Jump to content
Urch Forums

1000 SC's 238


chitralekha

Recommended Posts

Dental caries and gingivitis can be exacerbated not only by the foods patients eat but also by when the patients eat them.

(A) not only by the foods patients eat but also by when the patients eat them

(B) by not only the foods patients eat but also by when the patients eat them

© not only by the foods patients eat but also by time when the foods are eaten

(D) by not only the foods that are eaten by patients but also by the times the foods are eaten

(E) not only by what patients eat but also by when they eat it

 

Spoiler : My pick was C, O-A is E

Link to comment
Share on other sites

between C and E. I chose E. In C,

© not only by the foods patients eat but also by time when the foods are eaten

what i did not like about C is that time and when seem to be redundant.

Moreover, the author suddently switches from active to passive (food patients eat -- time when the foods are eaten).

 

 

Dental caries and gingivitis can be exacerbated not only by the foods patients eat but also by when the patients eat them.

(A) not only by the foods patients eat but also by when the patients eat them

(B) by not only the foods patients eat but also by when the patients eat them

© not only by the foods patients eat but also by time when the foods are eaten

(D) by not only the foods that are eaten by patients but also by the times the foods are eaten

(E) not only by what patients eat but also by when they eat it

 

Spoiler : My pick was C, O-A is E

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob, I do understand that 'it' refers to 'what' and that 'what' refers to 'food' but, is it not essential to have the term food to be used in the sentence when refering to it?
"What" does not refer to "food." There is no "food" in the best version of the sentence. "What" is the object of "eat" and the antecedent of "it." I see nothing wrong with "what" as an antecedent. Take this example:

 

Congress wants to find out what the President knew and when he knew it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"What" does not refer to "food." There is no "food" in the best version of the sentence. "What" is the object of "eat" and the antecedent of "it." I see nothing wrong with "what" as an antecedent. Take this example:

 

Congress wants to find out what the President knew and when he knew it.

 

Thanks Bob!!

I got it!!:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...