New SAT Writing and Language : New SAT
Study concepts, example questions & explanations for New SAT Writing and Language
All New SAT Writing and Language Resources
Example Questions
Example Question #3 : Author's Intent
The pair brought scientific thinking and equipment to the kitchen, challenging perceptions about what belonged in the lab and what belonged in a chef ’s kitchen. For example, an early experiment in pie baking involved injecting pies with a syringe full of liquid after baking in order to preserve the crust. Other experiments involved creating meringue (cooked whipped egg whites with sugar) in a vacuum chamber and a “reverse” baked Alaska (ice cream topped with meringue) with the hot merengue on the inside and the ice cream on the outside. Although the experiments themselves might not have been useful to the home cook, 1 they were interesting for scientists.
Which choice most logically completes the sentence?
they did answer many questions that This and Herve had about cooking.
there were other experiments soon to follow.
they did give insights into the science of cooking that improved recipes and techniques for cooks everywhere.
NO CHANGE
they did give insights into the science of cooking that improved recipes and techniques for cooks everywhere.
Whenever the SAT asks you to logically complete a sentence or thought, you are often going to need to complete a comparison or a contrast set up earlier in the sentence. In this case, the word "although" indicates that you need to have a phrase that contrasts with the idea that the experiments weren't useful to home chefs. If we leave the sentence as is, it may be true, but it isn't that comparison."They did give insights into the science of cooking that improved recipes and techniques for cooks everywhere." does set up that comparison, since the outcomes of the experiments were useful to home chefs even if the experiments themselves were not. This is correct. "They did answer many questions that This and Herve had about cooking." and "there were other experiments soon to follow." can be eliminated because they don't complete the comparison.
Example Question #5 : Rhetoric: Sentences & Paragraphs
Since 1988, the mission of molecular gastronomy has shifted. Kurti and This originally sought to investigate “kitchen old wives’ tales,” invent new recipes, improve old ones, and make the case to the public that science was a useful part of everyday life. Even if their experiments weren’t intended to be replicated in home kitchens, they were intended to encourage home cooks to experiment. Today, molecular gastronomists seek to explore the social, artistic, and technical aspects of food preparation. Some have argued that this shift in focus, along with the fact that techniques in molecular gastronomy have so far surpassed what any home cook could do, means that molecular gastronomy has lost 1 the ability to impact homemade food.
NO CHANGE
its ability to impact and influence how the world cooks at home.
its ability to impact how the world’s domestic cooks cook at home.
its ability to impact how the world cooks at home.
its ability to impact how the world cooks at home.
For this question, you are looking for an answer choice that gets rid of redundancy within the sentence and that maintains a logical meaning within the sentence. Choices "its ability to impact and influence how the world cooks at home." and "its ability to impact how the world’s domestic cooks cook at home." can both be eliminated because they contain redundant structures ("impact and influence" and "domestic... at home", respectively). NO CHANGE isn't logical. The field of molecular gastronomy doesn't affect homemade food. It affects how people cook. Choice "its ability to impact how the world cooks at home." correctly shows that molecular gastronomy affects the process of cooking and is not redundant.
Example Question #2 : Rhetoric: Sentences: Paragraphs
This excerpt is adapted from Kara Flanagan, “An Introduction to Linguistics.”
Linguists may specialize in any number of elements of language. While some examine morphology, the composition of individual words, others may study syntax, the structure of entire sentences. Those who study semantics or pragmatics, on the other hand, focus on the meanings of individual words, and how they might change depending on the context. Some linguists, known as phonologists, instead turn their attention to the speech sounds which make up spoken languages. Altogether, linguists have been responsible for the preservation of thousands of endangered languages.
Which choice provides the most effective conclusion for the paragraph?
Hardly a monolith, linguists work within an array of subfields nearly as diverse as the languages they study.
NO CHANGE
Many linguists never learn to speak the languages they choose to study.
Linguists sometimes live for months or years among the populations whose languages they study.
Hardly a monolith, linguists work within an array of subfields nearly as diverse as the languages they study.
When asked to choose which sentence presents the best conclusion, focus on the preceding information to understand what the remainder of the paragraph has discussed. The paragraph begins by suggesting that there are numerous “elements of language” to which linguists turn their attention, and goes on to name and define several of them, including morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and phonology. The present choice, which focuses on the “preservation” of “endangered languages,” has no connection to the remainder of the paragraph. The choice of mentioning the “populations” studies by linguists also makes a leap from the subjects discussed to groups that have yet to be mentioned. The choice which suggests that linguists might “never learn to speak” their studied languages, even if it may be true, doesn’t present an effective or relevant conclusion. However, the choice which mentions an “array of subfields” within linguistics accurately reflects the substance of the preceding paragraph while also drawing an effective comparison between these “subfields” and languages themselves.
Example Question #2 : Author's Intent
This excerpt is adapted from Kirk Powell, Studies in Sports.
In her study, L’Tainen wanted to focus primarily on those sports observers who had a strong understanding of the game, but had never seriously played it. “It’s often claimed that watching someone else perform a complex task can be as useful as practicing it ourselves,” L’Tainen wrote. “Here, I wanted to put that claim to the test.” L’Tainen assembled her group of sports fanatics from her own city, Philadelphia, through a series of online listings. Philadelphia has more than a dozen professional sports teams, including two baseball teams. Once she brought all the subjects to one place, the real fun could begin.
Which choice provides the most relevant detail?
NO CHANGE
She was careful to use language that specified the sort of person she was seeking: someone who loved watching sports, but had little experience playing them.
L’Tainen had grown up in the suburbs, but moved to the city when she started college.
She herself was a passionate softball player, having played since high school.
She was careful to use language that specified the sort of person she was seeking: someone who loved watching sports, but had little experience playing them.
When asked to select the most relevant detail, examine the surrounding information to understand which choice fits best in the particular context. Here, the sentence in question is preceded by a description of L’Tainen’s research objective, and the beginning of an explanation of her methodology for finding subjects. The sentence is followed by another mention of those subjects. It makes little sense to focus on L’Tainen’s personal life here, so the choice discussing her upbringing “in the suburbs” is altogether irrelevant, and even the choice which focuses on L’Tainen’s own experience as a “passionate softball player” distracts from the discussion of the experimental design. Similarly, a detail about Philadelphia’s “professional sports teams,” though related to the city in which the experiment is being conducted, has no connection to her approach to assembling subjects. Only the choice which expands upon her experimental methodology, discussing the listings and the “sort of person she was seeking,” expands upon the design of the experiment in a relevant manner.
Example Question #1 : Author's Intent
This excerpt is adapted from Rachel Kaplan, “A Day in the Life of Lennon—McCartney”.
The Beatles are often regarded by historians, critics, and listeners as one of the best recording groups of all time. Formed in Liverpool, England in 1960, they wrote and recorded some of the most popular songs of the twentieth century and ushered in a new age of innovation within Western popular music. At the creative heart of the group were John Lennon and Paul McCartney, together comprising the songwriting partnership “Lennon—McCartney,” whose songs made up the vast majority of the Beatles’ catalog. Interestingly, even when one of the two composers worked alone, the final product bore both of their names—the result of a handshake agreement the two had made at the start of their collaboration. Accordingly, hits like “Yesterday” and “I Am the Walrus,” written independently by Paul and John, respectively, are nonetheless credited jointly to Lennon—McCartney.
Which choice provides the most relevant detail?
NO CHANGE
The two often worked late into the night, completing six or seven songs in a single batch and scrapping all but the best one.
Their producer, George Martin, often helped them in the final stages of the writing process, making suggestions for instrumentation or special effects.
Their collaboration was not the only creative force within the group, however, as members George Harrison and Ringo Starr eventually contributed their own songs.
NO CHANGE
When asked to select the most relevant detail, examine the surrounding information to understand which choice fits best in a particular context. Here, the sentence in question is preceded by a brief introduction to the Beatles and a mention of its central creative force, the Lennon—McCartney writing team. It is followed by a sentence that gives examples of Beatles songs written independently by Paul and John and explains that both writers still received credit for the compositions. The choice which mentions the Beatles’ producer “George Martin” and his implementation of “instrumentation or special effects” interrupts a discussion of the specific partnership being discussed. Similarly, the choice which discusses the contributions of “George Harrison and Ringo Starr” blurs the discussion of Paul and John. The choice describing their method of writing “six or seven songs” is more relevant, but doesn’t help to explain the unusual crediting described in the next sentence. The existing sentence, however, which mentions a “handshake agreement” regarding their collaboration, remains on topic while also contextualizing the explanatory detail to follow, and is the best choice.
Example Question #2 : Author's Intent
This excerpt is adapted from Alan Gomez, The Pollution Solution.
Photosynthesis, despite popular conception, is not unique to plants, as it is performed by many microscopic organisms. Recent experimental evidence has shown that leafy plants, usually among the most effective photosynthesizers, perform the process much less efficiently when hindered by particle pollution. In one study, experimenters measured the oxygen output from dozens of identical plants placed in artificial environments with varying air quality and found that the relationship between particle pollution and photosynthetic inhibition was exponential—as particle count was increased steadily, oxygen output fell more and more steeply. With these results in mind, many environmental scientists believe that in some of the country’s most polluted cities, leafy plants may soon be completely unable to perform the photosynthetic processes necessary to sustain human life.
Which choice most effectively introduces the information which follows in the paragraph?
There is a growing belief among climate scientists that the current rise in global temperatures may be an irreversible trend.
Particle pollution also has a detrimental impact on photosynthesis, the process by which plants convert atmospheric carbon dioxide into breathable oxygen.
Some types of trees, known formally as conifers, maintain their green color and keep their leaves throughout all four seasons.
NO CHANGE
Particle pollution also has a detrimental impact on photosynthesis, the process by which plants convert atmospheric carbon dioxide into breathable oxygen.
When asked to choose which sentence most effectively introduces a paragraph, examine the remainder of the paragraph to determine which choice aligns most closely with the information which follows. The body of the paragraph focuses on the relationship between particle pollution and photosynthesis, describes a study on leafy plants in different artificial environments, and speculates about the implications of the findings. The responses which focus on a “rise in global temperatures” and trees which “keep their leaves throughout all four seasons” are entirely irrelevant and can be discarded. The existing sentence, although it mentions photosynthesis, mentions that the process also occurs in microorganisms, an idea which is not expanded upon in the remainder of the paragraph. The choice which mentioned the “detrimental impact” of particle pollution on photosynthesis, however, effectively introduces an idea which is further explored in the sentences which follow.
Example Question #3 : Author's Intent
This excerpt is adapted from David Brent, “The Method: Stanislavski in Practice.”
Stanislavski was described as hackneyed and vapid by some of his harshest critics. Utilizing his extensive experience as a director and a performer, he developed the first formal curriculum for aspiring actors. His exercises equipped students with techniques to embody the internal and external characteristics of real and imagined people. In other words, Stanislavski taught his students how to bring characters to life.
Which choice most effectively introduces the information which follows in the paragraph?
Later in his life, Stanislavski devoted much of his time to education, which he believed essential to the future of his craft.
Stanislavski was known throughout Russia for his modern reimaginings of Shakespeare.
Amid global acclaim for his performances, Stanislavksi suffered from declining physical and mental health.
NO CHANGE
Later in his life, Stanislavski devoted much of his time to education, which he believed essential to the future of his craft.
When asked to choose which sentence most effectively introduces a paragraph, examine the remainder of the paragraph to determine which choice aligns most closely with the information which follows. The body of the paragraph focuses on Stanislavski’s experience developing a curriculum for acting students, so responses which focus on his “reimaginings of Shakespeare,” the “hackneyed and vapid” state ascribed to him by his critics, or his “declining physical and mental health,” though they may be accurate, do not relate to the information contained in the rest of the paragraph. However, the choice which mentions “education” and Stanislavski’s belief that it was “essential to the future of his craft” effectively introduces the details to follow.
Example Question #1 : Adding And Deleting Sentences
One of the most influential niche constructors is the earthworm, an organism found almost everywhere on the planet. 1 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 better mixed than land without them – leading to monumental changes in the ecosystem.
The author is considering adding the following sentence.
Earthworms were originally aquatic organisms that were ill-equipped to survive on land.
Should the author make this addition?
Yes, because it adds information about the roles of earthworms as niche creators.
No, because it distracts from the discussion on niche construction.
No, because the author does not further address why this fact is important.
Whenever the SAT gives you answer choices in the form of "yes/no because", you should turn your attention to the reasoning given for each answer choice since it's easier to determine whether the reason is correct than it is to determine whether or not the sentence should be included. "Yes, because it explains the prediction made in the next sentence." correctly states that the sentence explains why the prediction in the next sentence is there. "Yes, because it adds information about the roles of earthworms as niche creators." can be eliminated because the sentence does not explain the role of earthworms as niche creators. "No, because it distracts from the discussion on niche construction. " can be eliminated because it doesn't distract from the discussion of niche construction since it talks about why earthworms need to be niche constructors. "No, because the author does not further address why this fact is important." can be eliminated because the next sentence does explain why this fact is important.
Example Question #2 : Adding And Deleting Sentences
For thousands of years, cooking was considered more of a practice than a science. Much of what chefs and food scientists alike knew about cooking came from conventional wisdom rather than carefully designed research. For individuals who considered cooking to be an art rather than a science, this seemed to be for the best; however, for physicist Nicholas Kurti and chemist Herve This, the lack on empirical knowledge around what we eat was not just an affront to science. It was a challenge. In 1988 the pair coined the term “molecular gastronomy,” which they defined as the investigation of the physical and chemical transformation that ingredients undergo during the course of cooking. They argued that if chefs understood these processes, they could produce dishes improved by the findings. 1
At this point, the author is considering adding the following sentence.
"The pair’s philosophy came from the Enlightenment thinkers of the 18th century, who believed that everything could be categorized and systematized."
Should the author make this addition here?
No, because it is not relevant to the focus of the paragraph.
Yes, because it reinforces a claim that is made earlier in the paragraph.
No, because it distracts from the paragraph’s focus on early experiments in molecular gastronomy.
Yes, because it explains the origin of the phrase “molecular gastronomy”.
No, because it is not relevant to the focus of the paragraph.
For questions with answers that lead with "Yes/Yes/No/No," it is often easier to look at the reasoning rather than at whether or not the sentence should be included since it is easier to eliminate answer choices based on reasoning that is incorrect rather than whether the sentence belongs. "Yes, because it explains the origin of the phrase “molecular gastronomy”." can be eliminated because the sentence does not explain the origin of the phrase "molecular gastronomy". "Yes, because it reinforces a claim that is made earlier in the paragraph." can be eliminated because it does not address a claim made earlier in the paragraph. "No, because it is not relevant to the focus of the paragraph." is true - this sentence is not relevant to the main focus of the paragraph. "No, because it distracts from the paragraph’s focus on early experiments in molecular gastronomy." can be eliminated because this paragraph does not discuss earlier experiments in molecular gastronomy.
Example Question #3 : Adding And Deleting Sentences
The Sagrada Familia has stood, incomplete, as part of the Barcelona skyline since the early phases of its construction in 1882. The project, originally intended to be a cathedral in the gothic style, was begun by the bookseller Joseph Maria Bocabella under the direction of the architect Francisco de Paula del Villar. Del Villar and Bocabella imagined a basilica modeled on the Gothic revival churches Bocabella had seen on trips to Italy. However, Bocabella’s ideal basilica never came to be. In 1883 del Villar resigned from the project, and 30-year old Antoni Gaudi, a young but already well-known architect from Catalonia, took over as lead architect.
Gaudi decided to depart from del Villar’s original Gothic design in favor of a more modern design. The new design was ambitious, featuring eighteen tall spires and four different facades on different sides of the basilica. But work on the new building was slow. Decades passed, and the work was still incomplete. In 1915, Gaudi - now 63 years old - abandoned all other work in favor of dedicating himself to the completion of the monumental church, but progress on the building was still slow. When pressured to speed up work on the monumental building, Gaudi was said to have replied, “My client is not in a hurry.” By the time Gaudi died in 1926, the basilica was only somewhere between 15 and 20 percent complete.
After Gaudi’s death, work stalled between 1936 and 1940 when Civil War broke out in Spain and again as World War II began, leaving the project years behind schedule. During the wars, Catalan anarchists destroyed part of the basilica and the models and designs Gaudi left for the builders, who were forced to reconstruct what plans they could, an arduous and time-consuming process. It took years for the project to get back on track; once it was, it was impossible to know whether additional construction would match Gaudi’s vision.
The Sagrada Familia, one of the most iconic structures in Barcelona, remains unfinished, a constant work-in-progress in the Barcelona skyline. Despite these setbacks, it is open to the public for both religious services and tourism, attracting over three million visitors a year. In fact, tourist entrance fees now pay for annual construction costs. 1
At this point, the author is considering adding the following sentence.
“Architects estimate that the building is now 70 percent complete and that the structure itself should be finished by 2026, one hundred years after Gaudi’s death."
Should the author make this addition here?
No, because it distracts from the paragraph’s emphasis on construction costs.
No, because it is irrelevant to the main idea of the passage.
Yes, because it provides a conclusion that reminds readers of the grandeur of the Sagrada Familia.
Yes, because it provides a conclusion that relates to the information given earlier in the passage.
Yes, because it provides a conclusion that relates to the information given earlier in the passage.
One of the best ways to deal with questions that give you the options Yes/Yes/No/No in the answer choices is to ignore the "yes" or "no " question and instead focus on the information that comes after the comma. Determining whether the reasoning is solid is often easier than deciding whether or not a particular sentence should be included. "Yes, because it provides a conclusion that relates to the information given earlier in the passage." correctly states that it provides a conclusion (it is the last sentence) that relates to information given in the passage (that the Sagrada Familia is still unfinished and has been behind schedule since the start). This is the correct answer.
Among the other answers, "yes, because it provides a conclusion that reminds readers of the grandeur of the Sagrada Familia" can be eliminated because there is nothing in this sentence that relates to the grandeur of the Sagrada Familia. "No, because it distracts from the paragraph’s emphasis on construction costs" can be eliminated because the paragraph doesn't talk about construction costs. And "no, because it is irrelevant to the main idea of the passage" can be eliminated because the sentence does relate to the main idea of the passage since it talks about the length of time needed to finish the project.
Certified Tutor
All New SAT Writing and Language Resources
