<p>@jimmypod you can also replace the “that” with “speed” and not “speed of sound”, making it perfectly correct to say “the speed of sound in air is faster than that in water.”</p>
<p>@darkp0tat0 </p>
<p>You just reiterated my point. It is correct to say “the speed of sound in air is faster than that in water”.</p>
<p>Overall, the question posed a redundancy issue.</p>
<p>I think the rest of the test went quite well, so I’m hoping this isn’t an issue. @feedback, how do you think my essay fits with that? As mentioned above, I argued that the process of progress did cause problems, but ultimately, the benefits outweighed. If nothing else, it seems like I just answered no to the prompt; any advice?</p>
<p>@jimmypod Sorry i meant to say “the speed of sound in air is faster than that of sound in water”</p>
<p>As long as you supported your argument that progress brings about drawbacks and problems with solid examples, you’ll be fine. I think you digged deeper in the prompt than any of us, and it’s definitely not a bad thing.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure that is no error.</p>
<p>This is confusing, so you’re certain that “that” represents “speed of sound” and not “speed” in the sentence? :/</p>
<p>I’m not sure how to explain this any other way, but I hope that even you can’t help but notice the awkward phrasing of that sentence. The awkwardness comes from the redundancy posed by “of sound.” </p>
<p>The length of complacency of the red string was the same as the length of complacency of the blue string
The length of complacency of the red string was the same as that of complacency of the blue string
The length of complacency of the red string was the same as that of the blue string.</p>
<p>The sentence was not designed to make sense, but to illustrate an example. I’m not very good at analyzing grammar and going in depth with my reasons, so I created an example.</p>
<p>There is a CLEAR redundancy posed by the 2nd example sentence. The same concept applies to the speed of sound question. I am more than certain.</p>
<p>so what’s the answer for the speed of sound question? There seems to be no consensus still</p>
<p>@ mpgh
Well there was the question about deleting a sentence, the one with “however” and “therefore” as some choices (first question) and that’s all I can recall.</p>
<p>I only got 1 no error. I do bad on those so…</p>
<p>Hmm alright. Yeah, my examples were decently solid. They discussed the difficulties Civil Rights leaders faces in their paths to progress and Guy Montags sacrifice of his life in society to help create a better future. It seems like I conceded that the prompt was true but argued the benefits outweighed. In any event, it doesn’t seem worth the cancellation.</p>
<p>Don’t cancel it, I think you’ll be fine.</p>
<p>@cheerios thanks for the reassurance, I got seriously scared for a bit in the middle. Any other opinions would be awesome.</p>
<p>Jimmypod, your sentence doesn’t sound correct because you’re referring to “length of complacency” as a single noun phrase; you can break the sentence into “sound in water” and “sound in air” as separate phrases, thus validating the replacement of JUST “speed” with the pronoun “that”. Consider this:</p>
<p>The agility of fish in water is greater than the agility of fish on land.
The agility of fish in water is greater than that of fish on land.
The agility of fish in water is greater than that on land.</p>
<p>Although both the second and the third sentences may make sense, these three sentences are designed such that “fish on land” and “fish in water” are treated as two different noun phrases, analogous to “sound in water” and “sound in air”.</p>
<p>@juggler</p>
<p>u did the same thing I did.
We both focused on how setbacks led to improvement…as you stated in ur ex. of how civil war leaders faced difficulties for peace… and how the setbacks Montag faced led to an improved society…</p>
<p>People are saying I interpretted it wrong, yet clearly you did the same thing as me…</p>
<p>Hmm sort of, I didn’t say setbacks led to improvement though. I argued that despite the setbacks of progress, the benefits still outweighed. It sounds small but I think there is an important difference there; that’s just me though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well that can’t help but instill some doubt in me. In the question, “speed of sound” appeared as a single noun phrase. </p>
<p>Well shoot. Now I’m not very certain.</p>
<p>@ juggler</p>
<p>what were ur ex in detail?</p>
<p>You cant just say that just by stating “benefits outweigh it” in one sentence… it doesnt make much difference</p>
<p>was ur thesis kinda just like:</p>
<p>in some cases improvement involves setbacks preceding it…blah blah blah?</p>
<p>I put down “No error” for the speed of sound one as well. </p>
<p>What did people get for the question that went something like “The island of Madagascar is home to over 200,000 species (underlined portion)”</p>
<p>I was vacillating between “species, many found nowhere else in the world”
and “species; of which many are found nowhere else in the world”</p>
<p>I put down the first one. Also, if you Google “many found nowhere else in the world” with quotes, you get search results on Madgascar :D</p>