<p>Quick93: Are those coming from CB or ETS?</p>
<p>here’s an ID error from a past test…</p>
<p>The radio station received (the most number) of calls from listeners (on the evening) (it) aired a discussion of (the music of) Aretha Franklin. (NE)</p>
<p>The way I see it, you could change “on the evening” to when, or change it to “that it” and both would be correct. So I decided NE??</p>
<p>
In this context, “look” must be followed by an adjective because “look” describes how a noun looks to the eye: “they look weak”; “they are weak.” “Are” is a verb, no? Why shouldn’t it be “they are weakly,” then? The reasoning behind such a question is faulty. “Look” can be followed by an adverb if it describes the verb “look” itself: “he looked questioningly at her.”
If you can say that the paintings ARE weak without compromising the structure (i.e., you can exchange “are” with “look”: the paintings LOOK weak; and vice-versa), then you maintain the adjectival form “weak”–don’t change it to “weakly.”
Yes, it is redundant. I don’t know whether that makes it incorrect or whether the test-makers agree with this. Where is this question from?
If you change “on the evening” to “when,” then you are changing the meaning of the sentence. “On the evening” implies that the event that we are talking about occurred during the same evening something else occurred. “When” implies that the event we are talking about occurred at roughly the same time something else occurred. “That it” makes no sense because it doesn’t refer to any time period. The sentence is stating that one thing occurred on the evening in which a second thing occurred. (“In which” is optional–it isn’t necessary.)</p>
<p>The answer is “the most number” because it should be changed to “the greatest number.” “Most” means “greatest in number.” It would be erroneous to say, “the most number of calls.” You would just say, “the most calls.”</p>
<p>[What] becomes apparent [from assessing] scientific accomplishments is that only relatively recently [have] the necessary technology [been developed for] solving the mystery of genetics.</p>
<p>[At] the reception [were] the [chattering] guests, the three-tiered cake, and the lively music that have become [characteristic of] may wedding celebrations.</p>
<p>[Opposite to] most people I know, Annie, a good photographer [herself], actually [enjoys seeing] the photographs that her friends take [on their] vacations.</p>
<p>[have] should be [has]</p>
<p>No error?</p>
<p>[Opposite to] should be [Contrary to]</p>
<p>I think lol.</p>
<p>Hmm why?</p>
<p>And you are correct; I just wanted to know the exact grammatical rules behind them.</p>
<p>For the first one I wanted to know why has?</p>
<p>And for the second one I thought it was “characteristics of”</p>
<p>And why contrary to?</p>
<p>Well, I’m pretty bad at explaining this sort of stuff, but I’ll give it a shot.</p>
<p>The first one: it should be has because it is referring to “the necessary technology”. This is a singular, not a plural. You need has instead of have.</p>
<p>Second one: “characteristics of” was what I looked at first, but you can’t over-think the question. There’s nothing grammatically wrong here.</p>
<p>Third one: “Contrary to” is a common idiom that you should be familiar with.</p>
<p>Guys, this resource helps so much. The more I study for the writing section, the more I realize that it’s a piece of crap that comes nowhere near assessing true writing skills.</p>
<p>Just a comment :)</p>
<p>Venezuela (devotes) a higher percentage (of its budget) to education (than do) other Latin American countries (such as) Mexico and Brazil. NE</p>
<p>NE or is (than do) an error?</p>
<p>No error. “Do” supersedes “devote” (plural).</p>
<p>I agree on the no error front, but I didn’t get your explanation. I just thought it’s the same as “than other Latin American countries such as Mexico and Brazil do” and thought it’s fine (probably better than how I wrote it) now.</p>
<p>Many people think taxes are too [high, consequently, some of those people do not report] all the money they earn.</p>
<p>A. jkdfkaj
B. (My answer) high, therefore, some of those people do not report
C. (Right answer) consequently, some do not report</p>
<p>I don’t really see a difference between B and C, but I thought that B clarified the “some”…or is that redundant?</p>
<p>^^There is a semicolon before consequently in C</p>
<p>Almost all animals that hibernate prepare for (it) by eating large amounts of food, which they convert to thick layers of fat. </p>
<p>is (it) the error, or NE?</p>
<p>Pilots at the airline, angered at the prospect of seeing
their pension plans replaced with less generous
versions, vowed to use legal means to fight (it).</p>
<p>a. it
b. them
c. this
d. such a move
e. that from happening </p>
<p>what’s the answer?</p>
<p>d. such a move</p>
<p>Many people think taxes are too [high, consequently, some of those people do not report] all the money they earn.</p>
<p>A. jkdfkaj
B. (My answer) high, therefore, some of those people do not report
C. (Right answer) ; consequently, some do not report</p>
<p>I don’t really see a difference between B and C, but I thought that B clarified the “some”…or is that redundant? Does it have to do with the semicolon? When do you use therefore and when do you use consequently? O.o</p>
<p>clause 1: Many people think taxes are too high.
clause 2: Some (people) do not report all the money they earn.</p>
<p>First of all, “people” is implied in “some” because it is the subject of both clauses. Second of all, you cannot divide two clauses directly with a comma. You cannot say, “I drank a lot of water, I had to use the bathroom.” You have to divide the two clauses into two sentences, OR you could separate them with a semicolon. A semicolon connects two clauses that are similar in idea. One causes the other (if you drink a lot, then you’ll have to use the toilet). So, you might say, “I drank a lot of water; consequently, I had to use the bathroom,” OR, “I drank a lot of water. Consequently, I had to use the bathroom.”</p>
<p>You can use a comma to join two clauses if you use a coordinating conjunction like “so”: “I walked out the house 5 minutes late, so I will probably get to class 5 minutes late”; “because”: “I will get to class 5 minutes late because I walked out the house 5 minutes late”; and “and”: “I walked out the house 5 minutes late, and I got to class 5 minutes late.” You get the point. (Notice I used semicolons to divide the 3 examples. That is another part of the semicolon’s usage, but that is not tested on the SAT. It is, however, tested on the ACT.)</p>
<p>Freedom of action and expression [are] at the foundation [not only of] our system of government but also of out [expectations concerning] human relations [at all] levels of society.</p>
<p>Crazybandit, that was a great answer. Thanks :)</p>
<p>Meadow:</p>
<p>[are]. It’s supposed to be “is” because the subject is the singular freedom, not the plural action and expression (which are modifying freedom).</p>