-
satishchandra
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:10 pm
- Thanked: 7 times
- Followed by:2 members
Any theory of grammar should answer three basic questions: what constitutes knowledge of grammar, how it is acquired, and how it is put to use.
(A) how it is acquired, and how it is put to use
(B) how is knowledge of grammar acquired, and how put to use
(C) how it was acquired and put to use
(D) its acquisition and putting to use
(E) how its knowledge is acquired, and how it is put to use
[spoiler] OA: A;
In correct answer, I thought 'it' has ambiguity in refering back to antecedent because both grammar and knowledge make sense if I substitute in place 'it'
However, 'E' addresses this ambiguity by placing knowledge in the sentence.
how its(grammar's) knowledge is acquired, and how it(grammar) is put to use[/spoiler]
(A) how it is acquired, and how it is put to use
(B) how is knowledge of grammar acquired, and how put to use
(C) how it was acquired and put to use
(D) its acquisition and putting to use
(E) how its knowledge is acquired, and how it is put to use
[spoiler] OA: A;
In correct answer, I thought 'it' has ambiguity in refering back to antecedent because both grammar and knowledge make sense if I substitute in place 'it'
However, 'E' addresses this ambiguity by placing knowledge in the sentence.
how its(grammar's) knowledge is acquired, and how it(grammar) is put to use[/spoiler]












