for use in the lab.
I helped create a tool to use in the lab.</p>
<p>Hm. Both sound correct to me. </p>
<p>For “for use in” to be wrong, that would mean that “for” could never be used correctly or idiomatically with “use in.” That would be the only way the SAT makers could argue that it is idiomatically incorrect.
But we can say:</p>
<p>How to import files to your system for use in the main drive.</p>
<p>I also think the confusion comes from the fact that we often see ‘use’ used in its infinitive form (to use) so that we automatically find it awkward when 'use
is used as a noun. But it’s acceptable, albeit awkward, even with various prepositions.</p>
<p>This bathroom is in use.
Its use is worthless.
For what use are you?
With extended use, your hands will become weary.</p>
<p>And in critical reading, the ques. In the education passage about the army? What was the ans. , I remember pedantic was one of the choices. But I didn’t choose it. Who can remember the ans.</p>
<p>Now, there is apparently a lot of heated controversy about this. I initially thought the answer was “snide,” because it’s obvious that he has a negative attitude towards the “army…” but the question itself was very tricky…it was asking us to find a word that describes the author’s characterization of the army… Does that mean what is the author’s attitude toward the army (in which case, snide is correct) or How the author characterized or described the army itself (in which case pedantic makes sense…It does not make sense that his characterization of them was snide, as he may have had a snide attitude toward them, but that is completely different from how one characterizes another)…The more I think about it, the more pedantic seems the answer. </p>
<p>Let me try something.</p>
<p>I hate that John is very arrogant and self-righteous.</p>
<p>Question: What word best fits MY characterization of John?</p>
<p>(a) arrogant - pedantic
(B) aversion - snide</p>
<p>I characterize John as arrogant.
I characterize John as averse.</p>
<p>Indeed, after looking at definition 2, I am not convinced at all that “characterization” in this context can mean “attitude” </p>
<p>char·ac·ter·ize
[kar-ik-tuh-rahyz] Show IPA </p>
<p>verb (used with object), char·ac·ter·ized, char·ac·ter·iz·ing.
1.
to mark or distinguish as a characteristic; be a characteristic of: Rich metaphors characterize his poetry. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>to describe the character or individual quality of: He characterized her in a few well-chosen words. </p></li>
<li><p>to attribute character to: to characterize him as a coward.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>In the writing 35 questions, were there 2 error identification questions after each other (I think 22 and 23) with no error</p>
<p>no there were 3 ne’s from what i recall.no consecutive no errors. Ive never seen that before except in 1 test…i think i remember which one youre talking about, as i struggled a bit to find the error in one of those…but it was definitely an idiomatic error with the incorrect preposition that caused confusion because the word before worked but not the one after</p>
<p>OMG 
so obviously I have a mistake here!!</p>
<p>Do u rrmember what was the content of the ques. That had the idiomatic error that ur talking about?</p>
<p>@donnykim: i can see ur point, but I think u misread the question. The question was:</p>
<p>“The authors description of the ‘army’ can be characterized as _____ .”
I suppose now it’s clear that the answer is “snide”. the question was asking US to characterize AUTHOR’s DESCRIPTION. Not the was u r thinking
lol. huge debate arose due to simple misreading the question</p>
<p>I’m sorry to say that it isn’t clear because the exact opposite is true.The question asked us to describe the author’s characterization of the army, not the other way around. If you can validate your claim, not based on your misreading of the question, but on the actual question itself, then I’ll listen. Otherwise, I politely ask you to put your money where your mouth is, 'cause I’ll put up $1,000 in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>and FYI, I put snide myself, and I am beating myself on the head, because as much as I have tried to justify snide, pedantic seems to be and is the right answer, and that would possibly be the only I missed. I don’t even want to argue over how the question was worded, so your point is moot. Rather, I would like to see someone come in here and based on a correct reading of the question, UNEQUIVOCALLY explain beyond a shadow of a doubt why snide is correct. And perhaps I can be convinced enough that snide was indeed the correct answer.</p>
<p>the author ‘characterized’ (to describe the character of) the army as pedantic. although he did have a snide attitude perhaps, thats not how he characterized the army</p>
<p>I am not basing my argument on misreading of question. please be polite.
If u remember, the author wrote about army sth like “we-are-going-to-save-the-world”. He was clearly mocking this attitude of army. And because the question asked about the attitude of author toward the army( not what is the characterization of army- if that’s the case, the answer is definitely pedantic), the answer is “snide”.</p>
<p>tl;dr- If the question is* “How author characterizes the army”*, the answer is, indeed, “pedantic”.</p>
<p>if the question is *“Characterize the author’s description”<a href=“i.e%20what%20I%20wrote%20in%20my%20previous%20post–%20I%20read%20the%20June%202012%20US%20thread%20and%20this%20seems%20to%20be%20the%20question%20imho”>/i</a>, the answer is undoubtedly “snide”. ( I hope we concur on this!)
And calm down a little. Even I have got 0 wrong. This is the only question i am doubtful about( simply because i am not 100% sure about the wording of question)</p>
<p>Well, I am not trying to be impolite, so don’t take it the wrong way. If anything, I am angry at myself for allowing myself to get trapped by what was “seemingly” the right answer (snide) and failing to read the question more carefully. </p>
<p>Trust me on this one. The question was asking what word most aptly depicts/illustrates the author’s characterization of the army…and I almost hope (albeit in vain) that you’re right and I’m wrong.</p>
<p>I have a doubt, donnykim. Pedantic means;narrow, often ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules.
I would be extremely glad if you will convince me that army was pedantic.
PS: I found the passage online. It’s changed up a little, though. But it never mentions anything about that attitude of army. here is the link:
[Save</a> the World on Your Own Time - Stanley Fish - Google Books](<a href=“Save the World on Your Own Time - Stanley Fish - Google Books”>Save the World on Your Own Time - Stanley Fish - Google Books)
Page 13 bottom
PPS: I know about those stupid mistakes. I am not too happy when I put 14*5=60 despite having a calculator! And then like stupid morons I start deriving the formula instead of checking my calculations</p>
<p>Okay. Well, if you’re asking how does ‘pedantic’ fit into the author’s characterization of the army, then let me explain. Pedantic, in a sense, would mean yes, an “ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules.” But is that the only definition to which it is restricted? In a general sense, pedantic can also mean one who is “ostentatious in one’s learning” ([Dictionary.com</a> - Free Online English Dictionary](<a href=“http://www.dictionary.com%5DDictionary.com”>http://www.dictionary.com)), meaning that one feels superior in one’s learning such that he or she feels inclined to flaunt or impose his or her knowledge or ideas upon others. Is such learning or knowledge, however, confined strictly to academics? Can one not be a moral pedant with a holier-than-thou attitude who feels inclined to show off and impose his or her seemingly superior moral values onto others? </p>
<p>And is that not how the author characterizes “the army” --as those who narrow-mindedly believe that moral virtues are the primary purpose of college, thereby implying that “the army” beileves that their knowledge of how to educate people, both academically and morally, is the right way or superior to that of others?</p>