13. A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
(A) that they will, or could,
(B) that they would, or could,
(C) they will be or could
(D) think that they will be or could
(E) think the power stations would or could
SC-Pronouns
This topic has expert replies
- ronniecoleman
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 11:00 pm
- Location: New Delhi , India
- Thanked: 13 times
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 940
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:22 am
- Thanked: 55 times
- Followed by:1 members
Nightwish wrote:13. A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
(A) that they will, or could,
(B) that they would, or could,
(C) they will be or could
(D) think that they will be or could
(E) think the power stations would or could
go with A
B and E -would or could looks awkward
Also repetition of "be" in C and D is wordy
In A "or could" is correctly made non essential
IMO D as it looks better than other options.
However to me all looks wrong, what is the source?
In A *that* has no antecedent, D clears the meaning by inserting one more verb think, however, still in D I can't figure out how will be and could, be are parallel
Also, don't you think there should be comman before 'but', i think but is acting as a coordinating conjuction here.
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present, but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
However to me all looks wrong, what is the source?
In A *that* has no antecedent, D clears the meaning by inserting one more verb think, however, still in D I can't figure out how will be and could, be are parallel
Also, don't you think there should be comman before 'but', i think but is acting as a coordinating conjuction here.
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present, but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 940
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:22 am
- Thanked: 55 times
- Followed by:1 members
Nightwish wrote:OA is D
As far as I know,
1. will or could cant go together
will expresses certanity and could expresses uncertanity
2. but is also followed by a comma when used a cordinator
Only exception is when but is used a preposition
3. "be" is just another form of being and having "will be or could be" is double bonanza for akwardness
( I hope no one thinks that "be" is required to provide parallelsim)
Friends, let me know your views
source pls
wouldnt 'they' refer to the journalists??!!
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
think that they will be or could
pls explain.
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/confused.png)
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
think that they will be or could
pls explain.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1153
- Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:21 am
- Thanked: 146 times
- Followed by:2 members
I agree with you iamcste
for parallelism be should used only once just like the infinitive to
The two most important points that differentiates parallelism from awkwardness.
Honestly I simply cant make sense of this question. I feel commas are also incorrectly used.
As far as the source is concerned, none other than 1000SC. So the next step should be forget about it.
for parallelism be should used only once just like the infinitive to
The two most important points that differentiates parallelism from awkwardness.
Honestly I simply cant make sense of this question. I feel commas are also incorrectly used.
As far as the source is concerned, none other than 1000SC. So the next step should be forget about it.
No rest for the Wicked....
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1153
- Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:21 am
- Thanked: 146 times
- Followed by:2 members
They - refers to nuclear power stationss&s wrote:wouldnt 'they' refer to the journalists??!!![]()
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
think that they will be or could
pls explain.
who [journalists] think that they[power stations] should be made safe
hope this helps.
No rest for the Wicked....
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:41 pm
- Thanked: 3 times
Can someone explain why option E is wrong.I am not concerned about the actual answer but only th explanation.Option E doesnt have any ambiguity about usage of Theyparallel_chase wrote:They - refers to nuclear power stationss&s wrote:wouldnt 'they' refer to the journalists??!!![]()
A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
think that they will be or could
pls explain.
who [journalists] think that they[power stations] should be made safe
hope this helps.