To those verbal experts that weren't always experts.

<p>In writing, I have always gotten high 500's or low 600's but suddenly I came to a realization that all the answers were active voice and almost all correction problems dealt with tense and correct pronouns. Lo and behold I got a 750 (not stellar, but acceptable). This improvement, I feel, was a result of a realization rather than practice and endless, hard work.</p>

<p>Now, I would like people who have increased their verbal scores in the same way to explain what they 'saw.' The only advice I can give myself is to look at all answer choices carefully before circling, but that alone isn't enough. The main problem is with critical reading. Then I have NO idea how to deduce answers in analogies if I don't know the words (some people have this ability to find out the answers using cleverness/elimination).</p>

<p>:) 1 week left til Nov Test Target: 700+</p>

<p>A 600-PSAT verbaler myself, I "saw" a few things en route to my 750 verbal score. (I've always been more of a verbal/writing person, though, so the 600 was shockingly low -- got 800 writing, and expected to do so.)</p>

<p>Sentence completion: Didn't get any wrong on the test, always my strong suit. Cover the answer choices and fill in the blanks with words you would use -- colloquialisms are fine. See which answer choice matches up closest. Also, for double-blanked questions, there will often be an answer choice that has the best answer for one of the two blanks (most likely the first), but the second answer is either blatantly wrong, or, if you're unlucky, not quite as good as another -- be careful.</p>

<p>Analogies: You don't always need to know the words in the analogy to get the question right. Sure it was great when I knew that sanguine meant full of optimisim when the two were paired together, but I probably would have gotten the question right had I not known the definition. If you don't know the "bridge" between the two words in the analogy, look to the answer choices and follow this process:
1. Eliminate pairs that have no relationship in a definitional sense, but that average Joes would lump together (cat:dog, fork:knife).
2. Make bridges for each pair (best to use a definitional sentence).
3. Use the "fence" -- decide if the two words in the original analogy are on the same side of the fence or different sides; the answer choice must mirror the fence in the original analogy.</p>

<p>Reading Comprehension: This is where the most improvement can be made. Though subjective, look for "ETS answers". It was tough to learn what these types of answers look like, but after heaps of practice, I can now spot them from a mile away. You still have to read the passage (I recommend a full reading and then answer question by question if you're quick enough), but if you can either eliminate answer choices because they don't sound like ETS answers, the seemingly ubiquitous toss-up between two "right" answers is not so 50-50 anymore. Again, it is hard at first to distinguish between answer choices, but certain words (irony, nostalgia, humility) and certain phrases reappear time and time again as correct answers.</p>

<p>Thank you!!!! :D</p>