A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certainTestluv wrote:When we say "contrast with", CONTRAST is behaving as a verb.
Example: "He likes to contrast his checkered jacket with plain pants" or "his checkered jacket contrasts with his plain pants."
But when we say "in contrast to", it is behaving as a noun.
Example: "His checkered jacket stands in contrast to his plain pants." (As you can see, in this sentence "stands" is the verb).
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
IMO E. D has problem with parallelism ( which include isn't parallel to would delay),mmslf75 wrote:In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certainTestluv wrote:When we say "contrast with", CONTRAST is behaving as a verb.
Example: "He likes to contrast his checkered jacket with plain pants" or "his checkered jacket contrasts with his plain pants."
But when we say "in contrast to", it is behaving as a noun.
Example: "His checkered jacket stands in contrast to his plain pants." (As you can see, in this sentence "stands" is the verb).
pollutants, the administration proposed calling for mandatory restrictions of
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
A. administration proposed calling for mandatory restriction of
B. administration proposed a call for mandatory restrictions, including those for
C. administration, proposing mandatory restrictions on
D. administration's proposal was a call for mandatory restrictions, which include
E. administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
Some say OA is D some say OA is E
What can be the correct one ???
i marked D
E is tempting ( would usage -- is incorrect , right ?)
A
B
C
D
E
Why to use WOULD here, we are NOT told that something is being said in past abt futuresadullaevd wrote:IMO E. D has problem with parallelism ( which include isn't parallel to would delay),mmslf75 wrote:In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certainTestluv wrote:When we say "contrast with", CONTRAST is behaving as a verb.
Example: "He likes to contrast his checkered jacket with plain pants" or "his checkered jacket contrasts with his plain pants."
But when we say "in contrast to", it is behaving as a noun.
Example: "His checkered jacket stands in contrast to his plain pants." (As you can see, in this sentence "stands" is the verb).
pollutants, the administration proposed calling for mandatory restrictions of
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
A. administration proposed calling for mandatory restriction of
B. administration proposed a call for mandatory restrictions, including those for
C. administration, proposing mandatory restrictions on
D. administration's proposal was a call for mandatory restrictions, which include
E. administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
Some say OA is D some say OA is E
What can be the correct one ???
i marked D
E is tempting ( would usage -- is incorrect , right ?)
here's final cut:
In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certain
pollutants, administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
Therefore it should be E.
A
B
C
D
E
When posting future SC questions, please set it up as I have above, actually underlining the underlined portion of the sentence and leaving a blank line between choices; it makes it much easier for people to address the question.mmslf75 wrote:
In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certain
pollutants, the administration proposed calling for mandatory restrictions of
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
A. administration proposed calling for mandatory restriction of
B. administration proposed a call for mandatory restrictions, including those for
C. administration, proposing mandatory restrictions on
D. administration's proposal was a call for mandatory restrictions, which include
E. administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
Stuart Kovinsky wrote:When posting future SC questions, please set it up as I have above, actually underlining the underlined portion of the sentence and leaving a blank line between choices; it makes it much easier for people to address the question.mmslf75 wrote:
In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certain
pollutants, the administration proposed calling for mandatory restrictions of
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
A. administration proposed calling for mandatory restriction of
B. administration proposed a call for mandatory restrictions, including those for
C. administration, proposing mandatory restrictions on
D. administration's proposal was a call for mandatory restrictions, which include
E. administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
We use "would" whenever something is hypothetical, or contrary to reality. The proposal hasn't actually happened in the real world, so if the proposal were implemented it would cause the changes.
(E) is definitely correct. Using the past tense changes the meaning of the sentence; saying a proposal "was" something implies that it's no longer that thing. We can say that a "proposal is a call for restrictions" or that the "proposal would call for restrictions".
D further changes the meaning with "which include"; according to the original sentence there are only 3 restrictions, but "which include" implies that there are other restrictions as well.
Stuart Kovinsky wrote:When posting future SC questions, please set it up as I have above, actually underlining the underlined portion of the sentence and leaving a blank line between choices; it makes it much easier for people to address the question.mmslf75 wrote:
In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certain
pollutants, the administration proposed calling for mandatory restrictions of
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
A. administration proposed calling for mandatory restriction of
B. administration proposed a call for mandatory restrictions, including those for
C. administration, proposing mandatory restrictions on
D. administration's proposal was a call for mandatory restrictions, which include
E. administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
We use "would" whenever something is hypothetical, or contrary to reality. The proposal hasn't actually happened in the real world, so if the proposal were implemented it would cause the changes.
(E) is definitely correct. Using the past tense changes the meaning of the sentence; saying a proposal "was" something implies that it's no longer that thing. We can say that a "proposal is a call for restrictions" or that the "proposal would call for restrictions".
D further changes the meaning with "which include"; according to the original sentence there are only 3 restrictions, but "which include" implies that there are other restrictions as well.
A
B
C
D
E
(Yes, WOULD is NOT restricted ONLY to PAST TENSE because, again, WOULD can be used for hypothetical events).So is it that, usage of WOULD is NOT restricted ONLY to presence of PAST TENSE key words in a sentence ??
A
B
C
D
E
Stuart Kovinsky wrote:When posting future SC questions, please set it up as I have above, actually underlining the underlined portion of the sentence and leaving a blank line between choices; it makes it much easier for people to address the question.mmslf75 wrote:
In contrast to environmentalists proposals to limit emissions of certain
pollutants, the administration proposed calling for mandatory restrictions of
only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and
nitrogen oxides-and the plan would delay such cuts until 2010 or later.
A. administration proposed calling for mandatory restriction of
B. administration proposed a call for mandatory restrictions, including those for
C. administration, proposing mandatory restrictions on
D. administration's proposal was a call for mandatory restrictions, which include
E. administration's proposal would call for mandatory restrictions on
We use "would" whenever something is hypothetical, or contrary to reality. The proposal hasn't actually happened in the real world, so if the proposal were implemented it would cause the changes.
(E) is definitely correct. Using the past tense changes the meaning of the sentence; saying a proposal "was" something implies that it's no longer that thing. We can say that a "proposal is a call for restrictions" or that the "proposal would call for restrictions".
D further changes the meaning with "which include"; according to the original sentence there are only 3 restrictions, but "which include" implies that there are other restrictions as well.
A
B
C
D
E
