The Achaemenid empire of persia reached the indus valley in the fifth century B.C., bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and southern Indian alphabets.
the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and
Why not option E?I find the parallelism bringing and deriving
for some srange reason, i think its A,simply because reached is parallel with derived..rather they are in the same tense.. also,in C bringing with it, sunds a but awkward..
IMO Closest Option is C - 'as' is used in place of 'such as', so I guess that should be fine (though I find it redundant with 'for example'). Parallelism also holds good in this option.
A - 'for example been prescribed' sounds wierd. B - mis-placed 'for example' because of which parallelism is being lost. D and E - 'when they have' - they is referred to whom patients or therapies (treatment being singular can not confuse us)...not clear.
Whats the OA?
Cheers. Ankit.
hey Ankit,
in D'they' refers to patients?how can therapies be termed they?
The Achaemenid empire of persia reached the indus valley in the fifth century B.C., bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and southern Indian alphabets.
the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and
IMO: C
Cheers. Ankit.
for some srange reason, i think its A,simply because reached is parallel with derived..rather they are in the same tense.. also,in C bringing with it, sunds a but awkward..
Ankit,
Could you hlep?
Logical construction of this sentence is: 1. The empire brought the script. 2. Alphabets were derived from the script (and not that the Alphabets were derived from the script.)
In my opinion: A: 1. Awkward construction. 'from which' doesn't clearly point to 'the script'. 2. In case of 'both', plural should be used. 'Which was' is incorrect. B: Awkward construction. 'and from which deriving' sounds wierd. C: Correct. D: In case of 'both', plural should be used. 'derives' should be replaced with 'derive'. E: 'bringing' and 'deriving' can not be considered for parallelism. Remember, the rule from Manhattan - "Do not become a victim of superficial parallelism by assuming that ALL verbs in a sentence must be parallel. Only the structures that are logically parallel must be structurally paralle." Here, 'bring' is and action taken by the empire. But 'derive' is an action taken by the script.
in D'they' refers to patients?how can therapies be termed they?
I understand that logically 'they' can not refer to therapies, but that is what we are being tested for here. Even though this sounds logically good, grammatically its not (or should I say 'may not be correct'), because 'they' is not clearly identifying the noun that it is referring to.
btw...whats the OA...who knows...all my explanations might go for a toss...
Not only do deep-sea divers risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet, but they also fall prey to decompression sickness, commonly known as the bends, if they ascend too quickly.
(A) Not only do deep-sea divers risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet, but
(B) Deep-sea divers risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet,
(C) Nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, is risked by deep-sea divers if they descend below 200 feet, in addition
(D) The descending of deep-sea divers to below 200 feet causes them risking nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, and
(E) Not only does a deep-sea diver risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet, butthey
Is the usage "....not only X but they also Y..." correct ? (please note the usage in option A)
I thought it can only be .....not only X ,but also Y.
Not only do deep-sea divers risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet, but they also fall prey to decompression sickness, commonly known as the bends, if they ascend too quickly.
(A) Not only do deep-sea divers risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet, but
(B) Deep-sea divers risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet,
(C) Nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, is risked by deep-sea divers if they descend below 200 feet, in addition
(D) The descending of deep-sea divers to below 200 feet causes them risking nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, and
(E) Not only does a deep-sea diver risk nitrogen narcosis, often called raptures of the deep, if they descend below 200 feet, butthey
Is the usage "....not only X but they also Y..." correct ? (please note the usage in option A)
I thought it can only be .....not only X ,but also Y.
I will go with option A for the one.It tests the usuability of Not only but also.Considering that only option A and E makes as contenders.Option E has the improper usuage of pronoun "they'
In addition to providing more course offerings than Willow High School, the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at Willow, having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body. (A) the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at (B) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than those at (C) Menlo High School teachers are better trained than they are at (D) the teachers at Menlo High School are better in training than those at (E) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than at
You will easily identify the answer as option (B) . But i had a doubt in the non underlined part of the sentence - having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body , What is this modifying??
Please give your inputs asap . I have my exam very soon and participles as modifiers are really troubling me.
In addition to providing more course offerings than Willow High School, the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at Willow, having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body. (A) the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at (B) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than those at (C) Menlo High School teachers are better trained than they are at (D) the teachers at Menlo High School are better in training than those at (E) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than at
You will easily identify the answer as option (B) . But i had a doubt in the non underlined part of the sentence - having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body , What is this modifying?? Please give your inputs asap . I have my exam very soon and participles as modifiers are really troubling me.
the subordinate clause- having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body, is modifying the teachers. the sentence tells that teachers are better trained and have received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body.
In addition to providing more course offerings than Willow High School, the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at Willow, having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body. (A) the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at (B) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than those at (C) Menlo High School teachers are better trained than they are at (D) the teachers at Menlo High School are better in training than those at (E) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than at
You will easily identify the answer as option (B) . But i had a doubt in the non underlined part of the sentence - having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body , What is this modifying??
Please give your inputs asap . I have my exam very soon and participles as modifiers are really troubling me.
Choosing Options B,rightly, will make Teachers as subject and the subordinate clause rightly gives more info about subject.
In addition to providing more course offerings than Willow High School, the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at Willow, having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body. (A) the teachers at Menlo High School are better trained than those at (B) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than those at (C) Menlo High School teachers are better trained than they are at (D) the teachers at Menlo High School are better in training than those at (E) Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than at
You will easily identify the answer as option (B) . But i had a doubt in the non underlined part of the sentence - having received more information on instructing a multilingual and culturally diverse student body , What is this modifying?? Please give your inputs asap . I have my exam very soon and participles as modifiers are really troubling me.
Hey!
The participle having is modifying Teachers here!
A few things shall help:
1. Participle can't act as verbs,can't subsitute for verbs where as Gerunds can (Smoking is good for health) 2. Present Participle - ing form 3. Past participle - ed form 4. To distinguish between 'ing' and 'ed' form, just focus on the noun and then ask yourself whether the noun is the subject or object of the verb. 5. If subject then use 'ing' form and if object then use 'ed' form
Now in above sentence:
Menlo High School has teachers who are better trained than those at Willow.
Here the subject is Teachers, trained is an intransitive verb and the objects of preposition 'at' are Menlo and willow ; Flip it and we can say - Teachers at X are better trained then teachers at Y, Hav'ing'(modifies subject i.e teachers)
What should be the appropriate answer?? As the housing affordability gap widens, middle-income families are especially hard-hit, and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes, and rising rental rates force them to use far more than the standard 25 percent of their incomes for housing, leaving them with no equity or tax write-offs to offset the expenditures. 1) and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes,and 2) since these families can no longer afford to buy homes, furthermore 3) for these families can no longer afford to buy homes, yet 4) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes; however, 5) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes, for
What should be the appropriate answer?? As the housing affordability gap widens, middle-income families are especially hard-hit, and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes, and rising rental rates force them to use far more than the standard 25 percent of their incomes for housing, leaving them with no equity or tax write-offs to offset the expenditures. 1) and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes,and 2) since these families can no longer afford to buy homes, furthermore 3) for these families can no longer afford to buy homes, yet 4) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes; however, 5) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes, for
Ans shud be (C). It is the only option that explains the reason Y r the middle class families hard hit. Yet again signifies that despite being hard hit rising rates FORCE them to use more than the standard %age reserved for housing.
What should be the appropriate answer?? As the housing affordability gap widens, middle-income families are especially hard-hit, and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes, and rising rental rates force them to use far more than the standard 25 percent of their incomes for housing, leaving them with no equity or tax write-offs to offset the expenditures. 1) and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes,and 2) since these families can no longer afford to buy homes, furthermore 3) for these families can no longer afford to buy homes, yet 4) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes; however, 5) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes, for
I would rather go with B. Explanation: A: bla bla bla, and bla bla, and bla bla. IMO, this construction seems awkward. C and D: yet/however are used to show contrast. But both the fragments, "families can no longer qualify to buy homes" and "rising rental rates force them" are talking about the same sad side of the story. No contrast... E: Usage of ", for" is incorrect, indicating that families can not afford to buy houses because of rising rental rates, which is not what we intend to say.
What should be the appropriate answer?? As the housing affordability gap widens, middle-income families are especially hard-hit, and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes, and rising rental rates force them to use far more than the standard 25 percent of their incomes for housing, leaving them with no equity or tax write-offs to offset the expenditures. 1) and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes,and 2) since these families can no longer afford to buy homes, furthermore 3) for these families can no longer afford to buy homes, yet 4) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes; however, 5) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes, for
IMO B
nothing else makes sense .. it should either be A or B , but the construction in A is weird, so B is the obvious answer.
What should be the appropriate answer?? As the housing affordability gap widens, middle-income families are especially hard-hit, and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes, and rising rental rates force them to use far more than the standard 25 percent of their incomes for housing, leaving them with no equity or tax write-offs to offset the expenditures. 1) and these families can no longer qualify to buy homes,and 2) since these families can no longer afford to buy homes, furthermore 3) for these families can no longer afford to buy homes, yet 4) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes; however, 5) and these families can no longer afford to buy homes, for
I will go with E. The reason for families not being able to buy houses is their lack of savings, isn't it? Also, can we use since after a comma?
I am not too sure here.
Also, I have a doubt in verbal.
It is often better to try repairing an old car than to junk it. (A) to try repairing an old car than to junk it. (B) to repair an old car than to have it junked. (C) to try repairing an old car than to junking it. (D) to try and repair an old car than to junk it. (E) to try to repair an old car than to junk it.
Which are the parallel verbs here. Is it 'try'or 'repair'? I thought it was 'try' that should be parallel to 'junk'. the solution says that repair is the verb. Can somebody explain?
