<p>Anyone have it? Or know where it is?</p>
<p>are you able to send me the test itself online?</p>
<p>I can’t but I’ll try to find you a link ^</p>
<p>Yes, I have the 2005 answer key :).</p>
<p>With the answers only or the explanations also? And is that for form W or S?</p>
<p>I need explanations and form S</p>
<p>and thank you iceqube!</p>
<p>The answer key I have is for both form W and form S. No explanations.</p>
<p>Okay so… I can’t find the explanations anywhere…</p>
<p>SOOOOOO… To the people who have PSAT 2005 Form S, Section 3, can someone explain the question 37 to me. I don’t understand why it’s A. Also number 44. Why is it E??</p>
<p>37) Lines 15-17 state that Hurston was …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The question asks for the purpose of the above concession. </p>
<p>Answer choice A states that the sentence notes an exception to the claim made in the previous sentence, and that is correct. The previous sentence said that Hurston had an “exquisitely sensitive ear.” But then she is “sometimes out of tune.” So yes, lines 15-17 serve the purpose of conceding a small point.</p>
<p>Why is it not B? No, being “out of tune” and using “self-consciously literary” metaphors is not an example of “effective use of poetic language.”</p>
<p>What about C? No, lines 15-17 concede a point, they don’t “emphasize the author’s central argument” about Hurston’s notable literary style.</p>
<p>D? A “sentimental image”? No.</p>
<p>E? No, it’s not an “accomplishment.” Rather, it is the opposite, more of a writing faux pas.</p>
<p>–</p>
<p>44) Let me rephrase the question. Why are the Roman numerals I, II, and III so ubiquitous, so universal? </p>
<p>According to the 5th paragraph, it is because the numerals I, II, and III are recognizable at a glance. </p>
<p>One line, two lines, three lines, OK. 10 lines for 10? That’s a stretch. What about the number 100? 100 lines? I don’t think so :). </p>
<p>Hope that helped :).</p>
<p>Thank you ^^</p>
<p>btw. How about 44? I skipped that one D:</p>
<p>For 37, the author originally said that Hurston had a very sensitive ear and because of it could use language in such a way that makes her among the group of best writers in American history. The following sentence “She was sometimes…” (15-17) states that she was sometimes out of tune which would not support the claim that she has knack for language, so it is an exception. </p>
<p>For 44, the question asks why the the Roman numerals I, II, and III escape the transformation that changed IV, V, and so on. The reason that the author gives later in the passage for changing the rest of the numbers (Lines 56-59) is because it is impossible for humans to distinguish between IIIIIIIII and IIIIIIIIIII at a first glance. However, it is possible to see I, II, and III, so these numbers need not be changed. </p>
<p>Hope that makes sense…</p>
<p>OMG. Thank you both :D</p>
<p>You made the questions seem so easy… XD</p>
<p>Thanks again (:</p>
<p>Hi, I see that you have the answers to the 2005 PSAT. Could you please send them to me as well.
thanks,</p>
<p>PS - I have form S</p>
<p>Guys, where did you even find the test? Can someone send me the link?</p>