Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is [#permalink]
17 Jun 2008, 08:14
This post was BOOKMARKED
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Scientists have identified an asteroid, 2000 BF19, that is about half a mile wide and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but probably not cause planetwide destruction.
A. and, if it strikes Earth, it can do tremendous damage to part of the planet but B. and, if it would strike Earth, part of the planet could experience a tremendous amount of damage but it would C. and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would D. and that, if Earth is struck by it, can do part of the planet tremendous damage, but it would E. and that, if it strikes Earth, it could experience a tremendous amount of damage but
A. if strikes, then would/could(future tense), no proper pronoun reference(it here refers to Earth) B. would will never come in the if part of the condition, no proper pronoun reference(it refers to Earth) C. if stikes, then could...but would(parallelism and tense match) D. is stuck by it...passive, no proper pronoun reference(it here refers to Earth) E. if strikes, then could (use is correct)...but lacks parallelism, no proper pronoun reference(it here refers to Earth)
Go with C.
Can someone tell me if i'm wrong, in the way i'm eliminating the answer choices.
Last edited by sumanamba on 17 Jun 2008, 08:36, edited 1 time in total.
What about the way the pronoun "it" is used in C makes it clearer than the other choices? I agree that the answer is C, but for a different reason. I think the use of "were to strike" is proper in C and no other choice uses it.
Is it C.
Pronoun it does not have a clear referrent in rest of the choices.
------------------------------------ J Allen Morris **I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$.
I dont know the answer. found it online in some wesite.
I vote between A and C.
But with option C
"and that, if it were to strike Earth, could do tremendous damage to part of the planet but would"
It does not seem a doubtful,hopeful statement , so can not be subjunctive mood. So were is not justified here. 'that' is also not needed.Since that in the first statement refers earth. Does not need to be parallel.
This is actullay giving a fact.It says that if asteroid strikes earth ..so and so happens..so it should be indicative mood statment.
Option A should be a better fit. I believe answer is A.