<p>
</p>
<p>I do not see an error.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“since 1925” indicates that the present perfect tense should be used: “complete” should be “have completed.” </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“in addition” is not a logical transition.</p>
<ol>
<li>The articled featured the Seas Islands because (many were known there to live) much as their ancestors of a century ago had lived.</li>
</ol>
<p>A. many were known there to live
C. many of the people there were known to live</p>
<p>why is C the answer? A is more concise.</p>
<ol>
<li>Improving passage -The artist’s works were forgotten. And so it (remained, and even later, in 1969,) the donation of one of his paintings to the Smithsonian Institution aroused new interest in the art of this American master.</li>
</ol>
<p>d. remained until 1969, when
e. remained when in 1969</p>
<p>i thought when could be used to end something being done. Can you give an example of using “when” to end an action being done or such. So, I though that D was redundant. Answer is D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The knowing did not only occur there; “there” should modify “many,” not “known.”</p>
<p>The museum is submitting proposals to several foundations in the hope (to gain) funds to build a tropical butterfly conservatory.</p>
<p>Its “of gaining”. However I was wondering if an infinite can ever follow “hope” or “in the hope(s)”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The state of the works’ being forgotten existed until 1969; “when in 1969” means that the works’ being forgotten did not begin until 1969.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If “hope” is being used as a verb, an infinitive follows, as in:</p>
<p>“I hope to run.”</p>
<p>If, however, “hope” is being used as a noun in an idiom, “of” followed by a gerund is the appropriate phrase, as in:</p>
<p>“I ran in the hope of winning the race.”</p>
<p>Silverturtle,
for one of the questions on US/Canda – limits,</p>
<p>The answer was “US and Canada set limits on…” without having the “have” in the sentence.
Why did you sat that “US and Canada HAVE…” was the right answer?</p>
<ol>
<li>(Tanner’s work was largely forgotten. And so it remained when in 1969 the donation of one of his paintings to the Smithsonian Institution aroused new interest in the art of this American master. )</li>
</ol>
<p>how does this mean “that the works’ being forgotten did not begin until 1969”?</p>
<p>i know you answered this one before but i have a more specific question</p>
<ol>
<li>Each of these structures was the tallest in the world at the time (they were) built.
is “each” the subject? Why can’t “they” modify “structures”?</li>
</ol>
<p>and thanks for answering these. I really appreciate it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“when in 1969 the…,” in that structure, modifies “remained”; that is, the dependent clause (everything after “when”) modifies the verb “remained.” The effect is that the verb does not take place until the subordinating clause occurs – in this case, 1969. Logically, however, the remaning was taking place until 1969, not beginning in 1969.</p>
<p>It’s difficult to verbalize this explanation, so I’m happy to attempt to re-explain if you need clarification.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“each” is indeed the subject. And so “was” is correctly singular.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good question. I’ll attempt to answer this question logically rather than grammatically.</p>
<p>Omit the intervening prepositional phrase in order to make the true semantics of the sentence more apparent; replacing “they” with its referrent, we get thus:</p>
<p>“Each [structure] was the tallest in the world at the time [the structures] were built.”</p>
<p>Logically, each structure could not have been the tallest at the time that the structures were built: the structures were all built at separate times.</p>
<ol>
<li>so is “when” being used to tell the time when “it remained”?</li>
</ol>
<p>how is “when” used to end a course of action?</p>
<ol>
<li>does “each of these structures” basically equal “each structure”?</li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>“until” can be used with “when” to indicate the end of a course of action, as in:</p>
<p>“I was hungry until 2008, when I ate for the first time.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, it does.</p>
<p>alright, thanks a lot</p>
<p>Between the sales manager (and I) (existed) (an easy), cooperative working relationship; (neither of us) hesitated to discuss problems. (no error) </p>
<p>the answer is A (and I), because it should be the objective case me? explain</p>
<p>Which would you rather say?</p>
<p>“Between you and me, that dress looks hideous on her.”
“Between you and I, that dress looks hideous on her.”</p>
<p>You would say the first, and that’s actually grammatically correct. “I” is a subject pronoun, and “me” is an object pronoun. If you don’t know what the difference between those are, google.com is your friend. :)</p>
<p>Plato and Aristotle taught that the ideal human being is the philosopher – the person of reason who looked upon existence with detachment.</p>
<p>Meteorites are of great interest to astrophysicists, since this is how they obtain information about the chemical composition of early solar systems.
</p>
<p>(a) astrophysicists, since this is how hey obtain information
(b) astrophysicists, who obtain from them information
(c) astrophysicists because information is obtained by them
(d) astrophysicists; they obtain information this way
(e) astrophysicists, which is how they obtain information</p>
<p>
Although Charlotte Bronte enjoyed painting as well as writing, she is more widely recognized as an author than as an artist.</p>
<p>People are no more likely to become athletic by watching sporting events as they are to become healthy by reading medical books.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The ideal human being is the philosopher; “looked” should be “looks.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Choice (A) is wrong because “this” has no referrent.</p>
<p>Choice (B) is correct.</p>
<p>Choice (C) is wrong because meteorites are not mentioned in the dependent clause.</p>
<p>Choice (D) is wrong because because “this way” has no referrent.</p>
<p>Choice (E) is wrong because the construction “…, which is how” implies that astrophysicists’ interest is the medium of obtaining information.</p>