VA Guide for CAT 2008

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE #13:

WHICH THAT AND WHO
Use which for parenthetical remarks and asides (nonrestrictive clauses). Such remarks are not essential to the meaning of the sentence and can be omitted without losing the sense of the sentence. Nonrestrictive clauses are set off by commas.

Use that for clauses that limit or define (restrictive clauses). These clauses are necessary to the meaning of the sentence. You can omit that in a sentence, but don't leave it out if there's any possibility of confusion.

When referring to a person, use who rather than which or that.

Which, that, and who are not interchangeable.
Which usually refers to things
that to either things or people
who to people.

When you can replace that with who, do so. Other life forms take that. But how should you refer to a dog with a personality? There are always exceptions.
Examples
The wagon, which [incidentally] is now broken, was purchased at a home improvement store.
The clause which is now broken can be omitted without disrupting the meaning of the sentence. It is not essential to the sentence (nonrestrictive). It's simply additional information.
The wagon that is broken was purchased at a home improvement store.
This one particular wagon is broken; others are not broken. The clause that is broken restricts the meaning of wagon to the one that is in disrepair (restrictive).

The brochure, which was designed by our marketing department, won high praise at the meeting.
The nonrestrictive clause which was designed by our marketing department provides parenthetical information and can be omitted without destroying the meaning of the sentence.
The brochure that was designed by our marketing department won high praise at the meeting.
Notice how in the thrust of the sentence changes for 'brochure' to 'marketing department' as 'which' is changed to 'that'
The marketing department brochure was a winner; the brochures designed by other departments did not win kudos.

The attorney, who graduated from Yale, filed the motion with the court yesterday.
The clause adds parenthetical information (nonrestrictive).
The attorney who graduated from Yale filed the motion with the court yesterday.
It was specifically the Yale graduate who took action rather than the Harvard graduate (restrictive).

The teachers, who have educated my son, deserve an award for patience.
This nonrestrictive clause refers to all of the teachers your son has had in his school career.
The teachers who have educated my son deserve an award for patience.
You are now referring to only the more effective of your son's teachers; other teachers may not have had an impact (and were probably not as patient with your son).

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE #14:
COMPARED TO VS COMPARED WITH

To show comparison between unlike things, ‘compare to’ is used.
To show comparison between like things, ‘compare with’ is used.
Example
He compared her to a summer day.
Scientists compare the human brain to a computer. (Unlike thing)
The police compared the forged signature with the original. (Like things)

Compare usually takes the preposition to when it refers to the activity of describing the resemblances between unlike things:
He compared her to a summer day.

Scientists sometimes compare the human brain to a computer.Compare takes with when it refers to the act of examining two like things in order to discern their similarities or differences:

The police compared the forged signature with the original.
The committee will have to compare the Senate's version of the bill with the version that was passed by the House.

When compare is used to mean "to liken" (one) with another, with is traditionally held to be the correct preposition:
That little bauble is not to be compared with (not to) this enormous jewel. But "to" is frequently used in this context and is not incorrect.

Rule 1: Compare to compares unlike things, whereas compare with compares like things.
Rule 2: Compare to is used to stress the resemblance. Compare with can be used to show either similarity or difference but is usually used to stress the difference.There is a difference between compare to and compare with;

the first is to liken one thing to another
the second is to note the resemblances and differences between two things.

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE 15:
CAN VS COULD

A)to describe ability/willingness to do something now or in the past.:
e.g. Bill can drive a car very well. - ability

Marcel can play the piano at the party - willingness now

My parents could play golf twenty years ago - ability past

Bill could take photographs until he lost his camera - willingness past

B) to give an explanation or ask for permission:
e.g. In England, you can drive a car at the age of seventeen. - explanation
Can Mary use your computer, this evening?

C)

to express perception with certain verbs by using can in the present tense, and could in the past tense. The verbs are: to feel, hear, see:
e.g. Bill and Mary can see the River Seine from their house.
Derek could hear the church bells every Sunday morning when he lived in Milan.
Ann can feel the heat of the sun before she sees it.

D)

to explain a possibility and to make a suggestion in the present and future tenses by using could:
e.g. The old table could be in the garage - present

We could go to the cinema next Sunday - future
Could Mary help you to make this dress? – present

[ankitbansal2002]

Hi can u plz send it to me ...............it would be a gr8 help ......right now i suck at dis part................

Thanks a ton
Ankit

[tzsrivastava]

Originally Posted by ankitbansal2002

Hi can u plz send it to me ...............it would be a gr8 help ......right now i syck at dis part................ my mail is : Thanks a ton
Ankit

hi ankit ,
i can make out that u r new to this forum and pagal guy..as a reminder plz donot post email id's publicily...its not allowed..instead pm it to the person concerned...

and frm next post onwards be clear in what u post..u can quote the post u r replying too...
rgds
tarun
PS: plz delete ur email id frm the above post

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE 16:

NOT/BUT VS RATHER THAN

The key here is to realize that not... but... is conjunction.
We use conjunctions when we want to join things that are "linguistically equivalent."
Eg:
Pucci is not a dog but a cat.
Not Todd but Taka will be studying with us today.
I not was sad but happy to learn that Megumi was moving to Paris for a better job.

The words in bold are "linguistically equivalent," or, as we say in class, "parallel."
Now compare one of these sentences if I try to use rather than:
Pucci is a cat rather than a dog.
The meaning is all wrong.
Now, let's look at a similar sentence, one in which rather than is used
I want a cat rather than a dog.
This sentence is okay because we are expressing a preference for one thing over another thing.
I need X, not Y = I need X but not Y = I need not Y but X
"I need X rather than Y" does not connote "I need not Y", it just tells the preference.

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE 17 :

MAY VS MIGHT
TAKE 1:

to express a possibility/make a suggestion at the present time or in the future.
Example:
If you return tomorrow, you may see Mr Smith.
If you return tomorrow, you might see Mr Smith.

It may rain on Thursday or it might snow.
Might suggests less certainty than may.
TAKE 2:
to give/ask for permission by using may:

Example:
The workers may leave at six o'clock if they have finished their work. - give permission
May I see you tomorrow? - ask permission

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE 18:
SO VS SO THAT

When used with the meaning in order that, so is usually followed by that

Example :
I am saving money so that I can buy a bicycle.

[tzsrivastava]

USAGE 19
BECAUSE VS IN THAT

Take 1
using pure strategy, when a question has both because and in that, the answer is most likely in that.
TAke 2
because is used to express a simple causal relationship whereas in that qualifies the previous statement.

examples:
Cause and effect relationship: I went to sleep because I was tired. ==> Being tired caused me to go to sleep.
Qualification: Going to college is a sacrifice in that doing so requires several years of forgoing the income that students could have earned had they not attended college. ==> Going to college is a sacrifice, BUT NOT IN EVERY WAY; there are many ways in which going to college is NOT a sacrifice, but in this sentence, I want to express one way in which going to college IS a sacrifice.

In Sentence Correction, "in that" is more precise than "because."
"because" is actually wrong in this sentence, but a lot of people adamantly believe that it is correct, so instead of explaining why "because" is wrong, we will stick to why "in that" is better.

[tzsrivastava]

An article on FIJ's:
PART 1:

FACTS:

deal with pieces of information that one has heard, seen or read, and which are open to discovery or verification. The key word here is "verification". A fact is a statement that can be ‘verified’, i.e. a fact is either true or false. Facts are statements that may involve numbers, natural phenomena, dates etc. The characteristics of the statements classified as facts are:
· Made after observation or experience. An event cannot become a fact unless it has occurred.
· Confined to what one observes; cannot be made about the future.
· Limited number possible.
· Not perception dependent. A fact will be agreed to by every person. It does not change from person to person.
· Tends to bring people together in agreement.

Examples:

1) Nearly 2 lac students took CAT last year.
2) Life exists on other planets (although physically not possible to verify, this statement will be either true or false).
3) I like Pink Floyd more than Metallica (It may not seem so, but this statement is either true or false. Either I like Pink Floyd more than Metallica or I don’t).
4) The legislature is advocating vigorously against intrusion of judiciary in parliamentary affairs.
5) A football field is 100 yards long.
NOTE: Notice the difference when a sentence contains subjective or abstract expressions-6) The music was very loud (NOT a fact as the loudness might vary from person to person).
7) I found the music very loud (A fact as it is either a truth or a lie. I must have found the music very loud or not very loud).
Poverty is a curse on mankind (NOT a fact…’curse on mankind’ is too abstract).
9) 20% of the population live below poverty line (Fact).

‘FACTS’ STATEMENTS IN CAT 2006 PAPER:

1) The government has been supplying free drugs since 2004, and 35 000 have benefited up to now- though the size of the affected population is 150 times this number.
2) Only about 13 million children in the age group of 6 to 14 years are out of school.
3) The truth is that we have more red tape- we take eighty- nine days to start a small business, Australians take two.
4) The economies of the industrialized western world derive 20% of their income from the sale of all kinds of arms.