<p>i thought "hardly anyone" was correct....dang</p>
<p>And I think hardly anyone is not wrong either. Hardly is an adverb and it's modifying a pronoun.</p>
<p>I mean this one is too much used in society and I've read too many times to think it's grammatically incorrect.</p>
<p>I think it was a trick to make ppl think it was a double negative</p>
<p>sentence completion
although the claims refuted that the editors were <strong><em>, the uneven quality was indeed _</em></strong>.</p>
<p>something along those lines, was the answer:
lax...harsh
seclusive...inclusive
or a different choice?</p>
<p>I don't think the "hardly anyone" is wrong => I used to think it was a double negative, but I remember doing a problem just like that one on the CB SAT online course and they said that hardly anyone was gramatically correct.</p>
<p>selective - inclusive.</p>
<p>i think i chose the inclusive one for that....itwas like...selective/inclusive</p>
<p>it was the inclusive one, because since they were reputed to be so "selective"</p>
<p>the uneven distribution would mean they were too "inclusive" of other articles</p>
<p>for the grid in..the one with 3 consecutive integers multipled to be less than 1000. Was the answer 8, 9, or 10.</p>
<p>hardly anyone IS CORRECT!</p>
<p>its wrong form would be "hardly no one"</p>
<p>the grid-in for 1000 or less is 9.</p>
<p>i believe it was 9 because</p>
<p>1,2,3
2,3,4
3,4,5
4,5,6
5,6,7
6,7,8
7,8,9
8,9,10
9,10,11</p>
<p>so is anyone sure about that vendiagram one??? was it def 10 and if so why</p>
<p>and also, for the math one number nine i forget the section... shows a graph and asks for the x symmetry or something... was the answer a??? i really hope so</p>
<p>for the grid in 1000 once..woudl u count -2, -1, 1. is that considered 3 consecutive integers...since they are consecutive integers. but not numbers? i dunno.</p>
<p>who thought writing was hard?</p>
<p>Thanks for the help.... I though "hardly anyone" could be simplified to "no one." But, that's goes to show what I know. So, was there a mistake in that question?</p>
<p>Anyways, I thought the answer to editor question was judgemental...discriminating. Inclusive means comprehensive and including a great deal. But, I've already been wrong once.</p>
<p>hmmm, never thought of it that way...LOL</p>
<p>no, im pretty sure it was selective/inclusive.</p>
<p>grid in cant be -2,-1,1 since you're skipping 0. 0 is an integer.</p>
<p>symmetry was x=2.</p>
<p>vendiagram was 10.</p>
<p>yea i remember that venn diagram one, it was tricky because there were 2 seperate ones, but one was a 3 way tie and the other was a 2 way tie to the left/beneath it and i picked that one</p>
<p>Venn diagram problem:</p>
<p>I just learned this in Stat...so let's see if I can explain it. Everyone agrees that at least 7 is contained in both x and y. However, so is the 3. It is in x, y, and z. Just because it is also part of z does not mean that is is NOT part of x and y.</p>