<p>The Bretons who began emigrating to the United States
from the Brittany region of France in the early
twentieth century were distinguished from other
French citizens by their Celtic origin, but about 40
percent of those who emigrated spoke a Celtic
language closely related to Welsh.
(A) but about 40 percent of those who emigrated
spoke
(B) about 40 percent of whom spoke
(C) about 40 percent of which were speaking
(D) with about 40 percent of those who emigrated
speaking
(E) where 40 percent of them were speaking</p>
<p>Can you explain why the answer is D? I picked B, but im guessing that would make the statement ambiguous since you don't know if you are referring to the French citizens or the immigrants</p>
<p>Ralph Ellisons Invisible Man is the story of a
nameless young Black man who ultimately decides to
forge his own identity rather than accept
the one assigned to him. </p>
<p>This sentence is correct but I had thought you would need to add a "to" before accept to make it have parallel structure.</p>
<p>If you can acquire the necessary calories by drinking
gasoline instead of by eating food, you would be able
to run 26 miles on about one-twelfth of a gallon of
gas. </p>
<p>The answer says "can acquire" is wrong. Can someone explain thaT ?</p>
<p>By the early 1920s, Louis Armstrong recorded
his first solos as a member of King Olivers Creole
Jazz Band in such pieces as Chimes Blues and
Tears, which he composed with pianist Lil Hardin.</p>
<p>The answer says "by" is wrong. Can someone explain thaT ?</p>
<p>By the early 1920's would be "In the early 1920's", depicts a certain time it occured, not that it occured up to that time, my guess on that.</p>
<p>Can acquire is an idiom, and it would be obtain, again my reasoning.</p>
<p>Your reason on it being ambiguous would be my answer as to why d is correct and not b.</p>
<p>As far as adding a to, makes it more wordy than it needs to be,remember concise is nice. </p>
<p>My guesses.</p>
<p>I'm guessing there is a tense issue between "can acquire" and "would be able to"</p>
<p>If you could acquire the necessary calories by drinking gasoline instead of by eating food, you would be able to run 26 miles on about one-twelfth of a gallon of gas.</p>
<p>Again, I think it's a tense issue on the last one also...if "By the early 1920s" were correct, it would have to read "By the early 1920's, Louis Armstrong had recorded his first solos..."</p>
<p>By the way, are these questions from collegeboard?</p>
<p>I think they're all from collegeboard.</p>
<p>Thanks for the replies, i was wondering
if i wanted to use "can acquire", how would i phrase the second part.
By the second part, i mean the "you would be able to run 26 miles"
in order to make the tenses match</p>
<p>First question: </p>
<p>(B) about 40 percent of whom spoke</p>
<p>This sounds right, but think about it carefully. :) In this version of the sentence, the word "whom" must refer to "other French citizens" (because "whom" should refer to a word immediately before it). So this version of the sentence means that the <em>other French citizens</em> speak a Celtic language, which changes the meaning of the sentence. It should be the Bretons who speak a Celtic language.</p>
<p>(D) with about 40 percent of those who emigrated
speaking</p>
<p>Okay. This sounds awkward at first, but actually, this is the choice that best preserves the meaning of the original sentence and shows the correct logical connection. You can use "with. . . ing" to show that one idea supports another idea. For instance, you would say, "With three players currently averaging four points a game, the Cougars are widely considered to have the best shot at the league championship." The "with. . . ing" construction at the beginning of the sentence gives you a little bit of supporting detail about the second part of the sentence. Same deal here.</p>
<p>In the Ralph Ellison question: No need for "to." The phrase "accept
the one assigned to him" is parallel to the phrase "forge his own identity"; that's fine.</p>
<br>
<blockquote>
<p>If you can acquire the necessary calories by drinking
gasoline instead of by eating food, you would be able
to run 26 miles on about one-twelfth of a gallon of
gas.</p>
<p>The answer says "can acquire" is wrong. Can someone explain thaT ?</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Let's say you're on the phone with someone and he says, "If I can get an 800 this weekend on the SAT CR. . ." That sounds like, maybe, he has an actual shot at an 800, at least in his own opinion, right? Now imagine he says, "If I could get an 800 this weekend. . ." That sounds like he's just dreaming, right? In sentences like these, we use the word "can" (the present tense) to refer to actual possibilities. We use the word "could" (the past tense) to refer to imaginary possibilities. You can't drink gasoline; therefore it's an imaginary possibility; therefore you need the word "could."</p>
<p>If you want more detail about this type of sentence (they're sometimes called if-then conditionals), you can find it at this website:</p>
<p><a href="http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional.htm%5B/url%5D">http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional.htm</a></p>
<p>As a native speaker, though, you might just want to keep using your ear.</p>
<p>Last question: I'm guessing that the word "recorded" is not underlined, right?</p>
<p>The problem here is subtle. It's not that "by" is wrong; it's that "by" and "recorded" don't match. With the word "by," you usually need a perfect tense (one formed with the helping verb "have" or "had"). For instance, we'd say, "By the time he turned 30, he had already made his first million," not "By the time he turned 30, he made his first million." In both sentences, the action "made his first million" is finished before he turned 30, so we use the past perfect, not the simple past.</p>
<p>If you have no idea what the past perfect and the simple past are, spend five minutes on google and you'll be able to figure it out.</p>