<p>Glory as well as gain is to be his reward.</p>
<p>A) Glory as well as gain is to be his reward.
C) He will be rewarded by glory as well as gain. </p>
<p>Choice A is the correct answer. Why choice C wouldn’t work? </p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Bob could easily have gotten a higher score on his SAt if he (would have read) more in his school career. </p>
<p>If I (would have known) more about the person whom I was writing to, I would have written a better answer.</p>
<p>Had Lincoln (have been) alive during World War 2, he would have regarded the racial situation in the armed forces as a throwback to pre-Civil War days. </p>
<p>The paranthesized words are the errors. The explanation tells me it is wrong because the sentence is written in a past contraty to fact situation/condition. Can someone explain or give examples what does this grammar structure mean?</p>
<p>ONLY BY TAPPING their last reserves of energy WERE the team members able…etc.</p>
<p>Sentence has no error…why? Why isn’t it 'Only by tapping INTO…" instead of 'Only by tapping"? </p>
<p>I thought ‘tapping into’ was idiomatic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess you thought wrong then?</p>
<p>Not strictly speaking, tapping into IS an idiomatic phrase. But that doesn’t mean you have to use into every time you use the verb tap. Here is one definition (the relevant one) of tap, taken from Dictionary.com:
Tap into is informal and not really correct. To tap into something is to gain access to it. That it is “idiomatic” has nothing to do with whether it is relevant in that sentence. But I can see how you would be confused if you hadn’t known the pertinent definition of tap.</p>
<p>thanks crazybandit, you came through yet again by tapping your vast W knowledge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very sneaky. :)</p>
<p>He claims A(to have paid) the contractor on time, but, between B(you and I), this is C(hardly) the first time he has gotten D(embroiled) in a dispute.</p>
<p>A(The Magna Carta) and the thirteenth-century Parliament are now B(seen) not as a C(response) to popular protest but as the outcomes of negotiation D(among) the political elite.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“you” and “I” are objects of the preposition “between,” so they must be in the objective case: “you” and “me.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, I don’t see an error (as long as you were correct in not including the article in (C)).</p>
<p>Oops (C) was (a response) <–I don’t think that makes a difference, does it?</p>
<p>It A(has been estimated) that B(half of all) animals raised in captivity C(will have) a longer lifespan D(than their) counterparts in the wild.</p>
<p>Is it E, no error?</p>
<p>Among the Vasava people A(of India), the eldest son traditionally B(leaves) his C(parents’) home and settles far away D(to start) his own family.</p>
<p>Is that E as well? >.<</p>
<p>When the village elders A(present) recommendations, B(there is) C(hardly ever) any opposition D(against) the proposals. </p>
<p>Why is D wrong? What is the right preposition after opposition? </p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>Glory as well as gain is to be his reward.</p>
<p>A) Glory as well as gain is to be his reward.
C) He will be rewarded by glory as well as gain. </p>
<p>Choice A is the correct answer. Why choice C wouldn’t work? </p>
<p>Bob could easily have gotten a higher score on his SAt if he (would have read) more in his school career. </p>
<p>If I (would have known) more about the person whom I was writing to, I would have written a better answer.</p>
<p>Had Lincoln (have been) alive during World War 2, he would have regarded the racial situation in the armed forces as a throwback to pre-Civil War days. </p>
<p>The paranthesized words are the errors. The explanation tells me it is wrong because the sentence is written in a past contraty to fact situation/condition. Can someone explain or give examples what does this grammar structure mean?</p>
<p>When ‘as well as’ is used after a singular subject like “Mark as well as Jane …” then we ignore the 2nd subject right?..like is this another typical SAT trick? </p>
<p>ex. is it supposed to be Mark as well as Jane is going to the store?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe that “reward” must be followed with the preposition “with.” Check Silverturtle’s guide to be sure, though.</p>
<p>
Yes, it is E, No error, although (C) could simply be “have” depending on whether “half of all animals” is indicative of existing animals now (so they WILL have a longer lifespan) or animals at any time and in general (so they generally HAVE a longer lifespan).</p>
<p>
Yes, this is E as well.</p>
<p>I am not sure that these sentences are very…genuine. What book or source did you get these questions from? You should stick to the blue book (The Official SAT Study Guide), the Online Course on Collegeboard.com, and other tests released and made by the College Board. You’ll get the best practice tests made by the actual test-makers of the SAT.
It should be “opposition to.” Opposition already kind of implies that the subject is against something, but to clarifies where the opposition is pointed–if that makes sense.
A man rewards you with a trophy. You have been rewarded BY a man WITH a trophy. You cannot be rewarded BY glory and gain because this implies that glory and gain gave you a reward or that they rewarded you–no, glory and gain are the rewards themselves, so you say that someone will be rewarded with glory and gain, NOT by glory and gain.
Yes, you are right. “As well as Jane” does not affect whether the subject is singular or plural: “Mark [as well as Jane] is going to the store.”
Yup.
It should be “Bob could easily have gotten a higher score on his SAT if he had read more in his school career.” We are talking about something that COULD have happened in the past; “had read” refers to something that happened BEFORE something else in the past. For example, if he had read more in his school career (from 2006 until 2008), he would have scored higher on his SAT in 2009. “Had read” helps clarify that the action took place before another action in the past.
Same thing here. The “if” depends on the “I would have…” This means that the action following “if” must hypothetically have taken place BEFORE the other past hypothetical action, so you say, “If I had known more about the person whom I was writing to, I would have written a better answer.” Generally in this case the structure “If I had…I would have…” or “I would have…if I had…” is correct.
I understand how this can be kind of difficult to understand if you’ve never heard this structure before. There is no “if” here, so we simply say, “Had Lincoln been alive during World War 2, he would have regarded…” Notice we are using the same words here–had, been, and would have: “If he had been alive…he would have…” It’s just a little bit different in this sentence: “Had he been alive…he would have…” You never use “would have” twice like in the original sentence.</p>
<p>this is off a PR review book:</p>
<p>Shawn prides himself (A) (on his ability) (B) to play the guitar, a (C) a skill that he taught himself (D) while procrastinating. the answer choice says its E no error but i think the answer is D instead of while i would add by?</p>
<p>“He taught himself how to play guitar while procrastinating” means he learned the skill during the periods of time in which he procrastinated…If you don’t do your homework for 5 hours every night, and instead play guitar, then you are playing guitar while not doing your homework, or while procrastinating. “By” doesn’t work here because procrastination didn’t cause him to teach himself how to play guitar; it simply allowed him to.</p>
<p>The sentence is kind of not as good as it can be because “procrastinating” isn’t the best representation of an activity. You usually say you do X while doing Y only when Y is an actual activity–e.g., “He sweats while playing soccer.”</p>
<p>Repost, because this never got answered 
</p>
<p>[A] After [A] climbing the rocks that led to the 150-feet-long breakers, the children walked along the full length of the [ B] prodigious ** and slippery stones, from [C] one [C] end of [D] it [D] to the other. E no error
I think its E but Barrons 2400 says it is D because it doesn’t agree with the antecedent stones- but I thought the subject of the sentence is never inside of a prepositional phrase?</p>
<p>
The subject of the sentence is “children,” so I don’t know what you’re referring to. The children walked along the full length of some stones, from one end of the stones to the other end of the stones: they walked from one end of *them<a href=“the%20stones”>/i</a> to the other [end of them]. Both “along the…stones” and “from one end…to the other” are prepositional phrases that modify walk–they describe how they walked, or, more specifically, where the children walked. So the first prepositional phrase includes the object “stones,” and the second prepositional phrase includes the SAME object, but refers to the stones as “them.” Pronouns can be used anywhere in a sentence as long as the antecedent is clear.</p>