For anyone going through or struggling with these object clause identifiers, I strongly reccomend going through each question and looking at the video guide before attempting the next question! :D
just as I was understanding modifiers and Referentials, this has now thrown me for a loop. I thought number 5 was trying to trick us and throw in two Predicate object “that”s, so i wrote my answer as:
Subject-noun: a bakery
Modifying “bakery”: in a region
Modifying region: facing a wheat shortage
Predicate verb: realizes
Predicate object: that
Object-clause: it cant continue to bake its traditional bread and switches to a recipe
Predicate object 2: that
Object clause 2: uses cornmeal
Clearly I am way overthinking this. Also I looked it up and the internet said that the reason the second “that” is not another predicate object is because is is apparently a subject pronoun in this case, and the object of this part of the sentence is the cornmeal.
@HiGigi Yes. Think about it like that + some clause = a complex object... In Q5, what is being realized? The bakery realizes X; And X = that it can't continue ... blah blah blah. I have been thinking of it as a way to express an object which is not merely just "a ball" but a thought/idea etc... I am thinking THAT .... etc.
@JashanpreetMalhi I might be wrong but I’m pretty sure it acts as a referential. The word “that” will REFER to the object clause and is basically saying THAT as in that object that it is describing except the object is now a clause. Therefore, the word “that” is the object.
This seems to be another intuitive process. If you understand the characters of the sentence and what they mean in relation to each other, you are good. This isn't something to get caught up on! Most of us understand what is going on in each sentence. The point of this lesson, is to know HOW to break a sentence down so that it is easier to digest when confused. No, we will not have the time to do an exercise like this on the real exam. However, if not already, and with practice, your mind will be able to process this info in seconds. I just wanted to reassure some folks! Its okay if the logistics of this lesson are a bit... mind boggling. You likely already know how to do this! I have gotten a tonnn of lessons technically wrong, such as missing labels or combing ideas that should be separate, but I seem understand the overriding point. If you are like me, trust you will be fine!
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.
111 comments
idk how i managed to get these right - like i seem to get it but i also don't
"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."
--> Would "it " be the new subject of the Object clause if we were trying to dissect the object clause into Subject &Predicate?
For anyone going through or struggling with these object clause identifiers, I strongly reccomend going through each question and looking at the video guide before attempting the next question! :D
5/5
just as I was understanding modifiers and Referentials, this has now thrown me for a loop. I thought number 5 was trying to trick us and throw in two Predicate object “that”s, so i wrote my answer as:
Subject-noun: a bakery
Modifying “bakery”: in a region
Modifying region: facing a wheat shortage
Predicate verb: realizes
Predicate object: that
Object-clause: it cant continue to bake its traditional bread and switches to a recipe
Predicate object 2: that
Object clause 2: uses cornmeal
Clearly I am way overthinking this. Also I looked it up and the internet said that the reason the second “that” is not another predicate object is because is is apparently a subject pronoun in this case, and the object of this part of the sentence is the cornmeal.
if only the LSAT was just breaking down sentences it would be such a breeze
yayyy 5/5
easy peasy
Is the predicate object going to be "that" for every clause??!
“that” as a predicate object was tripping me out till it clicked on the third question. everything else felt good.
@HiGigi Yes. Think about it like that + some clause = a complex object... In Q5, what is being realized? The bakery realizes X; And X = that it can't continue ... blah blah blah. I have been thinking of it as a way to express an object which is not merely just "a ball" but a thought/idea etc... I am thinking THAT .... etc.
@CameronA2027 Ahhhh, thank you for sharing THAT 😅
Makes sense tbh
5/5 but why does q4 read so awkwardly? "and so displays" maybe the addition of the so is causing the issue?
"and so displays them only"
"and displays them only"
How is "that" an object?
@JashanpreetMalhi I might be wrong but I’m pretty sure it acts as a referential. The word “that” will REFER to the object clause and is basically saying THAT as in that object that it is describing except the object is now a clause. Therefore, the word “that” is the object.
I got a majority of them right
good practice makes perfect. 5/5
This seems to be another intuitive process. If you understand the characters of the sentence and what they mean in relation to each other, you are good. This isn't something to get caught up on! Most of us understand what is going on in each sentence. The point of this lesson, is to know HOW to break a sentence down so that it is easier to digest when confused. No, we will not have the time to do an exercise like this on the real exam. However, if not already, and with practice, your mind will be able to process this info in seconds. I just wanted to reassure some folks! Its okay if the logistics of this lesson are a bit... mind boggling. You likely already know how to do this! I have gotten a tonnn of lessons technically wrong, such as missing labels or combing ideas that should be separate, but I seem understand the overriding point. If you are like me, trust you will be fine!
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