Pronoun Flashcards
Rejecting its argument that the Masters Dog Training Club’s primary aim was to teach people to train dogs, the court ruled the club ineligible for tax exemption as an educational group.
A. Rejecting its argument that the Masters Dog Training Club’s primary aim was to teach people to train dogs, the court ruled the club ineligible for tax exemption as an educational group.
B. In rejecting the Masters Dog Training Club’s argument that their primary aim was to teach people to train dogs, the court ruled the club ineligible to be exempted of taxes as an educational group.
C. Rejecting the argument that the primary aim of the Masters Dog Training Club was to teach people to train dogs, the court ruled that the club was ineligible for exemption from taxes as an educational group.
D. The club was not to be exempted of taxes as an educational group, ruled the court by rejecting its argument that the primary aim of the Masters Dog Training Club was teaching people to train dogs.
E. The court ruled the Masters Dog Training Club not eligible to be exempted from taxes as an educational group, rejecting the argument that the primary aim was to teach people to train dogs.
Ans = C
ITS IN A is wrong
As written, the possessive adjective its fails to make clear whether it is to the court or to the club that the argument mentioned is being attributed.
he sentence begins with the modifying phrase, “rejecting its argument,” which seems to be describing “the court.” But that doesn’t make any sense. Why would the court reject its own argument? We can eliminate (A), because it’s illogical.
Contrast that with (C), in which the court is rejecting “the argument,” rather than its argument. Now it seems as though that the court is rejecting an argument proposed by one of the parties in a case, rather than something it came up with itself. Much better.
According to the writings of Thorstein Veblen, the economist, the most reliable signal of a truly wealthy individual is his or her ability and willingness to engage in “conspicuous consumption”—to spend it in a way that is patently absurd or irrational.
(A) Thorstein Veblen, the economist, the most reliable signal of a truly wealthy individual is his or her ability and willingness
(B) Thorstein Veblen, the economist, the most reliable signal that one is truly wealthy is whether one is capable and willing
(C) economist Thorstein Veblen, the most reliable signal of one’s true wealth is whether an individual is capable and willing
(D) the economist Thorstein Veblen, an individual’s true wealth is most reliably signaled by their ability and willingness
(E) the economist Thorstein Veblen, the most reliable signal of true wealth is an individual’s ability and willingness
This sentence describes an assertion from the writings of the economist Thorstein Veblen: namely, that individual wealth is most reliably signaled by the ability and willingness to engage in “conspicuous consumption,” a concept that the sentence then defines.
(A) The pronoun it in the phrase spend it in a way should logically refer to wealth or money; however, no such noun exists in the sentence (wealthy is an adjective).
(B) The pronoun it in the phrase spend it in a way should logically refer to wealth or money; however, no such noun exists in the sentence (wealthy is an adjective). Whether is also illogical, suggesting that whether someone is willing or is not willing to engage in “conspicuous consumption” is a signal of wealth. Rather, someone must have both the ability and the willingness to do so. Finally, in the parallel structure capable and willing to engage, the idiom willing to + verb is acceptable, but the idiom capable to + verb is not (the sentence should say capable of engaging).
(C) The shift from one’s to an individual is unacceptable; it illogically suggests that the person possessing the wealth is not necessarily the same person who engages in “conspicuous consumption.” Whether is also illogical, suggesting that whether someone is willing or is not willing to engage in “conspicuous consumption” is a signal of wealth. Rather, someone must have both the ability and the willingness to do so. Finally, in the parallel structure capable and willing to engage, the idiom willing to + verb is acceptable, but the idiom capable to + verb is not (the sentence should say capable of engaging).
(D) The plural pronoun their cannot refer to the singular noun an individual’s.
(E) CORRECT. This sentence contains the singular noun wealth, which serves as a logical antecedent for it. Both ability and willingness combine idiomatically with to + verb.
It is impossible to truly understand a different culture neither having grown up in that culture nor immersed oneself in it for an extended period of time.
A. neither having grown up in that culture nor
B. if you haven’t grown up in that culture or
C. having not grown up in that culture nor
D. having neither grown up in that culture nor
E. without either having grown up in that culture or
(A) The second part of the parallel structure says that it is impossible to truly understand a different culture neither X nor immersed oneself in it for an extended period of time. The sentence needs to repeat having after or. Alternatively, the sentence could move the word having before the word neither and not repeat it: having neither grown up in that culture nor immersed oneself in it.
(B) This sentence fixes the initial broken parallelism. It is impossible to truly understand a different culture if you haven’t done one of two things: (1) grown up in that culture or (2) immersed oneself in it for an extended period of time. However, the sentence incorrectly shifts from you (second person) to oneself (third person) to refer to the same person. Either form is acceptable, as long as it’s consistent throughout the sentence.
(C) The construction not X nor Y is incorrect. The correct construction is not X or Y. If this sentence changed nor to or, it would be correct.
(D) CORRECT. This sentence fixes the initial broken parallelism. It is impossible to truly understand a different culture having not done one of two things: (1) grown up in that culture or (2) immersed oneself in it for an extended period of time.
(E) This choice has a similar error to the original sentence. The second part of this parallel structure reads as follows: It is impossible to truly understand a different culture without X or immersed oneself in it for an extended period of time. The sentence needs to repeat having after or. Alternatively, the sentence could move the word having before the word either and not repeat it: without having either grown up in that culture or immersed oneself in it.
Avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park killed more than 200 people between 1885 and 1910, but they are now controlled if not prevented; cannons are fired at the slopes to make snow masses fall before they become dangerous.
A. Avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park killed more than 200 people between 1885 to 1910, but they
B. More than 200 people have been killed by avalanches between 1885 and 1910 at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park, but they
C. Between 1885 and 1910, more than 200 people were killed by avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park, but they
D. More than 200 people have been killed by avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park between 1885 and 1910, but such avalanches
E. Avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park killed more than 200 people between 1885 and 1910, but such avalanches
VERY INTERESTING
I REJECTED THIS COZ OF “THEY” BUT I THOUGHT OT WAS AMBIGUOUS BECAUSE OF PEOPLE AND AVALANCHE.
BUT ANTECEDENT IS “AVALANCHE AT ROGER PASS IN GN PARK BTW 1885 AND 1990” , BUT HOW CAN YOU CONTROL AN AVALANCHE OF THE PAST SO IT IS ILLOGICAL
ALSO BECAUSE IT CLEARLY CALLS OUT PAST TIME PERIOD 1885 AND 1910,YOU WOULD NEED A TENSE IN SIMPLE PAST NOTHING TO DO WITH PRESENT LIKE PRESENT CONTINUOUS HAVE BEEN
In the small, closed Bedouin world, in which secrets are hard to keep, there is the danger of stigmatizing a carrier and their families, subsequently lowering their chances for marriage should word get out that a genetic disease runs in her family.
in which secrets are hard to keep, there is the danger of stigmatizing a carrier and their families, subsequently lowering their in which secrets are hard to keep, there is the danger of stigmatizing a carrier and her family, subsequently lowering her which secrets are hard to keep, there is the danger of stigmatizing a carrier and her family, subsequently lowering her in which secrets are hard to keep, there is the danger of stigmatizing a carrier and her families, subsequently lowering her which secrets are hard to keep, there is the danger of stigmatizing carriers and their families, subsequently lowering their
Ans -= B
Learning to look in non underlined portion
