<p>The following sentence contains either a single error or no error at all. If the sentence contains an error, select the word in parentheses that must be changed to make the sentence correct.</p>
<p>(Whereas) the caterpillars of most butterflies are harmless, moth caterpillars (cause) (an enormous amount of damage) (on) plants, forest and shade trees, clothing, and household goods. (no error)</p>
<p>The correct answer, according to the website, is (on), which is an improper idiom in this case. It should be "to".</p>
<p>Now, this is assuming that moth caterpillars cannot actually cause damage ON these materials, which is complete bull. What if two moth caterpillars decided to get in a fight? Moth caterpillar #1 punches moth caterpillar #2 in the face with his spiked punching glove, effectively DAMAGING moth caterpillar #2. There is no visible statement anywhere near this question that suggests that this cannot happen. This totally contradicts the following piece of advice given on Collegeboard's website: "The information you need to answer each reading question is always in the passage(s). Reading carefully is the key to finding the correct answer. Don't be misled by an answer that looks correct but is not supported by the actual text of the passage(s)." Sure it is. Bull.</p>
<p>More importantly, this question is assuming prior knowledge of moth caterpillars, which shouldn't be in a test that tests reading skill only. What if someone came from a country that didn't have moth caterpillars, but mastered English? Their reading skills might be spectacular, but they could still get the question wrong because (i) they had no prior knowledge of the subject, and (ii) as stated above, there is no explicit assumption that moth caterpillars could not also cause damage ON the mentioned materials.</p>
<p>bcos, a catepillar fight would not cause "an enormous amount of damage". Think about it another way, a little damage (bird poop) ON your car is less significant ("enormous") than a baseball crashing in-TO your car.</p>
<p>clearly, if you read the sentence, "on" doesn't fit. you do not need to know whether or not moth caterpillars cause a lot of damage to anything. just by reading the sentence through, you can see that "on" doesn't fit.</p>
<p>on could not be correct. if it meant that "two caterpillars got into a fight and caused damage on plants", it would have said so in the sentence, no matter how ridiculous it is.</p>
<p>I'm gonna go on a limb and suggest that this thread is a parody of such controversies as the oarsman-regatta analogy questions (SAT</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). And if that is the case, this thread is both genius and hilarious.</p>
<p>xanthom, I've encountered exactly the same problems as you on such questions. I think the solution is to not read too deeply into the question. Overanalyzing can hurt you on the SAT just as much as underanalyzing can.</p>
<p>I got this problem when I was doing the pratice test the day before yesterday, I just picked "to" because I didn't want to waste my time and be judgemental.</p>
<p>Haha. Reminds of the BB question I missed in test 1.</p>
<p>(Surely) one of the most far-reaching changes in the nineteenth century (will be) the change from working (at home) (to working in) the factory. (No error)</p>
<p>I put E, because I couldn't find anything wrong with it grammatically. Too bad I forgot that the nineteenth century already happened.</p>