<ol>
<li>Our team has worked for several (months on a robot for the science fair that we plan on entering in the robotics division).
(A)months on a robot for the science fair that we plan on entering in the robotics division
(B)months on a robot that we plan to enter in the robotics division of the science fair
(C)months on a robot that we planned entering in the science fair, robotics division
(D)months, we plan to enter a robot for the science fair in the robotics division
(E)months, we are planning to enter a robot in the robotics division of the science fair</li>
</ol>
<p>2.Someone who uses a personal computer (A-to perform) only (B-such tasks as) word processing and sending e-mail (C-need not) but the (D-most advanced) model available on the market. (E-No error)</p>
<p>3.Quincy took Dan to Derek's home (A-for a visit), (B-never imagining) that five years (C-would pass) before (D-seeing) Derek again. (E-No error)</p>
<p>Please give the answers for each one with explanations
Thanks!</p>
<p>(A) has ambiguous modification. Does the adjectival clause “that we plan on entering in the robotics division” intend to modify “science fair” or “robot”? It would be more logical if the modification were of the latter, but the clause is immediately adjacent to the former. </p>
<p>(B) fixes that problem. In this sentence “that we plan to enter in the robotics division” unambiguously modifies what we thought it meant to: “robot.” </p>
<p>(C) uses the past tense, whereas the sentence begins in the present tense and contextualizes no reason to switch to the past. (D) has unclear prepositional phrase compounding and also produces a comma splice because “we plan to enter…” is an independent clause that ought to be preceded by a semicolon or period. (E) cleans up the prepositional phrasing but also yields a comma splice. </p>
<p>(B) is correct.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s no error. Do any of the choices look wrong to you? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most students are able to spot (D) as the error in this question, but judging from the history on CC of mistaken reasoning to arrive at this answer, some explanation seems worthwhile. </p>
<p>(B) is not an error because the participle “imagining” modifies the subject of the adjacent independent clause, “Quincy.” (Quincy is the one who is doing the “never imagining” here.) </p>
<p>(D) should catch our attention. “seeing” is either a gerund or a participle here, because it ends in “ing.” If it’s a gerund, we know right away that it’s wrong because it’s not being possessively modified in order to indicate whose seeing of Derek we are referring to. We could write:</p>
<p>Quincy took Dan to Derek’s home for a visit, never imagining that five years would pass before Quincy’s seeing Derek again.</p>
<p>Let’s instead consider, with some more plausibility, that “seeing” is meant as a participle, like “imagining.” We assume again that Quincy is the one who would do the seeing of Derek. </p>
<p>Because “seeing” is herein a participle, it must also be clear grammatically, however, that “Quincy” is the participle’s object of modification. This is achieved only when the participle immediately precedes or succeeds (as in the case of “imagining”) a clause whose subject is the intended object of modification, or when the participial phrase immediately follows that object of modification. Here are some acceptable phrasings:</p>
<p>Before seeing Derek again, Quincy faced five years’ passing.</p>
<p>Quincy faced five years’ passing before seeing Derek again. </p>
<p>Quincy, before seeing Derek again, faced five years’ passing.</p>
<p>As the sentence was originally written, though, we don’t have such acceptability in the participial modification. This is so because, unlike in the second of the three previous example sentences, “before seeing Derek again” does not immediately succeed the clause whose subject is “Quincy”; instead, “before seeing Derek again” appears in a noun clause: “that five years would pass before seeing Derek again.” </p>
<p>Because a new clause has been fabricated in which the participial phrase “before seeing Derek again” is found, it’s no longer grammatically clear what the object of modification of “seeing” is. Who’s doing the seeing? Grammatically, we know not, even if the logic of the sentence conveys “Quincy.” Therefore, (D) is the answer.</p>
<p>In order to correct this simply rather than to revamp the syntax of the sentence as in my example sentences of proper participial form, we discard the participle and opt for a traditional verb, such as “he would see” or “Quincy would see”; “would” must be used to preserve tense parallelism with “would pass.”</p>
<p>I gather that you are asking why “need” shouldn’t be “needs”? “Someone” is indeed the subject, and it’s singular. “need” doesn’t conjugate to “needs” because it’s not the verb of the clause; “buy” is. “need” is serving there as a modal auxiliary, similar to “should” and “would,” and doesn’t change based on the plurality or singularity of the subject. Some examples:</p>
<p>He needs a hamster.</p>
<p>They need a hamster repellent. </p>
<p>He need not sell it to them.</p>
<p>They need not be afraid of the hamster.</p>
<p>“needs” and “need” are the verbs in the first two sentences. “need” is merely a modal auxiliary in the last two, in which the verbs are “sell” are “be.”</p>