I’m having trouble identifying the object. Sometimes there is an object and sometimes there isn’t. What is a good way to know when to identify that. Other than that I’m doing really well in identifying the subject and predicate- verb.
Question 4 might be tricky if you're only working with the information presented by 7Sage. The sentence:
"The formation of hurricanes that threaten the United States mainland is triggered by high atmospheric winds off the western coast of Africa."
is in the passive voice, which means the subject is receiving the action. Not every passive voice sentence includes the thing performing the action that the subject is receiving, but when it does, that noun or noun phrase is called the agent. Structurally, it feels like an object, but an agent is its own thing, so 7Sage considers that just another modifier.
Let's try another example. Let me know what you think, and point out the agent if you're feeling bold.
The seminal work of proto-existentialist fiction Notes from Underground was written by Fyodor Dostoyevsky.
In question #3 how is the predicate verb "declared" instead of "representing"? How should I determine the difference between which action is the predicate?
Half the time i think an object is the modifyer and the modifyer is the object.
Personally, it makes more sense to understand the subject of what the sentence is saying rather than the kernal. "Huricanes are triggered by Winds." In terms of saving time and understanding what the arguer is saying, the subject makes more sense than the kernal.
This is what helped me. The kernels [subject, predicate and object] should be a grammatically correct sentence when pulled out from the complex sentence; Ex: Mary Simms declared.
Alfred Wegener developed a concept
The formation is triggered.
Except Here:
[A] study concluded. Even though A is a modifier, I still pulled it from the sentence. I didn't have to change the definite article to make the sentence correct.
I'm finding it really hard to differentiate between predicate-object and modifier. For example in Q3, I identified that the predicate-verb was 'declared' so asked myself modifier questions like where, when, who etc, which led me to think "billboards are the basis of our business" was a modifier. But it's actually an object?? I just feel like it's so confusing! Anyone got any advice? Many thanks.
I finally am starting to understand how to spot the difference between the predicate objects and just modifiers for verbs. If you have to question if the structure falls apart when determining the objects relation to the verb then this is most likely a modifier for the verb.
I have no idea how to distinguish when something is a predicate object or a modifier. I feel like sometimes here it's considered a modifier and other times it's considered a predicate object
I think, on one hand, it is helpful to break down the sentences in this detailed manner, but, on the other hand, I still find it more helpful to get the key words rather than just the core of the sentence. For instance, for "The formation of hurricanes that threaten the United States mainland is triggered by high atmospheric winds off the western coast of Africa," I would mentally recap the sentence as "hurricanes are triggered by winds from Africa," instead of just the core, "The formation is triggered." I think the concrete words give more info than abstract ones, even if the abstarct word is the grammatical core of the sentence. If I recap by extracting the core, then I will need a second step to actually get the gist of the sentence.
I was able to successfully answer all questions - however for question number 4 the subject-noun being "the formation of" is fundamentally less helpful in understanding the kernel of the sentence than "hurricanes". "hurricanes [are] triggered." This would better aid the reader in finding important information. Why is "the formation of" a better subject-noun?
In q4 why isn't hurricanes the main subject? im confused as in why the main subject is there formation
5
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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.
258 comments
I’m having trouble identifying the object. Sometimes there is an object and sometimes there isn’t. What is a good way to know when to identify that. Other than that I’m doing really well in identifying the subject and predicate- verb.
Question 4 might be tricky if you're only working with the information presented by 7Sage. The sentence:
is in the passive voice, which means the subject is receiving the action. Not every passive voice sentence includes the thing performing the action that the subject is receiving, but when it does, that noun or noun phrase is called the agent. Structurally, it feels like an object, but an agent is its own thing, so 7Sage considers that just another modifier.
Let's try another example. Let me know what you think, and point out the agent if you're feeling bold.
4: why not
Subject: The formation
Predicate-verb: is
Predicate-object: triggered?
4/5 lets go!! I will say I'm still lacking on identifying the object
whoa! I got them all correct in a reasonable time... confidence booster!
I'm confused as to why the kernel for Q1 is not Antibiotics kill bacteria. FAil can modify kill.
In question #3 how is the predicate verb "declared" instead of "representing"? How should I determine the difference between which action is the predicate?
I think I am not going to get too caught up on the differences between predicate objects and modifiers.
how is the subject to number 4 not hurricanes
Half the time i think an object is the modifyer and the modifyer is the object.
Personally, it makes more sense to understand the subject of what the sentence is saying rather than the kernal. "Huricanes are triggered by Winds." In terms of saving time and understanding what the arguer is saying, the subject makes more sense than the kernal.
This is what helped me. The kernels [subject, predicate and object] should be a grammatically correct sentence when pulled out from the complex sentence; Ex: Mary Simms declared.
Alfred Wegener developed a concept
The formation is triggered.
Except Here:
[A] study concluded. Even though A is a modifier, I still pulled it from the sentence. I didn't have to change the definite article to make the sentence correct.
I'm finding it really hard to differentiate between predicate-object and modifier. For example in Q3, I identified that the predicate-verb was 'declared' so asked myself modifier questions like where, when, who etc, which led me to think "billboards are the basis of our business" was a modifier. But it's actually an object?? I just feel like it's so confusing! Anyone got any advice? Many thanks.
To everyone who feels stuck keep going just get the basic idea and move on because this stuff is rubbish
I finally am starting to understand how to spot the difference between the predicate objects and just modifiers for verbs. If you have to question if the structure falls apart when determining the objects relation to the verb then this is most likely a modifier for the verb.
I have no idea how to distinguish when something is a predicate object or a modifier. I feel like sometimes here it's considered a modifier and other times it's considered a predicate object
I think, on one hand, it is helpful to break down the sentences in this detailed manner, but, on the other hand, I still find it more helpful to get the key words rather than just the core of the sentence. For instance, for "The formation of hurricanes that threaten the United States mainland is triggered by high atmospheric winds off the western coast of Africa," I would mentally recap the sentence as "hurricanes are triggered by winds from Africa," instead of just the core, "The formation is triggered." I think the concrete words give more info than abstract ones, even if the abstarct word is the grammatical core of the sentence. If I recap by extracting the core, then I will need a second step to actually get the gist of the sentence.
I was able to successfully answer all questions - however for question number 4 the subject-noun being "the formation of" is fundamentally less helpful in understanding the kernel of the sentence than "hurricanes". "hurricanes [are] triggered." This would better aid the reader in finding important information. Why is "the formation of" a better subject-noun?
How is bacteria not an object in Q1?
Antibiotics (subject) fail to kill (verb) (fail to kill what?) bacteria (object)
Very glad that my English teacher was obsessed with grammar in 8th grade. This all comes very naturally.
I'm very confused.
How do you know when something is an object vs when it is a modifier of the predicate verb?
I feel like I'm talking like a caveman.
I hate this
I don't understand...wouldn't bacteria in number one be the predicate-object?
In q4 why isn't hurricanes the main subject? im confused as in why the main subject is there formation