<p>Can someone please clarify for me what “reluctantly optimistic” was the answer to. And also, I agree with “a1rlander” in thinking that “scientific implications” was not the answer for the ape question. I put something with “similar abilities in other apes.”</p>
<p>So i had section 2,3 back to back reading… Which one was the experimental one? I think the first one had vocab+passage1,2 compare short+1 long and 23 questions and the second one had vocab+2short+2long and 23 questions.</p>
<p>-One was ‘polymath’
-One was ‘indefatigable’ (The lady wouldn’t stop until she got results or something)
-One was ‘urbane/erudite’ (which is same as learned/scholarly)
-Was one ‘inhibit/skew’?</p>
<p>Dinosaurs
-‘stuck’
-A marketing campaign increased sales between June 1950 to July 1951</p>
<p>Greek Letters
-superfluous (written language, at first)
-Suggests oral tradition may be changed by social changes?
-…most nearly means ‘utilized’? I don’t think it was ‘proposed’…</p>
<p>The Girl ‘Yo’
-teasing
-teacher’s eccentric questions
-Father is unique in that he responds to teacher’s questions
-…“undiscolsed past” or something
-The father feels proud/likes his daughter or something but is ‘ambivalent’ about things that could leak that he doesn’t want to</p>
<p>Kanzi the Ape
-the phrase is “Liz go in” or something. Kanzi cannot read ‘in’
-In line 68, Passage 1 author would most likely view the Passage 2 author’s doubt of the assumption that apes cannot properly distinguish grammatical structure = ‘not yet disproven’? Because Passage 1 author believes that Kanzi cannot identify prepositions, conjuctions, and purely grammatical structures and would agree apes cannot properly distinguish grammatical structure
-In the final paragraph of Passage 2, the author implies that ‘humans and animals are inherently different in the way they are/communicate’ or something along the lines of that?</p>
<p>IGotAn800, I agree with you on everything you just wrote. Not sure what you’re referring to in your last sentence though. By the way, cool username.</p>
<p>Also, can we go over the creative writing passages. There was one question I wasn’t sure about. It had to do with their attitudes toward creative writing classes. I was stuck between “both found them to be useful but unecessary” or “they both valued input from classmates”</p>
<p>@Echelon11</p>
<p>Creative writing classes are ‘useful but not necessary’.</p>
<p>The first passage says that before creative university writing classes became popular, people learned to write well using 4 techniques (among those were reading old texts and working with others). The second passage says that creative writing classes ‘CAN’ be valuable, because a teacher and classmates can provide feedback, but most people learn to write by reading, first.</p>
<p>It is not ‘they both valued input from classmates’ because the first passage gives almost no evidence of the benefits of creative writing classes, it only talks about how people became good writers before the introduction of classes.</p>
<p>For Apes, both passages use behavioral evidence.</p>
<p>I found critical reading unusually hard and math unusually easy.
Usually the opposite for me.</p>
<p>='l</p>
<p>For the apes passage, the author of paragraph 1’s attitude towards the “assumption”</p>
<p>did you guys put completely wrong? or not yet disproven?</p>
<p>I agree with the “behavioral evidence” thing. And the first passage said that those 4 techniques were used before creative writing classes existed and that they Did Not imply a creative writing degree. In those 4, though, he included input from peers. The second passage did that as well</p>
<p>Yeah, I had input from peers. It was the only thing that was present in both.</p>
<p>And for which question was “reluctant optimism” a choice?</p>
<p>I put not yet disproven @Flickor</p>
<p>@Igotan800</p>
<p>Wouldn’t “Most talented writers probably won’t go”?</p>
<p>The first one never said they were useful and the second was not even fully supportive. I think the authors would both agree that a talented writer would not attend.</p>
<p>Definitely peers. I think passage one thought the line 60-something statement was clearly wrong. He was pretty stuck on the inaccuracies of the conclusion.</p>
<p>I disagree with you Igotan800 on the Yo question. Two of them. The point he was trying to make wasn’t that he was unique in answering the questions, it was that he is easily persuaded into preposterous requests or something like that, it says point so you have to look at sentence in context to the whole passage. It’s that answer because he’s saying that he was easily persuaded into the teachers questions as he was easily persuaded into answering his daughters questions. Also, for the one about feeling ambivalent the answer stated that he appreciated his daughters attention but was ambivalent. That was not the case, the whole thing was admiring his daughter and he was proud of his daughter and how determined she was. In the end of the passage he stated that he didn’t want to pass away being unknown so he isn’t really ambivalent</p>
<p>All of the answers I can remember: </p>
<p>autonomous
teasing
mired = stuck
phlegmatic
mollifying
urbane and erudite
passage 1 - response, passage 2 - communication (ape passage)
scientific implications
to validate the statement
insufficiently skeptical
superfluous
…and disproportionate
acknowledge that a position seems unreasonable
scant and undistinguished
readily willing to challenge perceived notions (???)
puzzling phenomenon
ideologue
scholarly enthusiasm
clearly wrong, has not been proven wrong yet…???
stories change with social changes
memories he is willing to share
accessible
alternative explanation
present tense used for contrast
inhibit/skew
indefatigable
marketing campaign increased sales
teacher’s eccentric questions
unique that he responds to the teacher
undisclosed past
…and ambivalent
go in there (believes the ape can’t understand “in”)
behavioral evidence is used by both authors</p>
<p>Also, reluctantly optimistic was most definately not the answer.</p>
<p>Insufficient skepticism was the whole point of the last paragraph.</p>
<p>@Echelon11</p>
<p>The first passage doesn’t relate peer work to creative writing classes’ value, though. It only mentions classmate cooperation as one of the ways people became good writers before the creation of writing classes.</p>
<p>In any case, it is indisputable that both passages agree that creative writing classes can be ‘useful but not necessary’. Passage 1 - creative writing classes can help you earn a degree and are another means of becoming as good of a writer, though as people in the past have done this without classes. Passage 2 - classes provide valuable teacher and peer feedback, but most become good writers after reading</p>
<p>Also, for the apes one they used scholarly citation. The author of passage one cites the grammar rules as does the author of passage 2. Passage one doesn’t use behavioral evidence, he just speculates.</p>