It seems that in some of these lessons, we're attempting to strip down sentences into the bare-most elements. Even if it doesn't make perfect, everyday English sense to say, "physicists were puzzled," for instance, we're learning the skill of highlighting each element of grammar so that we can fully grasp these elements. It's hard, introspecting on grammatical rules we've held our entire lives!! Be gracious and patient with yourself!
@vicdrucker I see what you're saying but I believe it just comes down to the phrasing. Ex. if you read "Sir Arthur convened the knights of the Round Table" you wouldn't think the object is the round table. So the "of" is the important difference. If the passage said "territorial America" then of course America would be the object.
Question 4 - Would/could it not be "Thomas Jefferson expanded America" instead of the territories. America seems like the better object of the sentence here.
Question 5 - This one seems like "William Shakespeare captured the elizabethan era" would make more sense. Saying "the spirit of" would add more context onto what about the Elizabethan era he was talking about.
I feel like this grammar section is more confusing than helpful, if you're a native English speaker you have an internal grammar engine. We don't have time on the LSAT to take mental note of subject-noun, predicate verb, modifying, predicate object etc and learn what these mean. Theres key things i feel like we should know like sufficient/necessary conditions, premise, conclusion etc.
Someone please correct my logic for #4 : During his presidency, Thomas Jeffersonexpandedthe territories of America by acquiring the Louisiana purchase.
[Subject-noun] Thomas Jefferson
[Predicate-verb] expanded
[Modifying "expanded"] during his presidency
[Modifying "expanded"] by acquiring the Louisiana purchase
[Predicate-object] America
[Modifying "America"] the territories of
I feel that "America" is as logically an object as "the territories" in this context. We are given these choices :
The object is America. What part of America? "The territories of America".
OR
the object is "the territories", i.e. the concept of all territorial polities. Which territories? Those of America.
It just seems simpler to parse the sentence the way I did. Am I wrong?
I, too, thought that "black holes" was the predicate-object in #3. Based on the comments, it is not the predicate-object because it comes after a preposition. I need to work on being able to determine when a predicate-object is evident in a sentence, and when it is not.
Previous lessons said that subjects can also contain a verb. I was anticipating seeing some examples of subject-verb in this skill builder.
It says to identify the subject, predicate, and modifiers. But then it asks us other things, like object-noun and predicate-object? That kind of threw me off a bit
#5 was hard beacuse at first, i thought william shakespeare as the subject, but then i second guessed to thinking it would be "writings" which i feel is a solid mistake to make because everything still makes sense after that with the P/V & P/O.
Can't it be possible that the writings captured the spriti too?
He says in the video don't get too caught up in the details as long as you can get the main subject and verb. As long as you can identify the main point of the sentence among all the modifiers thats the most important part.
Number 3 was a little confusing due to the existence of black holes being a whole modifier rather than black hole being the object predicate. Physicist were puzzled by black holes sounds like the broken down sentence
Okay why am I sorta bad at this lol. For question 4, I said America instead of the territories (minor mistake), and for question 3, I thought black holes were an object?? Oh well
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
145 comments
It seems that in some of these lessons, we're attempting to strip down sentences into the bare-most elements. Even if it doesn't make perfect, everyday English sense to say, "physicists were puzzled," for instance, we're learning the skill of highlighting each element of grammar so that we can fully grasp these elements. It's hard, introspecting on grammatical rules we've held our entire lives!! Be gracious and patient with yourself!
@vicdrucker I see what you're saying but I believe it just comes down to the phrasing. Ex. if you read "Sir Arthur convened the knights of the Round Table" you wouldn't think the object is the round table. So the "of" is the important difference. If the passage said "territorial America" then of course America would be the object.
4/5 These were so confusing... Definitely took me a minute and rewatching the videos.
Question 4 - Would/could it not be "Thomas Jefferson expanded America" instead of the territories. America seems like the better object of the sentence here.
Question 5 - This one seems like "William Shakespeare captured the elizabethan era" would make more sense. Saying "the spirit of" would add more context onto what about the Elizabethan era he was talking about.
I feel like this grammar section is more confusing than helpful, if you're a native English speaker you have an internal grammar engine. We don't have time on the LSAT to take mental note of subject-noun, predicate verb, modifying, predicate object etc and learn what these mean. Theres key things i feel like we should know like sufficient/necessary conditions, premise, conclusion etc.
Someone please correct my logic for #4 : During his presidency, Thomas Jefferson expanded the territories of America by acquiring the Louisiana purchase.
[Subject-noun] Thomas Jefferson
[Predicate-verb] expanded
[Modifying "expanded"] during his presidency
[Modifying "expanded"] by acquiring the Louisiana purchase
[Predicate-object] America
[Modifying "America"] the territories of
I feel that "America" is as logically an object as "the territories" in this context. We are given these choices :
The object is America. What part of America? "The territories of America".
OR
the object is "the territories", i.e. the concept of all territorial polities. Which territories? Those of America.
It just seems simpler to parse the sentence the way I did. Am I wrong?
I, too, thought that "black holes" was the predicate-object in #3. Based on the comments, it is not the predicate-object because it comes after a preposition. I need to work on being able to determine when a predicate-object is evident in a sentence, and when it is not.
Previous lessons said that subjects can also contain a verb. I was anticipating seeing some examples of subject-verb in this skill builder.
It says to identify the subject, predicate, and modifiers. But then it asks us other things, like object-noun and predicate-object? That kind of threw me off a bit
#5 was hard beacuse at first, i thought william shakespeare as the subject, but then i second guessed to thinking it would be "writings" which i feel is a solid mistake to make because everything still makes sense after that with the P/V & P/O.
Can't it be possible that the writings captured the spriti too?
in #3, can anyone help me understand why there is no predicate-object? I though it would be "black holes," but there is none identified in the answer
Got all subjects and verbs right, just need more practice on the predicate-object
This makes me nervous lol
I got all the subjects, objects, and verbs right. I can get most modifiers right, but I need more practice on what the modifier is acting on.
Who is this new voice
I think the main point of this section is to quickly digest sentences into an accurate and understandable form
why is existence not the predicate object of question 3?
number 3 kind of confused because i though that the object of puzzled was black holes
I don't understand, aren't the details the modifiers? then why not get caught up in them?
He says in the video don't get too caught up in the details as long as you can get the main subject and verb. As long as you can identify the main point of the sentence among all the modifiers thats the most important part.
QUESTION 3: shouldn't existence of Black holes be the subject since it is doing the puzzling (Predicate) of physicists (Object)?
Number 3 was a little confusing due to the existence of black holes being a whole modifier rather than black hole being the object predicate. Physicist were puzzled by black holes sounds like the broken down sentence
For question 3, why is black holes not considered the object?
Grammar is a lil tough
Okay why am I sorta bad at this lol. For question 4, I said America instead of the territories (minor mistake), and for question 3, I thought black holes were an object?? Oh well
First 5/5!