<p>Understanding that she could not take her illness lightly (and hoping for swift, effective treatment), Maria decided to see a specialist.</p>
<p>A) and hoping for swift, effective treatment
D) yet hoping for her treatment to be swift and effective</p>
<p>I thought D would be better because it shows the contrast between a serious illness and the hope for a quick recovery. But its A. Explain</p>
<p>(If we have) knowledge of the future, our lives would be more predictable but less interesting.
A) same as written
E) Were we to have</p>
<p>What's the diff. between A and E? Answers E. </p>
<p>(The octopus emits a cloud of ink acting as a smokescreen when fleeing a predator)
A) same
C) The cloud of ink emitted by an octopus acts a smokescreen when fleeing a predator
E) When fleeing a predator, the octopus emits a cloud of ink that acts as a smokescreen.</p>
<p>I was confused by these three choices. C can't be the because of it's passivity, correct?
Why is A wrong? Is it because CB thinks that "when fleeing" is ambiguous. It's not ambiguous. We clearly know that the subject is the octopus. </p>
<p>Why is E the better answer?</p>
<p>1) There is no contrast between understanding the seriousness of an illness and hoping for good treatment. In fact, they probably go hand-in-hand.
2) E utilizes the subjunctive mood, which indicates that there is a condition completely contrary to fact and purely theoretical. “If we have knowledge . . .” does not imply that “we” does not have knowledge; it just takes into consideration the circumstances if such a situation was presumed to be true if not already true. “If” means “in the event that”–it basically introduces a situation that may or may not be contrary to fact. The subjunctive mood is difficult to explain grammatically. Here is a site elaborating on it: [Verbs</a> and Verbals](<a href=“http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/verbs.htm#subjunctive]Verbs”>http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/verbs.htm#subjunctive)
3) The modifying phrase “when fleeing a predator” has no subject, so the subject is implied to be the same one in the phrase that is being modified. “When fleeing a predator” essentially modifies a verb; you do something when or while doing something else. There are two verbs in the sentence (“emits” and “acting”) so the modifying is ambiguous. Here are the two possible sentences (the verb being modified and the modifying phrase are in brackets):
“The octopus emits a cloud of ink which [acts…when fleeing a predator].”
“The octopus [emits…when fleeing a predator].”
The first example implies that the ink acts as a smokescreen when, or while, fleeing a predator. (The ink does the fleeing.)
The second example implies that the octopus emits ink when, or while, fleeing a predator. (The octopus does the fleeing.)</p>
<p>A and C are ambiguous. E precludes ambiguity by moving the modifying phrase to the beginning, in which case the thing being modified HAS to be in the first clause (“the octopus emits. . . .”)</p>
<p>How does “when fleeing a predator” modify a verb? That doesn’t make any sense. The present participle in that phrase, fleeing, indicates that the phrase should modify a noun, the octopus in this case because it is the subject of this sentence.</p>
<p>Conjunctions can’t modify nouns. You can’t say the phrase “the octopus when fleeing” without a verb, but you can say “emitting when fleeing” or “to emit while fleeing.” The verb is the means by which the subject is known, so since there are two verbs (each of which has a different doer–the ink or the octopus), both the verb and, in turn, the doer is ambiguous.</p>
<p>^Oh!!! that’s what confused me. Okay thank you so much. Just curious, what did you get on writing portion? IF you don’t want to tell me, that’s okay too. Just keep helping out others. Thanks so much!!</p>
<p>I got a 770 in writing.</p>