<p>hey guys there was a question about the household that recieved calls there was a pie graph about the percentages and stuff … so the question was … what is the percent of the household that recieved 2 calls or fewer calls? … IS IT 57 ( WE DON’T COUNT THE PERCENT OF THE NO CALLS RECIEVED ) OR 62 ???</p>
<p>I think it’s 62 since 0 is technically fewer than 2. On the semantics of the words ‘receive’, I think the phrase ‘I got/received zero calls from my boyfriend today!’ sounds pretty normal so I think 0 is also under the ‘received’ pile.</p>
<p>Double post</p>
<p>@SULHAFAT
We do count the households which did not receive calls at all because they are included in the “2 or fewer calls”.</p>
<p>@mcpheevn
Actually both “compared to” and “compared with” are correct. :)</p>
<p>but guys logically you cann’t recieve NOTHING or a 0 call so i think it is a trick where you should consider in your answer only the 2 calls and the 1 calls .</p>
<p>SULHAFAT, why can’t you receive 0 calls? Is there no day you don’t use the telephone?</p>
<p>i think sulhafat :P:P:P is right . but -1 is not a big problem. the answer is (8,4) for the coordinates . (7,4) is wen u take the bottom line but the question asked for the right line so it is (8,4). this SAT was the same like march 2009 SAT (US ONLY) . so do u guys think the curve will be the same? -1 was 790 in math</p>
<p>Well I too took the 0 calls into consideration. If they were really trying to trick us then wouldn’t the question would have appeared later in the section rather than somewhere in between.</p>
<p>“Identifying errors
-questions for which there had been no time. No error
-A woman not being able to find a flight instructor and going to Europe. No error.”</p>
<p>I think both had errors.
- Questions for which there had been no time - should be “was no time”
- The sentence went something like “Unable to find an instructor in the US, she traveled…”. Unable was incorrect, should be “being unable”.</p>
<p>Any opinions on these two?</p>
<p>SULHAFAT, 0 calls is fewer than 2 calls and I think this answer has been proven correct on the US March SAT. See the March SAT discussion. Please don’t use insulting language when discussing math problems!</p>
<p>SAT questions are recycled? Dude this is crazy!</p>
<p>Unable to find is perfectly fine … it should be no error
There had been no time ,I think,is fine because we need past perfect to express actions that happened before a certain event in the past.
The event was that they gathered around the teacher to ask questions,for for there had been no time …</p>
<p>@haggahagga: Unable alone, I believe, is fine. In fact, if you refer to Section 7 in Practice Set 1 of the CB blue book, there’s a W question like this ‘Burdened with 3 pieces of luggage and a pair of skis, Sarah’s search for a baggage cart was desperate’ and they only underlined the main clause for error.</p>
<p>I somehow thought ‘traveled’ had two l’s in it (crazy(ly) ■■■■■■■■, I know xD)</p>
<p>The tense in the first part of the sentence was “would” (occuring on a regular basis). There was no past simple in the sentence.</p>
<p>And why is “unable to find” fine? Shouldn’t there be some form of “be”? “She unable to find” makes no sense.</p>
<p>“She unable to find sthng” would be wrong, but “she, unable to find sthgn, did sthng” would be correct.</p>
<p>I guess you’re right… Too bad that section wasn’t experimental.</p>
<p>What did you put for the band that topped the charts with its unique sound.</p>
<p>Bilguun ,where are u applying to ?
If I break 2100 I will apply to Brown,Dartmouth,and Cornell…
If I have 2000 and sth,I will probably apply there but with less chances .
Probably It would be helpful that I wont require financial aid ,at least not full package</p>
<p>which Writing section was experimental? migratory birds or beachcombing ?</p>
<p>Beachcombing was experimental, unfortunately.</p>
<p>just to confirm, beachcombing was the SECOND writing section, right?</p>