<p>Airen you’re wrong, the second part refers to newly found statues with traces of colored paint on them, implying that they were NOT plain.
However, if you insert ornate into the sentence, it implies that the statues w/ paint ARE plain, and thus it is wrong.</p>
<p>silverturtle,</p>
<p>You said, “the author would not pose his problems with the use of comedy in rhetorically inquisitive form”</p>
<p>Why not? I do consider the posing of a rhetorical question an effective way to refute or debunk a particular idea–or at least that’s my 2 cents.</p>
<p>I agree that the example he cites (Tim Washer) does weaken the hostile tone established in previous sentences, and it threw me off when I was deciding between “hostility” and “skepticism.” But I’m rather convinced that I should base my reasoning on more direct information, which are “troubling,” “a culprit,” and rhetorical questions he poses, which, to me, come off as being strongly opposed and somewhat angry.</p>
<p>Moreover, the author does not explicitly suggest that he agrees to what Tim Washer has said, and this sentence directly follows the quotation to boot:</p>
<p>“According to Tim Washer, a former improv performer who is now a communications executive at IBM, funniness helps foster team-building and, of course, learning how to “think outside the box.” Never mind that, as Washer suggests, being funny can’t really be taught.”</p>
<p>–> Never mind that, as Washer suggests, being funny can’t really be taught.
----->What comedy consultants are doing is ineffective.</p>
<hr>
<p>This is a tough question and this is just my reasoning; I may be wrong.</p>
<p>consolidated answers please?</p>
<p>His diction in “may be” and certainly the fact that he was asking rhetorical questions in the first place, doesn’t seem to me that this is aggressive enough for a hostile tone. Instead, I chose skeptical considering his opinion is still being formulated with some room for speculation.</p>
<p>
- as one of the answers for the vocab section
Are you guys sure about this? I may have missed an earlier discussion about this so I’ll go back and check. But I remember considering ‘impromptu’ and then finding another, much more suitable answer, although I don’t remember what the word was…</p>
<p>narendly,</p>
<p>I do not think that “troubling” and “culprit” connote hostility, especially upon careful reading of the context. I am very grateful for your having found the article.</p>
<p>It begins thus: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The troubling idea is that comedy is acceptable everywhere; the author is not necessarily troubled by the presence of comedy at the workplace. </p>
<p>Moreover, “culprit” can merely denote the source of a problem – in this case, the problem is that comedy may be indiscriminately accepted. Note that the author calls corporate America a possible culprit. The author isn’t even sure that comedy is universally accepted. He is saying that if this is so, corporate America may be the source of it; he doesn’t even state the potential that comedy in the workplace is inherently bad, just that it may contribute to the general culture of comic acceptance. This is not a hostile position by any means.</p>
<p>Having reread the excerpt, I am convinced that the answer is “skeptical.”</p>
<p>Could you please tell me another choice of hostility or skepticism</p>
<p>what was the answer to like one of the first answers in the science passage?</p>
<p>it was like what does the author suggest about science research?</p>
<p>[trying this again because it’s worrying me a lot haha]
</p>
<ul>
<li>as one of the answers for the vocab section
Are you guys sure about this? I may have missed an earlier discussion about this so I’ll go back and check. But I remember considering ‘impromptu’ and then finding another, much more suitable answer, although I don’t remember what the word was…</li>
</ul>
<p>It was talking about his spontaneous speeches; I’m pretty sure impromptu was the answer.</p>
<p>Can someone tell me if the CR section about physics/newtonian/shakespeare was experimental? If it is, thank god! Because I skipped like 5 questions on the section alone.</p>
<p>Also, is it possible to have different exp sections (eg: 1 person with a math exp and another with a CR exp?)</p>
<p>Ugh, I’ve gotten only one question wrong on both the June and Nov 2009 Sentence Completion portions and now it looks like I’ve missed about four. I kind of want to die.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, it was experimental.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Killing yourself because you missed 3 questions on a test that probably won’t mean much 10 years from now? Nah, I can guarantee that you’re worth more than that. 
Besides, if you’re a junior, you can always retake!</p>
<p>what was the answer to like one of the first answers in the science passage?</p>
<p>it was like what does the author suggest about science research?</p>
<p>Haha, nobody answered my question yet.
Any guesses on the curve?</p>
<p>^The test began twelve hours ago. That’d be a new record.</p>
<p>anyone put that the example repudiated the first paragraph?</p>
<p>Just based on the difficulty.</p>
<p>Quetzalcoatl- another choice was ambivalent, which I put because in my mind the author did not seem to say anything with enough of a negative connotation or denotation to be skeptical. I was likely wrong, however</p>