All New SAT Writing and Language Resources
Example Questions
Example Question #3 : Redundancy
The nonprofit organization is able to raise an annual $350,000 per year from fundraising banquets alone.
NO CHANGE
are able to raise
are able to raise an annual
is able to raise
is able to raise
In this example, we want to express a meaning that is in agreement, and lacks redundancy. Because “per year,” is already in the non-underlined portion of the sentence, it would be completely redundant to also refer to the amount raised as “annual.” for this reason, we can eliminate the original construction, “is able to raise an annual,” as well as “are able to raise an annual.” The latter construction also makes the error of attempting to agree the singular “organization” to the plural verb “are.” Since our subject is singular, we need the singular “is” and can thus also eliminate “are able to raise,” leaving us with our correct answer, “is able to raise.”
Example Question #2 : Redundancy
Contrary to popular belief, bats are not blind, and in fact are among the most sensory animals on the planet; they use sonar to locate prey, and their ability to communicate audially at a wide range of frequencies assists them in mating, helping them to distinguish their own species from that of others.
those of others
NO CHANGE
others
these of others
others
In this example, we want to aim to express a meaning that is concise and logical. In order to do so, we’ll want to address what “that of” or “those of” is meant to refer to in the answer options. Since the comparison is between “their own species and (that of/those of) others, it would seem as though the “those of” is attempting to refer to the species. However, the term “others” already refers to the species, so it would be completely illogical and redundant to draw a comparison between “their own species and the species of other species.” This leaves us with only our correct answer, “others,” which draws a succinct and logical comparison.
Example Question #4 : Redundancy
In the meeting of the United Nations, representatives attempted to try to reach an agreement that would benefit all involved.
tried to attempt to
attempting to
attempted to
NO CHANGE
attempted to
In this example, we want to aim to express a meaning that is concise and logical. The original construction, “attempted to try to,” is illogical and redundant, since “attempted” and “try to” mean the same thing. This redundancy allows us to eliminate both the original construction and “tried to attempt to,” since reordering the words does not eliminate the redundancy. Between our remaining options, the answer “attempting to” is incorrect because the participial form leaves the sentence without a conjugated verb. Our correct answer, “attempted to,” both lacks redundancy and creates a complete sentence.
Example Question #5 : Redundancy
The several varied differences between the two animals led scientists to believe they were two unique species, when in fact they were one and the same.
NO CHANGE
difference
variable differences
differences
differences
This example attempts to describe differences between two animals. However, since differences are already inherently varied, it would be redundant to describe the differences as “varied differences,” particularly since we already address that there are “several differences” in the non-underlined portion. “Variable differences” is illogical in meaning, and is an improper word to utilize in this context, and “difference” does not agree with the plurality of “several” in the non-underlined portion. This leaves us with our correct answer, “differences.”
Example Question #6 : Redundancy
Though the political action group was generally in favor of traditional business practices, members could often be found protesting against the use of coal and instead favored more environmentally-conscious wind-powered businesses.
DELETE the underlined portion
NO CHANGE
for
away from
DELETE the underlined portion
In this example, we’re being tested on the redundancy of the phrase “protesting against.” Since protesting already means speaking up against, it would be redundant to utilize both of those terms. “Away from” makes the same mistake, and “for,” is perhaps even more illogical, as it conflicts with the context reinforcing that members of the group favored environmentally-conscious options over coal. In this case, we should delete the underlined portion entirely, as it is unnecessary and in some options outright illogical.
Example Question #7 : Redundancy
Despite the previous growth over the years, in May of this year, the stock depreciated in value by over 15%.
depreciated
has been depreciating in value
have been depreciating in value
NO CHANGE
depreciated
In this example, we’re being tested on the redundancy of the use of both “depreciated” and “in value.” Since depreciated already means “decreased in value,” the “in value” is completely redundant and unnecessary. This issue is not corrected with the phrases “has been depreciating in value” or “have been depreciating in value,” and the latter creates an additional error of agreement between “the stock” and “have.” Our correct answer, “depreciated,” eliminates this redundancy, and concisely expresses a meaning that is logical.
Example Question #3 : Redundancy
Within the excavated burial site was found a wealth of ancient artifacts, some of it as old as 2,000 years.
of them
with an age
NO CHANGE
DELETE the underlined portion
DELETE the underlined portion
In this example, the original construction “some of it” is needlessly wordy and redundant, and also creates pronoun ambiguity. “Of them” creates a similar mistake, and “with an age” is also unnecessary, as the age is clarified later in the sentence. In this case, the most appropriate construction would be to delete the underlined portion entirely, as it adds no additional meaning or value to the sentence and is thus unnecessary and redundant.
Example Question #1 : Author's Intent
One of the most influential niche constructors is the earthworm, an organism found almost everywhere on the planet. A scientist only concerned with evolution would predict that, in order to live on land, earthworms would have to significantly change. Earthworms didn’t change their physiology a great amount, however; instead, they changed the soil to make it more like the ocean in order to survive. Land with earthworms is less compacted, is more nutrient rich, and is better mixed than land without them – 1 leading to monumental changes in the ecosystem.
Niche constructors are particularly important in colonizing new environments. One of the easiest ways to measure this effect on evolution has been in the effect that the number of earthworms has on soil fertility, a measure of how hospitable an environment is to plant growth. Even the least fertile soil has around 62 worms per square meter, and as the number of worms increases so does soil fertility. As worms move through the different layers of soil, they eat, digest, and excrete massive amounts of organic matter. They leave their excretions behind in the form of nutrient-rich droppings known as casings. As these casings decompose, they release nutrients into the soil. This process not only moves nutrients from one layer of the soil to another but also converts the nutrients to forms that plants can absorb and process more easily. Because it is easier for plants to get the proper nutrients, plants don’t have to invest time and energy into making better root systems to gather nutrients. As a result, plants have, over time, lost some of these mechanisms – a form of evolution.
Which of the following best supports the point developed in this paragraph?
resulting in a moist environment in which the worms can thrive.
all from a tiny organism not much larger than a human hand.
all of which make the environment more suitable for plants.
NO CHANGE
resulting in a moist environment in which the worms can thrive.
In order to conclude which choice best concludes the paragraph, you need to understand the overall context of the paragraph. The paragraph is all about how and why the worms change their environment in order to survive. The only choice that talks about why earthworms change the environment is "resulting in a moist environment in which the worms can thrive." As it is in the text is too vague since it's already been established that the worms change their environments. Choice "all of which make the environment more suitable for plants." is more in line with the next paragraph, which discusses the effect of earthworm engineering on plants. And choice "all from a tiny organism not much larger than a human hand.", while catchy, does not address anything that is discussed in the paragraph.
Example Question #2 : Author's Intent
The public’s perception of archaeologists has, for years, been colored by depictions of the profession in movie franchises like Indiana Jones, Tomb Raider, and The Mummy. However popular these movies are, they– like movies that depict any other profession – don’t necessarily reflect what archaeologists actually do. While fighting supernatural forces and foiling nefarious plans does make for a better movie, 1 archaeologists are interesting people.
box office numbers don’t always reflect this fact
NO CHANGE
the primary work of archaeology is in research and preservation
movies don’t reflect what archaeologists actually do
the primary work of archaeology is in research and preservation
Whenever you are asked to complete a sentence without instruction as to what the test is looking for, you want to look for logic and for concision. The paragraph discusses the fact that movies don't necessarily reflect the job of real archaeologists. That implies that the contrast in this sentence should be between what archaeologists actually do and what they do in the movies. Since what they do in the movies is already addressed, the correct answer will reflect real- life archaeology. The only answer that does this is "the primary work of archaeology is in research and preservation", which gives an example of what archaeologists do. NO CHANGE and "box office numbers don’t always reflect this fact" don't address real-life archaeology and choice "movies don’t reflect what archaeologists actually do" is just a repetition of a phrase from earlier in the paragraph.
Example Question #1 : Rhetoric: Sentences: Paragraphs
One of the most influential niche constructors is the earthworm, an organism found almost everywhere on the planet. A scientist only concerned with evolution would predict that, in order to live on land, earthworms would have to significantly change. Earthworms didn’t change their physiology a great amount, however; instead, they changed the soil to make it more like the ocean in order to survive. Land with earthworms is less compacted, is more nutrient rich, and is better mixed than land without them – resulting in a moist environment in which the worms can thrive.
1 Niche constructors are particularly important in colonizing new environments. One of the easiest ways to measure this effect on evolution has been in the effect that the number of earthworms has on soil fertility, a measure of how hospitable an environment is to plant growth. Even the least fertile soil has around 62 worms per square meter, and as the number of worms increases so does soil fertility. As worms move through the different layers of soil, they eat, digest, and excrete massive amounts of organic matter. They leave their excretions behind in the form of nutrient-rich droppings known as casings. As these casings decompose, they release nutrients into the soil. This process not only moves nutrients from one layer of the soil to another but also converts the nutrients to forms that plants can absorb and process more easily. Because it is easier for plants to get the proper nutrients, plants don’t have to invest time and energy into making better root systems to gather nutrients. As result, plants have, over time, lost some of these mechanisms – a form of evolution.
Which of the following provides the most effective transition from the previous paragraph?
NO CHANGE
To be considered true niche constructors, however, earthworms must change the environment in such a way as to alter the evolution of another species.
Earthworms’ most important role is to make soil more hospitable to plants, microbes, and other animals that might not otherwise do well in an arid environment.
Earthworms aren’t alone in their capacity as niche constructors: beavers do the same.
To be considered true niche constructors, however, earthworms must change the environment in such a way as to alter the evolution of another species.
In order to provide an effective transition between the two paragraphs, you need to know what the previous paragraph was about and what the current paragraph is about. The previous paragraph discusses one of the factors that allow earthworms to be considered niche creators - that they significantly change their environment. The current paragraph discusses another - that they must affect the evolution of another organism. As it is in the passage (NO CHANGE) and "Earthworms aren’t alone in their capacity as niche constructors: beavers do the same." and can both be quickly eliminated because they don't address either of these challenges. Between choice "To be considered true niche constructors, however, earthworms must change the environment in such a way as to alter the evolution of another species." and Earthworms’ most important role is to make soil more hospitable to plants, microbes, and other animals that might not otherwise do well in an arid environment", the former at first seems insufficient because it doesn't clearly address the previous paragraph. However, note that it does call back to the previous paragraph by saying that earthworms need to do one more thing before they are real niche creators. "Earthworms’ most important role is to make soil more hospitable to plants, microbes, and other animals that might not otherwise do well in an arid environment." only continues to discuss how they change the environment with no mention of the main idea of the paragraph to come.