<p>GatitaZ - yes it was about her mother not knowing her that well </p>
<p>and oops guess i overlooked the servants thing. what question(s) did that pertain to?</p>
<p>yeah it was about classes/servants for sure. the mistress thing at end of the passage, the constant reference to her as ‘madam’. There were obviously words dictating a class distinction in the passage.</p>
<p>i think i got around a 500 something for this subject test, no joke.</p>
<p>I’m with the class snobbery people. It was clear in her constant malapropisms.</p>
<p>i put malapropism… but how would she demonstrate class snobbery if she was a servant?</p>
<p>^ Thanks for answering,hghschoolgirl!
Uhm,wait,what question contained malapropism? Also…I vaguely remember there was a quastioning asking the irony in the passage,what did ya’ll put?Thnx!</p>
<p>i believe malapropism was in the question asking what was prevalent in the things mrs. slipshop said?</p>
<p>^ yeah, that’s it.</p>
<p>If you knew what that word meant, that question was really easy. The SAT book even highlighted every instance.</p>
<p>It wasn’t malapropism. Malapropism is the mistaken use of a word in place of a similar-sounding one; the woman was using wrong words deliberately.</p>
<p>Also, the servant thing mentioned by people here is ridiculous; the passage clearly wasn’t about servants and usage of “madam” doesn’t make the speaker inferior in class or w/e. Where have all the clever CC’ers gone?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>near the end of the passage, it said something along the lines of… the mistress (meaning master)'s bell rang and the women had to go tend to that FULLY implying that she was a servant. it’s okay if you missed that.
most of the passage was the conversation between servants. making fun of their masters.</p>
<p>if malapropism wasn’t the answer, what was?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How can you say that she was using it deliberately? And as for your main point, the dictionary seems to disagree:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nowhere does it say that it has to be unintentional (even though I can’t think of any reason why you would think that she was using it intentionally).</p>
<p>@cgarcia
CC’ers generally used to be cleverer people compared to my classmates, lately however, deterioration of intellect seems to occurring here. I cannot believe almost everyone here misunderstood an easy text.</p>
<p>@hungryhippo1
Here’s the part to which you are referring; “her mistress” clearly refers to the woman herself. </p>
<p>As when a hungry tigress, who long has traversed the woods in fruitless search, sees within the reach of her claws a lamb, she prepares to leap on her prey; or as a voracious pike, of immense size, surveys through the liquid element a roach or gudgeon, which cannot escape her jaws, opens them wide to swallow the little fish; so did Mrs. Slipslop prepare to lay her violent amorous hands on the poor Joseph, when luckily her mistress’s bell rung, and delivered the intended martyr from her clutches. She was obliged to leave him abruptly, and to defer the execution of her purpose till some other time. " </p>
<p>Moreover, in other parts of the passage, the woman is described as “learned” which further establishes her as a person who is not a servant.</p>
<p>In addition, if you read the novel “Joseph Andrews”, from which this passage was excerpted, it will be even clearer that the passage in the test did not involve servants in any way.</p>
<p>@Jahaba
The words were italicized which puts stress on them and thus suggests that they were deliberate. Again, if you read the novel, this will become even clearer, but it still could have been easily understood reading only the excerpt. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Were you drunk when you quoted this? The definition you yourself have provided says: “unintentionally humorous misuse”. Please read carefully before quoting.</p>
<p>Polyglot: The dictionary entry clearly says “USUALLY unintentionally…” Does that mean it’s always unintentional? No. </p>
<p>Please be careful before claiming others demonstrate “deterioration of intellect.”</p>
<p>OK… I definitely did not think it was “class distinction”, I thougth it was either greed or vanity. And I was inclined to put greed since the epic similie(the tiger, the fish) were all referring to how greedily the large predator attacked the small, vulnerable prey. That is greed to me, not vanity or class distinction, and since that took up such a large part of the passage, I picked that option.</p>