<p>yeah, if they left the article out, that is an obvious error that any person can spot… That would not be a question, or one to be debated. Sure there was the article there.</p>
<p>Can someone post the exact q for 29. Or a close paraphrase. Kinda shocked that I marked a no error, since I always only mark errors when i can name them. In other words, I almost never mark no errors as errors.</p>
<p>Can somebody confirm whether or not the test phrased the question as “in absence of” or “in the absence of”?</p>
<p>@padawangabe that is exactly what I have, and I am almost sure those three are no errors. I am interested in what 29 is now… seeing that some claim it is no error.</p>
<p>Pretty sure it was “evolved in the absence of predators.” I read that question several times since I finished the section earlier.</p>
<p>it was evolve in absence of predators lol</p>
<ol>
<li>is definetley no error. I posted an explanation about this somewhere else. Let me look for it.</li>
</ol>
<p>SheepGetKilled 29. was E, even though D lacked a subject, it was considered right because if there was a subject (it) then there HAS to be a comma before and (,and), if there is no comma after and, then the subject cant be repeated.</p>
<p>Source: Erika Meltzer’s Grammar guide</p>
<p>I see your explanation, can I get a paraphrase of the exact question. I want to just refresh my memory on the whole sentence, not just the error. Thanks.</p>
<p>Also the penguin question had to be no error: I circled a verb tense error foolishly, everything else was right!!!</p>
<p>Yeah sure, dchenfire, The question started with an artist displayed his portraits at a certain exhibit, and so crtics consider… something of those line (does that jog your memory a bit :))</p>
<p>wait is this the sentence??</p>
<p>the paintings she selected for her art show were more varied than those of her previous show [and so gave] critics … something</p>
<p>it looks familiar to the one you’re talking about panmit</p>
<p>Hmm. Thanks. I’m wondering if anyone can give a full sentence paraphrase so I can see the context of the disputed error. Just hearing you say the error out of context doesn’t really help. I’d really appreciate if someone could give a full paraphrase of the question.</p>
<p>i was sort of close loll yeah smooch you got it!</p>
<p>Does anyone agree that there was another NE in the early 20s, somewhere in the second column of the second page of sentence ID</p>
<p>This thread is starting to scare me lol… I typically get -1 max per section. But I have missed atavism already… and now maybe 29</p>
<p>yeah panmit i figured that was the one… i put no error for that also
dchenfire the question was
the painting she selected for her art show were more than those of her previous show, and so gave critics a variety to judge her artistic skill on</p>
<p>or something along that lines …
selected for was underlined
those of was underlined
and so gave was underlined</p>
<p>so dchenfire, because the subject is not repeated in the second clause there is no need for a comma before the and, so the sentence has no error.</p>
<p>dchenfire, in my other post of consolidated writing answers, did you agree with all the other answers i posted?</p>
<p>o wait i know the error in 29… you cant say “and so gave” its “and gave” I dont disagree with you on the subject repeating itself. Its just that “so gave” is so awkward and unnecessary when you can just say “and gave”</p>
<p>I personally think that “so” is not awkward enough to say that it is an error.</p>
<p>they use the conjuction so because it is a result of her selection in paintings that the critics have consequentially more to base her talent on</p>
<p>So, what is the consensus for the “nevertheless” one?</p>
<p>i personally think nevertheless is correct
what do you think, any?</p>