NGL, this is one of the most incoherent exercises/skill builders. Instructions are super vague which leads to us not really understanding the objective of the entire lesson let alone the exercise.
Break up the sentnance so it’s more clear to understand.
But we did already do that and that, the word, is not super distinct here.
Yet the repetition of trying to make the language understandable as clear and quickly as possible has helped me.
Break grammar. It’s Not required for clarity. Yet grammar required for precision. LSAT writers love grammar. Not because it’s proper, but because it can hide the meaning.
I think it'd be wonderful to have, in the instructions of these assignments, a list of everything we should be looking for and a disclaimer that not every question will have every element. It's a little disheartening to feel like you've identified every element of the current lesson - object clauses, for instance - to have a curveball that you didn't identify referentials or modifiers!
This skill builder has an error, and repeats it for two examples: for questions 4 and 5. In both cases, there is a structure: subject + predicate verb + predicate object + CONJUNCTION + SECOND PREDICATE. In the video, this structure is recognized as a possible, but technically wrong way of understanding the passage. It isn't simply possible. It is the only correct analysis of the passage, for both questions 4 and 5, and failing to recognize the second predicate structure results in failure to understand the passage. For question 4: the first predicate is "finds that it is unable to lend its printed books". "that it is unable to lend its printed books" is the object. "and" is the conjunction, which is followed by a second predicate for the same subject "displays them only when requested for an exhibition." This second predicate can't be part of the object, because it does not make sense to say that "a library find that so displays them only when requested for an exhibition". "displays them" can't operate as an object for "finds". Similarly, for question 5, there are two predicates. The first is "realizes that it can't continue to bake its traditional bread" and the second is "switches to a recipe that uses cornmeal." "switches" can't be an object for "realizes". They bakery didn't realize that they switched. They realized that they can't continue with wheat flour, and they switched to a cornmeal recipe. Considering this all to be the object of 'realized' misses the meaning that the switch was a result of the realization. This is a basic scoping error, and, honestly, it is disappointing to see it not once but twice, and shortly after a discussion of the concept that a subject can have two predicates. I realize Ping is saying he's not rigorously teaching grammar, but parsing the difference between an object and a second predicate is fairly important to understanding a passage.
idk if this is helpful but, a couple sections later, the course recommends reading widely to help with comprehension.
I find that 19th English novels and short stories tend to be really dense with subordinate clauses, modifiers of all kinds, and referentials. Dickens especially. Even more so read aloud.
Now that Object clause is introduced- it makes things easier to put together. I wasn't understanding the gap because all I wanted to do was put the pieces together to make a full puzzle- rather than a partial (i.e., main subject, and verb). I need more practice, but I thought I'd share.
For question 4, why wouldn't "and so displays them only when requested for an exhibition" be considered an additional object clause to be drawn out and separated? Would "and so" not be considered its own predicate object if it is linking a different clause/point to the same sentence? Or does this not need to be separated out like that because it is a cause and effect relationship?
In his explanation of question 5, the instructor says: “What thing does the bakery realize? It realized that it can’t continue to bake its traditional bread and as a consequence switched to a recipe that uses cornmeal”
But the answer key says that the word “and” on its own does not indicate a causal relationship between the clauses “it can’t continue to bake its traditional bread” and “it switches to a recipe that uses cornmeal”. The answer key says that “based on the meaning of the two clauses it’s strongly implied that the second clause is a consequence of the first clause.
I’ve done all the lessons in order so I haven’t gotten to the in-depth lessons that explain the types of relationships that can be expressed by joining clauses together. But it feels like whether or not the relationship is a causal one is important to the overall understanding of the sentence b/c if we’re saying that the fact that the bakery “can’t continue to bake its traditional bread” definitelycauses the bakery to switch to a cornmeal recipe – that’s different than saying that it’s likely to have caused that switch.
So I'm wondering: Is it important to the overall understanding of the sentence whether or not the relationship is causal?
It took me a couple questions but got the hang of it. I feel like if there was more extensive practice on this, it would solidify my understanding further. I have been trying to utilize this every day when I am reading!
#help on the previous page, it says "that the sky is blue" is the predicate object. However, question 1 says "that" is the predicate object and "cells have the ability to heal themselves" is the object clause. Why is that? Going off of this skill builder shouldn't the previous page say "that" is the predicate object and "the sky is blue" is the object clause?
Ok so I went way to in depth with this and tried to make the object clause into S/P and found it very hard after watching I realized I misunderstood the goal of the exercise but I did found out how relevant referential are and heres how:
Q3: Fans of the movie argue that it will have a significant impact on the perspectives of many viewers.
S = Fans
P = Argue
OS - it will (it as in the movie will)
OP - have a significant impact on the perspectives ( perspectives as in the viewers)
Hope this helps someone -- without being able to see referents this would make 0 sense.
[subject (noun)] A (library) in a digital-first community [predicate (verb) {object} object clause] (finds) {that} it is unable to lend its printed books and so only displays them only when requested for an exhibition.
or if this looks easier
(A library) in a digital-first community(finds) [that] "it is unable to lend its printed books and so displays them only when requested for an exhibition."
WHOLE subject is underlined
WHOLE predicate is italicized
(subject-noun) and (predicate-verb) are in parentheses
Predicate object is [bracketed] in bold
"object clause" is in quotes
hopefully this breakdown helps you or anyone else struggling with number 4 better understand the parsing
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.
92 comments
5/5
NGL, this is one of the most incoherent exercises/skill builders. Instructions are super vague which leads to us not really understanding the objective of the entire lesson let alone the exercise.
@Dom80 i feel the purpose is pretty clear.
Break up the sentnance so it’s more clear to understand.
But we did already do that and that, the word, is not super distinct here.
Yet the repetition of trying to make the language understandable as clear and quickly as possible has helped me.
Break grammar. It’s Not required for clarity. Yet grammar required for precision. LSAT writers love grammar. Not because it’s proper, but because it can hide the meaning.
Who has to find it. Not them.
I think it'd be wonderful to have, in the instructions of these assignments, a list of everything we should be looking for and a disclaimer that not every question will have every element. It's a little disheartening to feel like you've identified every element of the current lesson - object clauses, for instance - to have a curveball that you didn't identify referentials or modifiers!
This(subject?) takes practice. But I think its a useful skill to have on the toolbelt in the long run
i struggled a bit
In question 3, I put "it" as a referential to "movie", is that wrong? Or why does that not matter?
@PedroDaher That's correct. He mentions that "it" is a referential for "the movie" in the 5 min mark.
I struggled with is one 3/5.
This skill builder has an error, and repeats it for two examples: for questions 4 and 5. In both cases, there is a structure: subject + predicate verb + predicate object + CONJUNCTION + SECOND PREDICATE. In the video, this structure is recognized as a possible, but technically wrong way of understanding the passage. It isn't simply possible. It is the only correct analysis of the passage, for both questions 4 and 5, and failing to recognize the second predicate structure results in failure to understand the passage. For question 4: the first predicate is "finds that it is unable to lend its printed books". "that it is unable to lend its printed books" is the object. "and" is the conjunction, which is followed by a second predicate for the same subject "displays them only when requested for an exhibition." This second predicate can't be part of the object, because it does not make sense to say that "a library find that so displays them only when requested for an exhibition". "displays them" can't operate as an object for "finds". Similarly, for question 5, there are two predicates. The first is "realizes that it can't continue to bake its traditional bread" and the second is "switches to a recipe that uses cornmeal." "switches" can't be an object for "realizes". They bakery didn't realize that they switched. They realized that they can't continue with wheat flour, and they switched to a cornmeal recipe. Considering this all to be the object of 'realized' misses the meaning that the switch was a result of the realization. This is a basic scoping error, and, honestly, it is disappointing to see it not once but twice, and shortly after a discussion of the concept that a subject can have two predicates. I realize Ping is saying he's not rigorously teaching grammar, but parsing the difference between an object and a second predicate is fairly important to understanding a passage.
@dh2303 Thank you for pointing this out, I was a bit confused about this as well and I hope others can offer additonal insight into this
lets get this bread
5/5
will this become intuitive, because how will I have enough time on the test to do this?
idk if this is helpful but, a couple sections later, the course recommends reading widely to help with comprehension.
I find that 19th English novels and short stories tend to be really dense with subordinate clauses, modifiers of all kinds, and referentials. Dickens especially. Even more so read aloud.
Might be fun to read A Christmas Carol this holiday season as prep: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/46/46-h/46-h.htm
This might help your brain adjust to long sentences with many modifiers. It certainly helped me.
@law_guy I additionally recommend Wuthering Heights, Pride & Prejudice, and Middlemarch
@mibuch Currently reading Wuthering Heights. It is so good.
@law_guy Good advice
Now that Object clause is introduced- it makes things easier to put together. I wasn't understanding the gap because all I wanted to do was put the pieces together to make a full puzzle- rather than a partial (i.e., main subject, and verb). I need more practice, but I thought I'd share.
For question 4, why wouldn't "and so displays them only when requested for an exhibition" be considered an additional object clause to be drawn out and separated? Would "and so" not be considered its own predicate object if it is linking a different clause/point to the same sentence? Or does this not need to be separated out like that because it is a cause and effect relationship?
In his explanation of question 5, the instructor says: “What thing does the bakery realize? It realized that it can’t continue to bake its traditional bread and as a consequence switched to a recipe that uses cornmeal”
But the answer key says that the word “and” on its own does not indicate a causal relationship between the clauses “it can’t continue to bake its traditional bread” and “it switches to a recipe that uses cornmeal”. The answer key says that “based on the meaning of the two clauses it’s strongly implied that the second clause is a consequence of the first clause.
I’ve done all the lessons in order so I haven’t gotten to the in-depth lessons that explain the types of relationships that can be expressed by joining clauses together. But it feels like whether or not the relationship is a causal one is important to the overall understanding of the sentence b/c if we’re saying that the fact that the bakery “can’t continue to bake its traditional bread” definitely causes the bakery to switch to a cornmeal recipe – that’s different than saying that it’s likely to have caused that switch.
So I'm wondering: Is it important to the overall understanding of the sentence whether or not the relationship is causal?
4/5!!! though i did not get it mainly because I feel like i'm getting bored but yay!!
What makes this different from prepositions that we did in the previous lessons?
I think this stuff is fun!
@DavidAnthony0116 I agree! I actually enjoyed this one!
understanding this much more. 5/5.
5/5, woohoo!! I never thought DGP would ever come in handy, shoutout to my 8th grade English teacher!
5/5 - gaining momentum 🎉
It took me a couple questions but got the hang of it. I feel like if there was more extensive practice on this, it would solidify my understanding further. I have been trying to utilize this every day when I am reading!
#help on the previous page, it says "that the sky is blue" is the predicate object. However, question 1 says "that" is the predicate object and "cells have the ability to heal themselves" is the object clause. Why is that? Going off of this skill builder shouldn't the previous page say "that" is the predicate object and "the sky is blue" is the object clause?
Ok so I went way to in depth with this and tried to make the object clause into S/P and found it very hard after watching I realized I misunderstood the goal of the exercise but I did found out how relevant referential are and heres how:
Q3: Fans of the movie argue that it will have a significant impact on the perspectives of many viewers.
S = Fans
P = Argue
OS - it will (it as in the movie will)
OP - have a significant impact on the perspectives ( perspectives as in the viewers)
Hope this helps someone -- without being able to see referents this would make 0 sense.
5/5!!!
Question 4.
Object clause.
"it is unable to lend its printed books and so displays them only when requested for an exhibition."
What would be the Subject and Predicate?
Subject: Printed books? Library?
Predicate: unable? display?
@Sameer_Ahamad
[subject (noun)] A (library) in a digital-first community [predicate (verb) {object} object clause] (finds) {that} it is unable to lend its printed books and so only displays them only when requested for an exhibition.
or if this looks easier
(A library) in a digital-first community (finds) [that] "it is unable to lend its printed books and so displays them only when requested for an exhibition."
WHOLE subject is underlined
WHOLE predicate is italicized
(subject-noun) and (predicate-verb) are in parentheses
Predicate object is [bracketed] in bold
"object clause" is in quotes
hopefully this breakdown helps you or anyone else struggling with number 4 better understand the parsing
@Sameer_Ahamad
I am guessing you mean what is the subject and predicate for the object clause since it is a clause.
My best bet is:
Subject: "It" a referential for "Library"
This would be a one subject two predicates situation...
Predicate [1]-
Verb: unable
Object: the rest w/ modifier
Predicate [2]-
Verb: displays
Object: the rest w/ modifiers