<p>“There shouldn’t be “so” or any word in that spot for question 12. That doesn’t make sense grammatically…”</p>
<p>I agree. I dropped the “so” and didn’t use “with” either. The sentence had more fluidity without those words.</p>
<p>“After playing the game, our shoes were covered in red dirt, our legs were colored with it.”</p>
<p>This is correct as is.</p>
<p>^then there r two verbs In one sentence</p>
<p>what was the one about the most vivid description? when she’s like under the canoe?</p>
<p>@taylordemon i put the one that described it like a cave.</p>
<p>What was the one about the farm asking which sentence set up the game the best? i put no change (something along the lines of “the constant foot work meant nothing would grow in the red dirt”)</p>
<p>I had trouble with one question, which refers to the canoeing trip, or “tippy section.” when they tip over the boat and the question asks something about the pocket of air that is created and which shows the most description. they were like a) cave like pocket of air, b) pocket of air c) space d) no change (no particular order here!)</p>
<p>Jerm, I said cave like pocket of air</p>
<p>good so did I, might be irrelevant but I suck at the ACT lol I need a 25+ on the test I got a 21 in June. on practice tests I do as good as a 29 but I just cant bring that to the test day :/</p>
<p>Here’s some answers that I got:</p>
<p>Which word least fits?
Contemplated <- This is because the rest of the words meant that they were relatively sure, whereas contemplated means thinking, meaning not sure. Hence, contemplated to be is least acceptable.</p>
<p>Which provides the most vivid description of the canoe/kayak thing?
The Cave like pocket of air</p>
<p>The question where it asks something about the dust on the shoes/legs, I removed the “so.” Once you remove the so, the sentence is fluid, concise, and makes sense.</p>
<p>Agree with TheNexus on those three questions ^</p>
<p>what were all the options for the sentence about the legs streaked with red dust?</p>
<p>@nexus
if you remove “so”, it creates run-on sentence. we went over this like 5 times</p>
<p>For the question about “Rather to,” shouldn’t there be a comma after “to”?</p>
<p>Its intention was not to… but rather, to highlight…</p>
<p>because it’s used as a phrase, and if there wasn’t a comma, it’d be used like “I’d rather have this than that” where rather conveys a tone of preference; whereas, but rather should convey a tone of contrast.</p>
<p>Does anyone agree? or am I just being stupid? lol</p>
<p>@kudos, that is false. You needed to remove “so” because that made the sentence most concise. Also, removing “so” made the sentence have parallel structure or proper syntax.</p>
<p>@hockey
After playing the game, our shoes were covered in red dirt, our legs were colored red. </p>
<p>An example of a run-on is a comma splice, in which two independent clauses are joined with a comma without an accompanying coordinating conjunction.
^ahaha from wikipedia directly although it’s supposedly not a “trustworthy” source.</p>
<p>anyway, “our shoes were covered in red dirt” (obviously our shoes + were covered as Subject + verb = complete sentence), “our legs were covered red” (again, our legs were covered = subject + verb = complete sentence)</p>
<p>Complete sentence + Comma + Complete senetence = Two Independent Clauses with Comma = Comma Splice = a run on sentence</p>
<p>sorry ^ thats my habit of taking eveything into “math world” ^^
therefore, it is a run on sentence</p>
<p>Are you sure there were two independent clauses? I kind of remember the sentence as being “After we played the game, our shoes were covered with red dirt, our legs colored red.”</p>
<p>I believe astoria is on the right track. I, too, remember it being similar to how astoria stated it.</p>
<p>The way I remember it is that everything after the comma was being used to describe the word just before the comma. There is some technical term for this, but I cannot recall it.</p>
<p>@Astoria, in that case, are you saying that “our legs colored red” modified the sentence “our shoes were covered with red dirt”… I don’t understand why, even in that case, it is not a run on sentence. that still creates two independent clauses, right? our legs + colored = still subject + still verb… though… lol</p>
<p>@astoria, skalyan. if you guys are saying that the 2nd sentence was modifying the 1st sentence… then i certainly just need a person who remembers the exact wording, lol cuz i might be just being stupid here lool idk anymore T.T</p>
<p>An independent phrase has to be able to stand alone as a sentence. “our legs colored red” is not a sentence. It’s like “our contact lenses tinted blue.” I’m not 100% sure I’m remembering the question correctly though. :)</p>