<p>Is the idiom just as…so really accurate? I mean it just sounds so odd</p>
<p>Is off of idiomatically incorrect?</p>
<p>How often do diction errors appear? those are pretty difficult for me, but I’m hearing they don’t show up much…</p>
<p>one actual problem: </p>
<p>Baby lobsters are preyed on by fish and crabs because (they don’t have a hard shell yet and they can’t defend themselves with fierce claws yet.)</p>
<p>Correct answer is : the lobsters still lack both hard shells and fierce claws with which to fend off predators.</p>
<p>the “with which to fend off preadators” didn’t sound right. Is there an explanation for why it is right?</p>
Yes, it is correct. You could also say “just as . . . so too.” You could also strip it down to, simply, “just as” (without the “so.”) It sounded unfamiliar to me when I first heard it as well (obviously), but it’s correct.</p>
<p>
I don’t know. Here is a response to this question:</p>
They are relatively rare, but they do show up. I remember there was a question on one of the SATs from 2009 that used “respectively” wrong. It means “in the order given.” It may have been tricky to those unfamiliar with the word because it contains the word “respect,” a word unrelated, in it. These errors stick out because they are so abnormal (writing questions don’t typically test semantics–i.e., word meanings), so I can say that that was the only diction error in the whole test. I don’t remember seeing other diction errors in practice exams and other SATs. So I could say they are very rare. I’m sure you’ll be able to handle it. Just don’t think every word or phrase you are unfamiliar with has a diction error!</p>
<p>
This is such a weird question. Where is it from? Anyway, the “which” refers to the object last named, “hard shells and fierce claws.”</p>
<p>(1) Lobsters lack hard shells and fierce claws to fend off the predators with.
(2) Lobsters lack hard shells and fierce claws with which to fend off the predators.</p>
<p>Sentences (1) and (2) mean the same thing.</p>
<p>If you rode on a horse, you may call it “the horse on which I rode,” or “the horse that I rode on.” Both are correct. The first one is a bit more complex.</p>
<p>Yeah, all of these questions have their origins in the 11 practice tests of princeton review. I guess this is why PR isn’t so good. They gave me a wierd diction one that I didn’t catch. It was discrete vs discreet. I mean common who knows spelling differences like that…</p>
<p>hi guys! i would to know the answers to these three questions:</p>
<p>“Social scientistis agree that a system for exchanging goods and services is not only present but also of necessity in all societies”
------“of necessity” is wrong, but why? & how can i fix it?
“Intense preoccupation on technique appears to be the one trait that great pianists have in common.”
------“on” is wrong, but why? & how can i fix it?
“It is a myth that mathematicians are so absorbed with abstractions and thus have no practical interests”
-----book says “so absorbed with abstractions and thus” is wrong and should be fixed with “so absorbed in abstractions that they,” but i chose “absorbed by abstractions and therefore.” what makes the book answer better than mine? </p>
present is an adjective so to be parallel, “necessary” should replace of necessity.</p></li>
<li><p>preoccupation with is the correct idiom</p></li>
<li><p>There is much debate about this, but most grammar buffs object to the use of “so” as an intensifier without “that” to focus the intensity in the sense of “to the extent that.” I suspect that the CB is one of those grammar buffs.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>“I’m so hungry, I can eat a horse!” is wrong but
“I’m so hungry that I can eat a horse is correct.” Just the way usage is.</p>
<p>Man I hate usage questions; they’re like idioms–takers must have been previously exposed to an incorrect usage for them to know the correct. Culturally biased anyone?</p>
<p>In 1970, the United States government identified as major pollutants carbon monoxide, ozone, and lead, and it had set goals for limiting those pollutants based on a scientific determination of the risk that each pollutant posed to human health.</p>
<p>(A) lead, and it had set
(B) lead, and which set
(C) lead, and to set
(D) lead, and set
(E) lead and setting</p>
<p>The answer choice is (D). I understand that, but why is there a comma after “lead”?</p>
<p>I also thought the comma wasn’t necessary and wrong. However, I copied this directly off of the Collegeboard official online course. I suppose the question itself is messed up.</p>
<p>Emperor Justinian reunited the Roman Empire, but at too high a cost, Italy was left in ruins. </p>
<p>a) but at too high a cost, Italy was left in ruins
b) the cost was too high, since Italy was left in ruins
c) but at too high a cost: Italy was left ruined
d) at too high a cost, however, Italy was left in ruins
e) however, the cost was too high, Italy was left ruined</p>
<p>Completely unremarked in the confusion were the three boys who sneaked past the ushers. </p>
<p>a) were the three boys who sneaked past the ushers
b) was the three boys who sneaked past the ushers
c) were three boys whom sneaked past the ushers
d) were the three boys who sneaked passed the ushers
e) was the three boys that sneaked past the ushers</p>
<p>Ralph Nader defiantly proclaimed that even if he would have known how the election would turn out, he would still have run for president. </p>
<p>a) even if he would have known how the election would turn out.
b) even if he would have known how the elction turns out.
c) even had he known how the election would turn out.
d) even if he would know how the election will turn out.
e) if even he would have konwn how the election would turn out.</p>
<p>To amass a large vocabulary, you should read many books, however, a good dictionary is also necessary. </p>
<p>a) however, a good dictionary is also necessary
b) you also need a good dictionary, however
c) however, a good dictionary is also something you need
d) but you also need a good dictionary
e) since a good dictionary is also necessary</p>
<p>(A) results in a run-on sentence (a comma splice) because you have two independent clauses connected with just a comma. (B), (D), and (E) have the same problem.</p>
<p>When there was a massive blackout that affected the east coast, Midwest, and parts of Canada, terrorism was initially suspected. </p>
<p>a) when there was a massive blackout that affected the east coast, Midwest, and parts of Canada
b)when a massive blackout affected the east coast, Midwest, and parts of Canada
c) when the east coast, Midwest, and parts of Canada was affected by a massive blackout
d) because there had been a massive blackout of the east coast, Midwest, and parts of Canada
e) after there was a massive blackout on the east coast, Midwest, and parts of Canada</p>
<p>Recognize that the subject comes after the verb but that they still must agree, so the plural “three boys” takes the plural verb “were.” This rules out (B) and (E). (C) is wrong because “whom” is in the objective case but is acting as the subject of “sneaked.” (D) is wrong because “passed” is a verb but the writer of the sentence was searching for the preposition “past.”</p>
<p>For post 691, all options except C have comma-splice errors. For post 692, all other options have passed spelt in the wrong way (these are not CB questions)
For post 693, only option C does not have If and woul in the same clause.</p>
<p>(A) results in a run-on sentence (a comma splice) because you have two independent clauses connected with just a comma. (B), (D), and (E) have the same problem. </p>
<p>(B) is incorrectly in the present tense (“turns”). (C) is incorrect because there is no “if” to introduce the clause. (D) is incorrectly in the future tense (“will turn”). (E) is incorrect because one says “even if,” not “if even.”</p>
<p>(A), (B), and (C) result in run-on sentences. (E) is illogical because the fact that a good dictionary is necessary does not result in the fact that one should read many books.</p>
<p>(C) lacks subject-verb agreement. (B) is just a more concise version of (A), so we can eliminate (A). (D) is the best choice because it is the only one to indicate the causal relationship between the suspicion of terrorism and the blackout; the others just indicate time and do not explictly say in what way the blackout affected those regions.</p>
i would to know the answers to these three questions:</p>