2 mindblowing grammar problems

<p>1) although there seems to be many ways to solve the puzzle, only one method will bring about the desired result</p>

<p>2) in this book, equiano traces his spiritual growth from his kidnaping at age 12 to his work with abolitionists. his religious faith figures prominently in his autobiography. For instance, after his capture, Equiano found himself in an often unjust and cruel world. Many would have become corrupted. He sought to become a man of virtue instead of that. </p>

<p>IN context, which of th following is the best way to revise and combine sentences 8 and 9 reproduced below</p>

<p>many would become corrupted. he sought to become a man of virtue instead of that</p>

<p>a. many become corrupted; however, he seeks to become a man of virtue.
b. many would have become corrupted, but equiano becomes a man of virtue instead
c. seeking to become a virtuous man instead of becoming corrupted, equiano does what many would not</p>

<ol>
<li><p>“There seems” should be “there seem”</p></li>
<li><p>a</p></li>
</ol>

<p>1.so “seem” has to correlate with “many ways”, but I don’t understand how “many ways” acts on “seem” (e.g. what part of speech is “many ways” in correlation to “seem”?</p>

<ol>
<li>A is wrong</li>
</ol>

<ol>
<li>C?</li>
</ol>

<p>b should be, i think “many would have become corrupted but equiano BECAME a man of virtue instead” and a doesn’t seem right? are these even CB questions?</p>

<p>2.b </p>

<p>I’ll try to explain 1. </p>

<p>To be=preposition so if you take it out and the sentence is there seems many ways… would you replace seem with is(singular) or are(plural)</p>

<p>It seems to be a problem (singular)
There seems to be a problem (singular)</p>

<p>There seem to be problems (plural). </p>

<p>If you take out the preposition and make the sentence more simple… Then replace the confusing word with something else (seem with is/are)… it helps</p>

<p>oops thats right b should be:
b. many would have become corrupted, but equiano became a man of virtue instead</p>

<p>I have a question: What tense is “would have become corrupted” in? Is it in present perfect or past perfect? It seems to not correlate with the 'became" in the second part of the sentence…</p>

<p>These are PSAT collegeboard disclosed tests</p>

<p>^ lol no idea. I never learned my tenses. I just go with what sounds right.
Sorry</p>

<ol>
<li>A</li>
</ol>

<p>“there seems” should be “there seem”</p>

<ol>
<li>B</li>
</ol>

<p>B is most concise, correct, and short.</p>

<p>Those are pretty basic grammar questions.</p>

<p>can someone answer my question about 2?</p>

<p>I think it’s past perfect.</p>

<p>Actually, it may be the passive past conditional tense because of the “would”.</p>

<p>so when you see a sentence that goes like this:</p>

<p>I would have “past action”, , but I “present tense word”…
the sentence is correct?</p>

<p>…Also, Can the conditional “would have” correlate with any other tense…
(e.g. I would have…“action in any tense”, but I “action in any tense”…</p>

<p>help plz!</p>

<p>There are both past and present conditional tenses.</p>

<p>Present conditional: “I would go to the store with you, but my head is exploding.”</p>

<p>Past conditional: “I would have gone to the supermarket with you, but my dog flew to the neighbor’s house again.”</p>

<p>The “become” is not really relevant to the tense. It simply makes it passive.</p>

<p>“Become” is relevant to tense, because it is in present tense. Then what decides the tense in the part of the sentence affter “but”? </p>

<p>i’m saying that “would have” (past conditional) does not correlate with “become” (present)</p>

<p>The verb “would have become” is future perfect subjunctive. (Check it out, if you doubt this.)</p>

<p>You’re going to have to elaborate, QuantMech. I don’t see how “would have become” is subjunctive. </p>

<p>Based on Wikipedia’s examples of the conditional tense, the phrase seem to fit perfectly. Wikipedia gives “I would have called” as an example of the past conditional tense.</p>

<p>I’m convinced that it’s not the future perfect subjunctive. The future perfect tense is defined on Wikipedia as a tense used “to describe an event that has not yet happened but is expected or planned to happen before another stated occurrence.”</p>

<p>This is clearly not the case with “Many would have become corrupted.”</p>

<p>“Conditional” is the non-snobbish English term for the same mood that is labeled “subjunctive” in Latin, and that used to be called “subjunctive” in English also. </p>

<p>The future perfect is a tense that refers to an event that has yet to happen, but that will be completed by the time to which the sentence refers. </p>

<p>For example:
“By this time next month, school will have been in session for three weeks.”</p>

<p>But:
“If we lived on Mars, by this time next month, school would have been in session for three brzlatna.”</p>

<p>The second sentence is in the future perfect subjunctive/conditional (in this case, used because it is contrary to fact).</p>