<p>convoluted and understandable is correct. </p>
<p>can someone please compile a list of answers?</p>
<p>The "him and me" was a CORRECT usage. I believe the answer to that question was No error. </p>
<p>(Unless you're referring to a different question because you had the experimental writing section...which I didn't have!)</p>
<p>hey what did you get for the one with man developing fire slowly and time goes through advances that are offset by _____. I thought it was regression at first but... how can you regress? wouldn't that mean unlearning fire???</p>
<p>btw i put contemplative or that other word that meant roughly thinking periods... for that one</p>
<p>that's what i thought too, chink182, but... if you can list the choices i can probably do it again and see what i put hahaha</p>
<p>use of “sense” in sense and spirit- meaning
female writer- economical
colorful celery- vividly descriptive
convoluted book
play had trenchant- schematic
epidiomologists- contain and check
advances set off by periods of- regression
The man stood _______ not vehemently prosecuting innocence but _________ in denial of guilt- nonchalant, perfunctory
Guy who had opinions but didn’t argue- Polemical
Strident
Statistics- demographic
Woman writer- immoral because her characters didn’t always get punished
Conservationists wanted to protect land development- Arrest
The city council- halt, cease
What was the one about two girls wanted editor’s help?</p>
<p>WALKING
Clean linen- evoked a sensation
Both passages acknowledge- potential time for contemplation</p>
<p>Shocked at the revelation
Carlyle- Was someone every educated person should know
To forget!- surprised disbelief
Realize- conceive
Fool- acquire knowledge indiscriminately
Friend’s way of thinking- pragmatic</p>
<p>Passage was about personal account
Real Asian- authentic
When they saw asian on TV- excitement
List of vital signs of Asian- thorough and systematic
She found their comparisons- irritating
The Asian actresses- unlikely to fool the panelists
Somehow they all picked me- unsurprised at the panelist’s decision
Pre-videocassette- technological innovation made experience more common</p>
<p>Both articles about chimpanzees- exhibit human behavior
What would passage 1 say about passage 2- verify conclusions</p>
<p>Not many people given opportunity- granted
Ghosted along- moved silently
Copepods’ transparency- avoiding being eaten by predators
Noclitus was odd- doesn’t follow pattern of animals adjusting
Malactose with red light was different because- only malactoses could see it
Submarine on surface of water- crab out of its shell</p>
<p>Primary purpose of passages- historical works into modern language
What would the author of passage two be concerned with passage one: did he preserve the original essence of the work?
developmental changes in English language
who would passage two agree with-
European translators would agree with newman
No language at all- “il fait froid” to it makes cold
European translators consider crime- revering the author too much, NOT read in original language
Author two used examples of weird words-show how pound wasn’t accurate in his assertion
Wrath of scholars- inevitable/understandable because of assertion “nearly literal”</p>
<p>Carlyle- Was someone every educated person should know</p>
<p>i got his thinking was not relavant to most peoples daily lives or whatever..</p>
<p>spikypufferfish, thanks!</p>
<p>as of right now im at 3-4 wrong...what score is that?</p>
<p>does anyone remember answer choices for epidemiologists question?
i dont remember if i put contain and check</p>
<p>contain and check is correct</p>
<p>yeah but what were other answer choices?</p>
<p>Also, "play had trenchant- schematic" -> can anyone elaborate on that question.. I don't get why I dont remember..</p>
<p>play had trenchant- schematic
dont remebmer that one</p>
<p>Guy who had opinions but didn’t argue- Polemical -- yes, but there was another close choice, anybody remember?</p>
<p>Both passages acknowledge- potential time for contemplation -- what was the question here...</p>
<p>List of vital signs of Asian- thorough and systematic - anybody else... unsure about this one?</p>
<p>developmental changes in English language -- what was this question</p>
<p>Author two used examples of weird words-show how pound wasn’t accurate in his assertion --- other choices?</p>
<p>Dang... I seemed to have got a lot right, but there's a good chunk I seem to have gotten incorrect as well. :(</p>
<p>it is good that we have a list, but it should be verified by many people.
for example, there are like many around me with different answers for the tone asian parent's comment - innocent & amusing, thorough & systematic, or demoralizing & critical?</p>
<p>^spikypufferfish must be a memorizing savant. I can hardly recall even 5 questions from the WHOLE test</p>
<p>I put that the the parent's remark was systematic, since the author explicitly said something that the parents never failed to comment that she should try out for miss universe. I actually think the amsuing/innocent is a very tricky and close choice, but I changed my answer after some thorough reasoning (no overanalyzing. Just hunting to evidence in the +-5 sentences of the given sentence range</p>
<p>I agree with everything that spikypufferfish says except:</p>
<p>"List of vital signs of Asian- thorough and systematic", which I thought was humorous and innocence. It's debatable though. </p>
<p>And I don't really remember this one:</p>
<p>"Wrath of scholars- inevitable/understandable because of assertion “nearly literal”"</p>
<p>Or this one:</p>
<p>"Primary purpose of passages- historical works into modern language"</p>
<p>Good job spikypufferfish!</p>
<p>oh someone was severe because she upbraided people</p>
<p>i think this someone's name was wu</p>
<p>oh wait and charles dickens was an example of somebody who spoke out even more boldly than... smith did or whatever?
and they thought that smith was harmful to the social order ? </p>
<p>Anybody get those?</p>
<p>yeah i got the same</p>