<p>hey</p>
<p>i remember putting artificial construct for that question, not sure though</p>
<p>the political science was tough man</p>
<p>@mahess1311: I think the context is: Someone who is usually rancorous, but when his boss shows him his mistakes, he was … with choices like vituperative, sagacity, bemusement, …</p>
<p>@ tunganh:
It was sth about this animal/insect not being seen ever on the island before. Therefore, it can’t be indigenous, which means “native”. If it had been native, it presumably should have been seen before. Foreign, QED.</p>
<p>Is it just me, or was there a question with an answer choice with “presumption”? I remember reading sth like that.</p>
<p>hey anyone</p>
<p>any help with the vituperative question ?</p>
<p>hey tunganh</p>
<p>if what ur saying is correct shouldnt it not be vituperative since that means bitter similar to rancorous and the question has a but?</p>
<p>i put sagacity not too sure</p>
<p>any help appreciated</p>
<p>the #35 about Washington, I think it is “pp implementing his inventions” because the clause after that mentioned “by 19…, he accomplished his way to improve American agriculture”. the sentence was talking about the past, not the present. Therefore it seems to be irrelevent to discuss how pp STILL NOW use his invention?</p>
<p>@djp: I thought the context was the animal in one area has something special that never spotted outside that area?</p>
<p>mahesh: It’s not sagacity. Vituperation and rancorous disposition work together; there was not but.</p>
<p>tunganh: either way, it’s still foreign, if it’s never been spotted outside that area.</p>
<p>Janny: good point!</p>
<p>There was also a question about Charlie being unruly? I don’t ever remember considering that, since Charlie is meticulous.</p>
<p>Mahesh, didn’t you see what tunganh posted earlier? The sentence described someone/something as rancorous (deep resentment), and the only thing that’s similar to that is vituperative. Sagacity is definitely wrong (shrewdness, clear-sighted).</p>
<p>wats up with the vituperative question, was it vituperative sagacity or something else</p>
<p>really bothering me :p</p>
<p>please help</p>
<p>anyone remember what they put and why?</p>
<p>but wasnt there a but</p>
<p>like he is usually like this but that day he acted in this manner</p>
<p>i remember it being the opposite of what he usually was</p>
<p>does anyone remember what the wording of the question was like?</p>
<p>@mahesh : the sentence is : Unsurprisingly, given his rancorous ways, he replied to… with vituperation.</p>
<p>Jesus facking christ, I’m ****ed now. Stop posting about vituperation; carson and I have cleary shown (as well as the last 20 pages) that it is vituperative, not sagacity. Learn to read.</p>
<p>@djp: if the animal is indigenous to some area, i think it has special features that you cannot see outside of the are?
@carsonpwns: i remember there was a “but”, if there was not a “but” then definitely the answer would be vituperative</p>
<p>about the “indigineous” one , I remember that the sentence was sth like : "The bird is … to this area, it has never been spotted in any OTHER areas " so I’m with Tunganh, indigineous seems to work</p>
<p>i got math experimental…</p>
<p>Does anyone remember the SC: “Though not a … of someone, he … to join the dismissal of his something”? Does admirer and declined ring a bell?</p>
<p>@tunganh : yep! definitely</p>
<p>@tunganh
Yup, admirer and declined is correct. But I think that’s a part of the experimental CR section? </p>
<p>I can’t remember the exact question for the birds and foreign/indigenous…</p>
<p>I think the admirer question was in the section of robert frost</p>