Minnesota is the only one of the

[sanjay]

Minnesota is the only one of the contiguous forty-eight states that still has a sizable wolf population. and
where this predator remains the archenemy of cattle and sheep.
(A) that still has a sizable wolf population, and where
(B) that still has a sizable wolf population, where
(C) that still has a sizable population of wolves, and where
(D) where the population of wolves is still sizable;
(E) where there is still a sizable population of wolves and where

Ron, can you pls shed more light of Singular Vs Plural construction here.... is use of HAS is okay...

[RonPurewal]

Minnesota is the only one of the contiguous forty-eight states that still has a sizable wolf population. and
where this predator remains the archenemy of cattle and sheep.
(A) that still has a sizable wolf population, and where
(B) that still has a sizable wolf population, where
(C) that still has a sizable population of wolves, and where
(D) where the population of wolves is still sizable;
(E) where there is still a sizable population of wolves and where

Ron, can you pls shed more light of Singular Vs Plural construction here.... is use of HAS is okay...

if it says the only one of..., then it's singular.
if it says only one of... (without the), then it's plural.

read my last post on this thread for more about this issue.

[tankobe]

Need Ron....

Minnesota is the only one of the contiguous forty-eight states where there is still a sizable population of wolves and where this predator remains the archenemy of cattle and sheep.

i have 3 quetions about pronoun:
when talking about it/they, we kown the the number must be consistant.
1# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(the atandance need to be 'cars' rather than 'car'?) in number?
2# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(not the same Noun but the Noun of same catalog, ig. automobile) in number--in this context, this predator vs. wolves?
3# if a Noun is function as adj to modify another Noun, can we use it/they to refer the adj Noun? in another words, in this context of 'wolf population', can we use it to refer to wolf ? if not, is such/this wolf ok?

[shrads.jp]

Minnesota is the only one of the contiguous forty-eight states that still has a sizable wolf population. and
where this predator remains the archenemy of cattle and sheep.
(A) that still has a sizable wolf population, and where
(B) that still has a sizable wolf population, where
(C) that still has a sizable population of wolves, and where
(D) where the population of wolves is still sizable;
(E) where there is still a sizable population of wolves and where

Ron, can you pls shed more light of Singular Vs Plural construction here.... is use of HAS is okay...

What is the OA ....is it B?

[RonPurewal]

i have 3 quetions about pronoun:
when talking about it/they, we kown the the number must be consistant.
1# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(the atandance need to be 'cars' rather than 'car'?) in number?

what is "atandance"? do you mean "antecedent"? (i'll assume that's the case for the sake of the following discussion)

i don't understand this question - it seems to be the same as question #2, below.

if you're literally talking about the same noun, then this question is probably outside the scope of anything you're actually going to see on the test - if it's the same noun, then there isn't much of a reason to repeat it.

2# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(not the same Noun but the Noun of same catalog, ig. automobile) in number--in this context, this predator vs. wolves?

apparently not, since the correct answer to this problem has "wolves" and "this predator".

3# if a Noun is function as adj to modify another Noun, can we use it/they to refer the adj Noun? in another words, in this context of 'wolf population', can we use it to refer to wolf ? if not, is such/this wolf ok?

no. in the phrase "wolf population", wolf is actually an adjective, not a noun. you can't use a pronoun to stand for an adjective.

you can't say "such a wolf" or "this wolf" either; those constructions imply that you actually have some particular wolf in mind.

[tankobe]

i have 3 quetions about pronoun:
when talking about it/they, we kown the the number must be consistant.
1# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(the atandance need to be 'cars' rather than 'car'?) in number?

what is "atandance"? do you mean "antecedent"? (i'll assume that's the case for the sake of the following discussion)

i don't understand this question - it seems to be the same as question #2, below.

if you're literally talking about the same noun, then this question is probably outside the scope of anything you're actually going to see on the test - if it's the same noun, then there isn't much of a reason to repeat it.

2# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(not the same Noun but the Noun of same catalog, ig. automobile) in number--in this context, this predator vs. wolves?

apparently not, since the correct answer to this problem has "wolves" and "this predator".

3# if a Noun is function as adj to modify another Noun, can we use it/they to refer the adj Noun? in another words, in this context of 'wolf population', can we use it to refer to wolf ? if not, is such/this wolf ok?

no. in the phrase "wolf population", wolf is actually an adjective, not a noun. you can't use a pronoun to stand for an adjective.

you can't say "such a wolf" or "this wolf" either; those constructions imply that you actually have some particular wolf in mind.

Ron! really a fan of you and your explanation!
yes, it should be 'antecedent' rather than 'antecedence', which is a typo.

[RonPurewal]

i have 3 quetions about pronoun:
when talking about it/they, we kown the the number must be consistant.
1# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(the atandance need to be 'cars' rather than 'car'?) in number?

what is "atandance"? do you mean "antecedent"? (i'll assume that's the case for the sake of the following discussion)

i don't understand this question - it seems to be the same as question #2, below.

if you're literally talking about the same noun, then this question is probably outside the scope of anything you're actually going to see on the test - if it's the same noun, then there isn't much of a reason to repeat it.

2# when talking about this/that/these/such+Noun(ig. cars), should the Noun be consistant with its atandance(not the same Noun but the Noun of same catalog, ig. automobile) in number--in this context, this predator vs. wolves?

apparently not, since the correct answer to this problem has "wolves" and "this predator".

3# if a Noun is function as adj to modify another Noun, can we use it/they to refer the adj Noun? in another words, in this context of 'wolf population', can we use it to refer to wolf ? if not, is such/this wolf ok?

no. in the phrase "wolf population", wolf is actually an adjective, not a noun. you can't use a pronoun to stand for an adjective.

you can't say "such a wolf" or "this wolf" either; those constructions imply that you actually have some particular wolf in mind.

Ron! really a fan of you and your explanation!
yes, it should be 'antecedent' rather than 'antecedence', which is a typo.

thanks

[agha79]

What is the OA for this question? is it "D"

[StaceyKoprince]

the OA is E

[ranjeet1975]

what is wrong with C and the use of 'there is' is right in E?

[RonPurewal]

what is wrong with C

i think the easiest criterion on which to eliminate choice (c) is the fact that its parallelism is inferior to the parallelism exhibited in choice (e).

note that choice (e) contains two parallel "where" clauses. in general, you should always opt for a choice with superior parallelism over a choice with inferior parallelism.[/i]

also, the use of the comma in choice (c) isn't appropriate.
[b]there should not be a comma in the construction "X and Y" unless "X" and "Y" are independent clauses -- i.e., each is a complete sentence on its own, with "and" serving as a coordinating conjunction.

and the use of 'there is' is right in E?

(e) is an officially correct answer, so, yes.

everything in the officially correct answers is always correct, 100% of the time. even if it would be considered ugly by many, or even most, other sources.

[sangeethmani]

What is the diffrence between D and E.. Why is E right?

Is D incorrect because an article follows where?

[RonPurewal]

What is the diffrence between D and E.. Why is E right?

Is D incorrect because an article follows where?

(d) and (e) are both grammatically correct, but (d) is out because it contains a significant change in meaning.

if two or more sentences are grammatically correct, then you must pick the one whose meaning adheres most closely to the original meaning.
although the original is grammatically incorrect, its intended meaning is clear:
* minnesota is the only state where there is a sizable wolf population;
AND
* minnesota is the only state where the wolf is still the worst enemy of the sheep.

(e) preserves this meaning, while (d) does not.
the semicolon in (d) separates its meaning into two unrelated sentences; i.e., the part of (d) that follows the semicolon suggests that the wolf is still the archenemy of the sheep in general. this is almost exactly the opposite of the intended meaning, which is that minnesota is the only state where that's still true!

[sudhansu9dm]

Ok, if one was made to select between:

Minnesota is the only one of the contiguous forty-eight states that still has a sizable wolf population and where this predator remains the archenemy of cattle and sheep.

(A) that still has a sizable wolf population, and where
(C) that still has a sizable population of wolves, and where

which of these would be better. Parallelism aside, are they both grammatically correct? Which option is better? A for concision?

[tim]

i'm not sure what you're talking about. They are both grammatically incorrect..