Unlike the offspring of many other frog species,cogul froglets-about the size of a grain rice when (hatching-emerges) fully formed from the egg,skipping the tadpole stage entirely.
A)hatching-emerges
B)Hatching-emerging
c)they hatch-emerge
d)they hatch-emerging
e)it hatches-emerges
(For) many television viewers who (grew up) in the 1980s,the typical half-hour famiy comedy of the period (will forever) model what a situation comedy (should be).
PS i have no answer key
For the first one, you should focus on the word “froglets” and know that the verb will have to match it. Only “emerge” does the job. That suggests C is the answer. Just to be sure, try out “when they hatch.” Since it sounds good, now you know C really is correct. If you were in a hurry, you could skip that second test.
The second problem looks correct as is.
in the first one shouldnt it be froglets’ offspring bec it said unlike offspring of …
second one why should is correct
it has different tenses but its meanin is correct?
“Forglets’ offspring” is not an option, so you don’t have to worry about it. But it should not be froglets’ offspring. The “-let” suffix in English means something like “children” or “small ones,” so in one word it already means “frogs’ offspring.”
On the second one, it is normal for a sentence to use multiple tenses as long as the point of view is consistent. In a simple example, you will probably see there is no problem if I write, “The children hope they will succeed.” “Hope” is in the present, and “will succeed” is in the future. It makes sense because people normally have hopes about the future.
Your example is only a little more complicated. To understand it, you have to imagine the television viewers as they are right now. From this point of view, growing up is in the past. The viewers’ opinions exist now and will continue into the future.
Note that it is characteristic of English to use the future tense to describe a state that exists in the present and which will exist in the future also. When I say, “I will always love honey,” I mean that I love honey now and will continue to love it.
For the first problem: the sentence talks about froglets before it addresses their actions; therefore A, B, and E should be automatically eliminated. You need to put “they” after a plural noun is addressed immediately before.
Now the next part of the sentence should read as: “…cogul froglets about the size of a grain rice, when THEY HATCH, emerge fully formed…” D is incorrect because “hatch” and “emerging” (those tenses) don’t match up. It combines the present tense with the present progressive (emerging)
It should be “hatch” and “emerge”, having both words which matching tenses (present.)
Although it may seem the meaning is correct, don’t simply go off of that notion. I used to say to myself “oh, since it sounds right, then that’s the right answer”, but that eventually earned me a 540 on my PSAT which eventually improved to a 700 when I started to have a pedantic outlook on those small details.
For the second one, “should” is correct because the sentence describes that the comedy is a model of something (kind of like a role-model.) Therefore, since it is a model of something, every comedy in the future should follow this one.
Here’s a similar sentence which follows the same logic sequence:
“See? That man is a great innovator. He is a role model for all future innovators and amateur innovators SHOULD learn from his practices.”
“Should” implies an obligation.