GWD8-Q11:
There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that
can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.
A. There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of
monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion
through overfishing.
B. There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or
haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being
overfished.
C. There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not
for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.
D. Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish,
which contributes to its depletion by being overfished.
E. Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching
monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished.
Q11 is a problematic question.
I chose A not C just because "...monkfish, which contributes to..." is not an acceptable structure (according to OG) to describe the fact/situation in the previous clauses. If 'which' modifies monkfish, it creates illogical meaning that monkfish will generate (its) own depletion.
But "their" in A to modify monkfish as a spieces different from Cod and Hadcock seems to be less appropriate than "its". Thus, "their" is a confusing referent to either "monkfish" as a collective noun or "Cod and Hadcock" as a group.
NN, please help!!
GWD8-Q41
When drive-ins were at the height of their popularity in the late 1950’s, some 4,000
existed in the United States, but today there are less than one-quarter that many.
A. there are less than one-quarter that many
B. there are fewer than one-quarter as many
C. there are fewer than one-quarter of that amount
D. the number is less than one-quarter the amount
E. it is less than one-quarter of that amount
Q41 is a problematic question.
I chose C based on feeling. But I have the impression that in OG, "amount" usually refers to uncountable noun, such as water, energy and resource, not to countable nouns, such as cars, relations and memories, in this case, 4000 drive-ins. But “amounts” can refer to countable nouns, as the case in OG 243, amounts of suspected carcinogens…
Other examples in OG: 101, 132
amount in Webster:
usage Number is regularly used with count nouns <a large number of mistakes> <any number of times> while amount is mainly used with mass nouns <annual amount of rainfall> <a substantial amount of money>. The use of amount with count nouns has been frequently criticized; it usually occurs when the number of things is thought of as a mass or collection <glad to furnish any amount of black pebbles -- New Yorker> <a substantial amount of film offers -- Lily Tomlin> or when money is involved <a substantial amount of loans -- E. R. Black>. |