Redid my PSAT FORM W Writing section. Questions and help. Silverturtle.

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>Oh boy! More PSAT discussion.</p>

<p>If residents [were to separate recyclable materials apart from the daily trash], the cost of refuse disposal would be greatly reduced</p>

<p>If residents [separate recyclable materials from the daily trash], the cost of refuse disposal would be greatly reduced</p>

<p>If residents [were to separate recyclable materials from the daily trash], the cost of refuse disposal would be greatly reduced</p>

<p>Q1. I'm confused on the tense. How would I determine the correct tense for the brackets? I originally thought that it didn't matter, as long as it was constant throughout the first clause, so I chose the second because it seemed like the most concise and active answer.</p>

<h2>Q2. (the answer is the 3rd one). Why is "apart" wrong? Please teach me apart vs. from rules... </h2>

<p>By the time Gregory Hines was 6 yrs old, he [had already been] dancing and singing at the the Apollo Theater in New York; 2 years later he would make his debut on Broadway.</p>

<p>By the time Gregory Hines was 6 yrs old, he [was already] dancing and singing at the the Apollo Theater in New York; 2 years later he would make his debut on Broadway.</p>

<h2>Q3. Just wondering. Would both of these work? What does the "perfect" tense even do? I'm confused on when to you use regular tense, and when to use perfect tense. </h2>

<p>Fran [would be happy] to assist Brad, had he simply requested help early enough to give her time to complete her own assignments. </p>

<h2>Q4 Why is "would be happy" wrong? Please give me necessary verb tense advice/information. Is the combination [present tense , past perfect] wrong? </h2>

<p>[Along one wall] of the kitchen [stands] fine oak cupboards and a massive walnut chest, each [dark with age] and [inscribed with] the date 1660.</p>

<h2>The answer is E, but: Isn't "inscribed with" wrong, because it sounds like "the date 1660" inscribed the chest? </h2>

<p>[That] the American Discovery Trail comprises [more than] 200 local, regional, and national trails [came] as a [surprise to] the visitors from the city.</p>

<p>Answer is E, but: Shouldn't it be "comprises OF more than"? Isn't that idiomatic? And does "that" serve as a conjunction? Doesn't this sentence need a comma somewhere? Gosh it sounds mad weird. </p>

<p>Thanks y'all.</p>

2

<p>

</p>

<p>The “would” indicates that this is the future unreal conditional tense, which requires the subjunctive tense for the subordinating conjunction. This rule is often not observed in colloquial contexts, however. Here are some examples:</p>

<p>“If he were to eat, he would be happier.”</p>

<p>“If I were to go with you, I would do so unhappily.”</p>

<p>“were to separate” is necessary; the subject is irrelevant.</p>

<p>Are you sure you copied the answers correctly? If I recall correctly (and I may be wrong), this tense knowledge was not essential to correctly answering the question: I don’t think the second choice had “from the daily trash” but rather the incorrect alternative “and the daily trash.”</p>

3

<p>

</p>

<p>“separate…apart from” is redundant; “apart” is not needed.</p>

4

<p>The real question did have “separate recyclable materials and the daily trash” as well as the one I posted. So the knowledge was rather essential. Ok thanks, this is very helpful!</p>

5

<p>

</p>

<p>What’s the answer here? It seems as though both of these work; they mean different things, though.</p>

<p>“had already been” means that Gregory had been dancing and singing before he turned six. “was already” means that Gregory was dancing at age six; he might have started earlier, but the sentence doesn’t necessarily mean that.</p>

6

<p>In the real question, “was already” was correct, and “had already been” wasn’t an option. I posted it to help my understanding of the tenses. </p>

<p>thanks, I get the past perfect better.</p>

7

<p>

</p>

<p>“had he simply” is the past unreal conditional tense. “would be happy” is the future unreal conditional. Changing this to “would have been happy” correctly modifies the tense to past unreal conditional.</p>

8

<p>

</p>

<p>I’ll clarify a bit: the past perfect is used to indicate that something occured before something else, where the “something else” is already in the past tense.</p>

9

<p>

</p>

<p>If “the date 1660” were the one doing the inscribing, the passive “by” would be needed, as in:</p>

<p>“…each dark with age and inscribed by the date 1660.”</p>

<p>However, choice (B) contains an error: “stands” should be “stand.”</p>

10

<p>

</p>

<p>“That” is functioning to render what would otherwise be a clause into a subject; the entire subject of the sentence is:</p>

<p>“That the American Discovery Trail comprises more than 200 local, regional, and national trails.”</p>

<p>In contexts like this, “That” functions similarly to how “The fact that” does, as in:</p>

<p>“The fact that I am hungry makes me happy.”</p>

<p>“comprises of” and “comprised of” are, according to some, incorrect. “comprised,” in the strictest sense, means “to include”; one wouldn’t say, “to include of.”</p>

<p>Some sources accept it as proper, though; from Merriam-Webster:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>In any case, “comprise” without “of” is definately correct.</p>
</a>

11

<p>Why is “stands” wrong? The answer was E…</p>

12

<p>It should be “stand” instead of “stands” because there is a compound subject (reverse construction) following that verb. Therefore a verb that satisfies a plural subject should be used, hence “stand”</p>

13

<p>pokrat is right.</p>

14

<p>How do you know that it’s a reverse construction? I’ve seen this sometimes, like with the verb “to lie [down].” But I thought that the subjust was “along”? Guess not :P</p>

15

<p>“along” is a preposition; prepositions often indicate inverse construction, as in:</p>

<p>“Here lie Bob and Joe” versus “Here lies Bob.”</p>