<p>I honestly think it will be this:</p>
<p>0 36
-1 34
-2 32
-3 31</p>
<p>It was really easy.</p>
<p>^def too harsh -2 will not be a 32.</p>
<p>try
0 36
-1 35
-2 34
-3 33
-4 32
-5 31
-6 30</p>
<p>^much more reasonable</p>
<p>Just to clear this up…
It can be inferred that the buyer thought that the seller was negotiating due to the fact that when he said he would pay a higher price the seller sold the clock. The question however, specifically asks for the answer “Supported by the text.” There is no text supporting that the buyer thought the seller wanted to negotiate a higher price. There was evidence that supported the seller seeing the hidden enthusiasm in the buyer. The narrator actually went on for a few sentences about how he could see the hidden enthusiasm.</p>
<p>^hmmmm…debateable.</p>
<p>I thought the answer referenced enthusiasm akin to a collector, but in reality he saw he genuinely wanted the radio.</p>
<p>Did you say he applied Wordsworth’s definition correctly?</p>
<p>I agree with collegeforyou</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure the text also said the shop owner acknowledged he was trying to bargain with him, but his thoughts stated he really didn’t know its value nor did he want to pass up the money.</p>
<p>I said he applied Wordsworth’s definition incorrectly because his interpretation of “memory spots” was fundamentally different. Is this correcT? not sure now…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t think that he did, but most people are saying that he did indeed apply it correctly.</p>
<p>^I agree with Linger.</p>
<p>^ Nice! that gives me some hope!</p>
<p>I thought he applied it correctly! I’m getting very nervous about this reading section. In the past, I got a 35, and then a 36 and now i’m freaked out that’ll I’ll be stuck with a terrible score. There are so many ambiguous questions.</p>
<ol>
<li>Negotiation v Enthusiasm</li>
<li>“Told by her colleague” and “Clementine Mission”</li>
<li>Literal v. Changed for Woodworth</li>
<li>Purpose of the Mexican Artist Story (creatively fertile vs. Mexico/US comparison)</li>
</ol>
<p>There seems to be no concensus.</p>
<p>i went with that he did apply the theory. Anyone have the article for that one?</p>
<p>I went with that too. The passage was from a book called Second Hand. I found it on Amazon: <a href=“http://www.amazon.com/reader/0385335709?_encoding=UTF8&query=Wordsworth#reader_0385335709[/url]”>http://www.amazon.com/reader/0385335709?_encoding=UTF8&query=Wordsworth#reader_0385335709</a></p>
<p>If you have an account, the passage is on pages 41-42.</p>
<p>its states what the theory is, then he says that’s what it is for him. Seems pretty clear?</p>
<p>I dont follow that logic msalam. Just because he says what the theory means to him doesn’t mean that he used it correctly. I remember his definition of what the guy said to be totally different and changing the meaning. But I could be wrong…</p>
<p>its another debatable one…look at the link above and tell me what u think</p>
<p>Definition was there are things that resonate deeply later in life for people, “spots of time”. The story said these objects meant something deep to people, and people seeked them out to cherish moments of their past. That seemed to me like an apt interpretation, and a “resonance”.</p>
<p>Also, I put the creatively fertile answer, and that the Clementine Mission happened first.</p>