Explanation for Question 4 From the Writing Section on the 2017 May Sat
Question four, some commentators claim that there is an excess of too 2 many pressing constraints on the federal budget to commit funds to federal land protection. 3 Wow. So the underlying section says is an excess of tool money. 4 We should knows right off the bat that this answer or this underlined section 5 is very repetitive. It's redundant. If there's an excess, 6 we know that there's too many. And the sat is really, 7 um, keen on, they really prioritize being concise. 8 So not having, 9 um, words that aren't necessary in our underlined section. 10 So we look at the answer choice and we see which of these answers 11 says the same thing. It doesn't lose the meaning of having an access or 12 having too many, but it doesn't say it in a repetitive way. 13 So B says is too much of an access up again, 14 too much in excess is the same thing or C are 15 in abundance, too many again, 16 same issue. And then D are too many do 17 the answer choice. It's not repetitive. 18 It doesn't have the access and the too many, 19 it just has too many. And we can read it to confirm it would 20 read some commentators claim that there are too many pressing constraints 21 on the federal budget to commit funds to federal land protection. 22 That makes complete sense. We don't lose any meaning and we don't have repetition.