<p>1) The article featured the Sea Islands because many were known there to live[\u] to live much as their ancestors of a century ago had lived.
a) many were known to live
b) they were known there for living
c) many of the people there were known to live
d) of the many people, they were there living
e) of knowing that many people lived there</p>
<p>2) At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the proposal to replace the existing Articles of Confederation with a federal constitution were met with [\u] fierce opposition
a) were met with
b) having been met with
c) it met
d) met with
e) met their</p>
<p>3) Intimacy, love, and marriage are three different, if interrelated, subjects [\u]
A) different, if interrelated, subjects
B) interrelated subjects, being, however, different
C) different subjects, whereas they are interrelated
d) different subjects when interrelated
e) subjects that are different although being interrelated</p>
<p>Identify errors:
1) the cost of safely disposing [\u] of the toxic chemical is approximately [\u] five times what [\u] the company paid to purchase it [\u]</p>
<p>You use ‘/’ not '' to form an underline. You’re using the wrong slash.
First of all, the sentence is talking about the Sea Islands from a distance. “There” should modify the people (“the people there were known”), not the knowledge of the people (“the people were known there”). “The people there” refers to the people in the Sea Islands. “The people were known there to live…” implies that the people were known in the Sea Islands to live similarly to their ancestors, meaning the knowledge of how they live existed in the Sea Islands as opposed to where the article featuring the Sea Islands originated. Where were the people known? Everywhere, apparently, since an article was written about it. They weren’t just known there, or in the Sea Islands. C remedies this problem found in A.</p>
<p>In A, “many” presumably refers to the Sea Islands. It should refer to the people living there. C corrects this problem with “many of the people there.”</p>
<p>NOTE: “To live much as their ancestors did” means “to live a lot like their ancestors did.” It has nothing to do with the amount of time the people lived; it has to do with how they lived. The “much” means “a lot.” “As” means “in a similar way” or “like.”</p>
<p>B is wrong because it makes the mistakes that A does. “They” presumably refers to the Sea Islands, not the people living there. You have to actually say the word “people,” not just refer to them as “they” or “many” as if it is implied–it is not.</p>
<p>D is wrong because it essentially has the phrase “they of the many people.”</p>
<p>E is wrong for various reasons. I hope I don’t have to explain this one.
A is wrong because the plural verb “were” does not agree with the singular subject “proposal.” </p>
<p>B is wrong because “having” is not a verb (“The proposal having been met with fierce opposition” is not a sentence) and is in the wrong tense.</p>
<p>C is wrong because the subject is already being modified; you don’t have to refer to it again with “it”: “The proposal…it met…” is incorrect; “The proposal…met” is correct.</p>
<p>D is correct. “The proposal…met with fierce opposition.” The two things met each other. Meet means “come into contact.” With means “against”: “He fought with her.” The proposal basically went against fierce opposition, as if one was trying to stop the other in its path.
The answer is A. “If” means “although perhaps”: “an interesting if unstable argument.” It basically can separate two adjectives that seem to somewhat contradict each other. It is similar to “yet”: “a sour yet tasty apple.” “Intimacy, love, and marriage are three different, if interrelated, subjects” means to say that although these three things are interrelated (similar), they are different. They are three different, although (perhaps) interrelated, subjects.</p>
<p>B is wrong because it essentially says that the three things are “interrelated subjects being different,” which is ridiculous. Even if it were more concise–i.e., “interrelated, different subjects,” it would be wrong because there is no contrast. How can you describe something as interrelated AND different? The “if” and the pause before it (“different, if interrelated…”) serves as a stylistically grammatical structure.</p>
<p>C introduces a conjunction, a pronoun, and a verb, as if an entire clause is necessary. You cannot pause and start a new sentence: “… are different, … they are interrelated.” </p>
<p>D changes “if” to “when.” “When” has to do with time, which is irrelevant in this sentence. “If” and “when” are related, but the particular definition of “if” in this context is unrelated to “when.”</p>
<p>E is wordy. It is a common error on the SAT for adjectives to be next to the word “being”–you don’t describe an apple as being green; you describe it as green. Adjectives should stand alone. You do not need to attach it to a participle (“being interrelated”) or have to start a new clause because of it (“they are interrelated”).
The answer is D. The singular “it” does not agree with the plural “toxic chemicals.” I’m assuming you made a typo. Why would a sentence analyze how much a company paid for a single chemical? </p>
<p>“Dispose of” is grammatically correct because it is a phrasal verb that means “get rid of.”</p>
<p>oh wow crazybandit, you should write a SAT walkthrough book or something. But on the last (identification question), I thought A supposed to be safe disposing of? Because disposing is a noun right?</p>