Writing question: Original BB problems 877/6, 8, 9

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<ol>
<li>Laughing because they had missed their stop while reading the map, the task for the tourists now was getting off the bus and back to their destination.</li>
</ol>

<p>(A) task for the tourists now was
(B) tourists' task now was
(C) tourists now facing the task of
(D) tourists nevertheless now faced the task of
(E) tourists now faced the task of</p>

<p>E is correct, but why is D incorrect? Isn't the word "nevertheless" appropriate because although they were laughing, there was a problem at hand?</p>

<ol>
<li>When Catherine the Great had a magnificent dinner service of Sevres porcelain made for her, she was scandalized by its great cost, which became the subject of prolonged controversy.</li>
</ol>

<p>(A) which became
(B) so it was to be
(C) with a result that it was destined to become
(D) therefore becoming
(E) consequently it would become</p>

<p>A is correct, but why is D incorrect? I understand that "therefore becoming" would make Catherine the subject of controversy, but how do we know it's the great cost and not Catherine?</p>

<ol>
<li>Though the damage caused by strip-mining was often irreparable to the natural environment, it was once used to supply half the coal produced annually in the United States.</li>
</ol>

<p>(A) Though the damage caused by strip-mining was often irreparable to the natural environment, it
(B) Though irreparable damage is caused often to the natural environment by strip-mining, it
(C) Though strip-mining often caused irreparable damage to the natural environment, it
(D) Despite the fact of often irreparable damage to the natural environment, strip-mining
(E) In spite of often irreparable damage to the natural environment, strip-mining</p>

<p>The correct answer is C, but why is E incorrect? In fact, E keeps the subject ("strip-mining") closer to its description clause in the second part of the sentence, whereas in C, strip-mining is broken up with the second clause started by the ambiguous "it".</p>

2

<p>i think choice (D) for num 6 falls in the “wordiness” category, because “nevertheless” with “now” sounds a bit awkward</p>

<p>8: if you choose (D) you would still be referring to “her”, and SHE didn’t become the “subject” of the controversy, the great cost did.</p>

3

<p>6) It is somewhat redundant because the sentence is indicative. It indicates events that occur in relation to each other. You would say: “Running for the train because he was late, the man missed breakfast.” We know that the dependent clause “running…late” and the independent clause “the man missed breakfast” are related grammatically. There is no need for an extra word or phrase like “for that reason” in: “Running for the train because he was late, for that reason the man missed breakfast.” I don’t know how to explain it in grammatical terms, but it isn’t necessary.</p>

<p>8) First of all, we know that “which” refers to the “great cost” because it is the last noun mentioned in the previous clause. That’s all there is to it. Grammatically, it cannot refer to Catherine. Here is the corresponding definition from Dictionary.com: </p>

<p><a href=“used%20relatively%20in%20restrictive%20and%20nonrestrictive%20clauses%20to%20represent%20a%20specified%20antecedent”>QUOTE</a>: The book, which I read last night, was exciting. The socialism which Owen preached was unpalatable to many. The lawyer represented five families, of which the Costello family was the largest.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>9) First of all, “it” is not ambiguous. The other nouns in the first clause, “irreparable damage” and “natural environment,” are objects of the transitive verb “caused.” The sentence can essentially be broken down to: “Though strip-mining caused…, it used…”</p>

<p>(E) says: “In spite of often irreparable damage to the natural environment, strip-mining was once used to supply half the coal produced annually in the United States.” This is incorrect:</p>

<p>1) There is no correlation between “irreparable damage to the natural environment” and “strip-mining.” We do not know if strip-mining caused the damage.
2) “Often” is an adverb which does not modify adjectives or nouns. It only modifies verbs, which is missing in the dependent clause.
3) Since the verb is missing, the clause relies on nouns: In spite of [strip-mining’s] [damage] to the [natural environment], it…" Because of this, even if we did say that the damage was caused by strip-mining (as in the sentence I just gave), the sentence would be wrong because “it” would not refer to “strip-mining.”</p>