<p>“What did you guys get for the one with the passage about the grammar sticklers where the question was something like “what are these two passages about?” I put “the self-perception of grammar sticklers” but “people who are concerned about language errors” (or something similar) seemed pretty correct too.”</p>
<p>^ I had people who are concernted about language errors. Because the first passage didn’t seem to me to have anything to do with self-perception. :/</p>
<p>45fly - I don’t know, passage 1 seemed to be written by a language stickler too - at the end he says, “I prefer ‘snoot’” and then something about “a snoot is someone who knows what the word [forget the word] means and isn’t afraid to show it” or something.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did as well. I had thought the question was asking about how the sticklers would feel in response to critics like in Passage 1, but I think many people pointed out otherwise.</p>
<p>@yunsang,I put claim without supporting evidence</p>
<p>for the what the authors have in common one, i put “people concerned about language errors”</p>
<p>yunsang, for that question I put “a rebuttal to a generalyl accepted conclusion” or something</p>
<p>lets say 0 wrong math, 5 wrong cr, 1-2 wrong w</p>
<p>what would be possible score?</p>
<p>I put “claim without supporting evidence” as well.</p>
<p>It was assertion with no evidence right?
I had that too.</p>
<p>lol I missed the venn diagram too =[</p>
<p>-1 math</p>
<p>yeah, I had assertion without evidence
the self perception vs. people concerned about language was a bit ambiguous imo…I chose the latter, but I can see the former as a potential choice</p>
<p>it would have been understanding sympathy…it was about language sticklers responding to the reactions of other language sticklers</p>
<p>Damn, I was thinking it was a claim without supporting evidence, but couldn’t it also be a hypothesis based on the previous statement? Before that statement, he was talking about how long the conservationists were focusing on separating humans from animals and how it got so sophisticated from 30 or 5 years ago.</p>
<p>I didn’t think it was really a hypothesis though, the sentence said something like Conservation now is more sophiscated than whatever # years ago right?</p>
<p>damn i put summarize misconceptions too</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a hypothesis based on the previous statement.</p>
<p>assertion without evidence was a solid choice…not much ambiguity there I think</p>
<p>light airen, that would be 80M, 70CR, 73 or 76W</p>
<p>“lets say 0 wrong math, 5 wrong cr, 1-2 wrong w”</p>
<p>^ According to the practice book thats 80 M, 70 CR, minus 2 is 73 W. Or something like that.</p>
<p>would would -1 for W be then?</p>
<p>I think it was an assertion w/out evidence because that sentence was kind of random with no back up…</p>
<p>so for the rebute question, everyone picked A (some Africans were unrecognized but helped with the conservation effort) ?</p>
<p>-1 W is 76.</p>
<p>I got oracular and catalog as well.
Are we allowed to discuss it though?</p>
<p>-1W is 76 according to the chart</p>