<ol>
<li>By [incorporating] Pueblo figures into her [strongly geometric] and abstract [work is why] Pueblo artist Helen Hardin has had a significant [impact on] contemporary Native American art.</li>
</ol>
<p>My answer was NO ERROR. And the error is C. I thought it was an inverted sentence? I guess not :( Can someone explain a bit to me how to tell if a sentence is inverted or not?</p>
<ol>
<li>By using electromagnetic sensors (to record) the frequency of lighting strikes (throughout) the United States, meteorologists have (determined that) (it occurs) at the rate of 2,000 per hour. (No Error)</li>
</ol>
<p>Okay, I googled this question and I read silverturtle's response:* "it" cannot logically refer to "frequency" because a frequency does not occur at a rate; it is the rate.*</p>
<p>But I still don't get it!</p>
<ol>
<li>(To those of us) who (had heard) the principal of the high school talk (about) the budget, the news of the staff cuts (was not) surprising.</li>
</ol>
<p>okay, 'NEWS OF THE STAFF CUTS' is DEFINITELY plural. How is 'was not' correct?</p>
<p>Okay guys. Forget the swag part (cuz I got none. ;D)</p>
<p>But I need grammar help</p>
<ol>
<li>“News” is always singular because it is a noncount noun. It wouldn’t make sense to say “…the new of the staff cuts was not surprising.”</li>
</ol>
<ol>
<li>By using electromagnetic sensors (to record) the frequency of lighting strikes (throughout) the United States, meteorologists have (determined that) (it occurs) at the rate of 2,000 per hour. (No Error)</li>
</ol>
<p>The antecedent of “it” is ambiguous. There are 4 possible choices – i.e. sensors, frequency, lightning strikes and United States. I suppose that the listener can eliminate some of the possible antecedents, because they are plural. More likely the “it” is meant to refer to lightening strikes and if so could be “they” but then the antecedent of “they” would then be ambiguous. Anyway the sentence is a mess as written.</p>
<ol>
<li>Is no error. See:</li>
</ol>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/1030443-can-you-answer-these-7-level-5-writing-questions.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/1030443-can-you-answer-these-7-level-5-writing-questions.html</a></p>
<p>Okay, kimmey, here goes…16. “By incorporating…” is an introductory prepositional phrase acting as an adverb modifying the verb “has had” in the main clause. The adverb tells ‘how’ Hardin has had an impact… (The preposition is ‘by’ and the object is the gerund phrase 'incorporating…into her work".) So, how did she have an impact? ‘By incorporating abstract…into her work.’ </p>
<p>That’s what the sentence intends to happen, however in choice C, the words ‘is why’ are added without purpose to the end of the gerund construction. The result is that the gerund is forced into the role of the subject of a new linking verb construction with ‘is’ as the linking verb. In addition, the original main clause construction of “Pueblo artist Helen Harden has had…impact on…art” becomes a subordinate clause acting as the predicate nominative complement of that linking verb ‘is’. In other words, the sentence starts out to be an introductory adverb construction modifying the verb in a main clause. However, the intrusion of ‘is why’ in choice C distorts the entire construction of the original sentence leaving the opening preposition ‘by’ dangling without purpose and hijacking the object of that preposition to become a subject of a new sentence while also making the main clause of the original sentence act as a subordinate clause in the intruding sentence.</p>
<p>In short, ‘is why’ blows up the first sentence and shoves the twisted smoking pieces of that sentence into a new Frankenstein of a sentence. Actually, both constructions, the new and the old, exist side by side in the messed up version, so it really a sort of Siamese twin Frankenstein of a sentence.</p>