<p>Since I can’t delete my posts, I’ll just say the ones that I wrong:
not elude, but forestall was correct answer
the tenant lady was indeed content, according to the people of the thread (i said something dumb here)
found tenant lady to be compelling (i said she didnt want her company)</p>
<p>I still stand by:
underscoring the need for improvement (i think it was a traffic problem)
passage 2 expressed caution/reservation (photography)
trade with other villages (short passage)</p>
<p>I think those were all of the points that I (hastily) added to this thread</p>
<p>i know it’s been discussed many times, but the analogy question in the passage about traffic laws still seems unclear. the traffic engineer was a highly regarded professional that VOLUNTARILY decided to devote his time to educating people about traffic laws, so shouldn’t that be similar to a renowned politician deciding to becoming a teacher?? i understand that the workshop answer involved travelling to another state, but he was “picked” to do it. doesnt necessarily mean he wanted to.</p>
<p>also, for the 2 short passages about blogs, whats the final consensus about what author II would say about author I? good description of readers? thats what i put…</p>
<p>@jimmy
haha, I thought you were still defending some of the answers many of us agreed upon as true, sorry for that.</p>
<p>I Agree with
-underscoring the need for improvement
-trade with other villages</p>
<p>I got those answers as well!!</p>
<p>what passage was this from?
“passage 2 expressed caution/reservation”</p>
<p>@chopstick
I think that the question specifically pointed to the lines that referred to him moving to other places to share the work he had done in the United States…therefore making the answer more likely to be the state recycling workshop one.</p>
<p>I didn’t get the underscoring need for improvement one what was the question?
And I think it was captivated by not compelling but other then that I agree. Thanks for your insight.</p>
<p>The reservation was about the photography and had methodology in the answer as well.</p>
<p>It was the photography passage where the first author describes the process of taking photography and all those things</p>
<p>Then the second photographer begins photography himself and finds that photography can be a useful medium, but also harmful because of its ability to make innocent people appear as bigots/deceitful people.</p>
<p>The two agreed that photography’s technical aspects were not as important as its (i forget the word) aspects.</p>
<p>Then there was the passage 2 caution/reservation answer choice for another problem</p>
<p>@000 the underscoring the need for improvement was a question in the traffic passage. I forget the question to which the answer was attached to though sorry</p>
<p>I have to disagree with the methodology one. I put down philosophy because the passage one describes a philosophy of seeing social profundity in photography, which the author of passage two details in his experiences.</p>
<p>Agree with the two drac agreed on. Those are very likely to be the right answers.</p>
<p>@chopstick there was a specific line reference. Everyone needs to understand that the question wasnt asking about traffic engineers as showed throughout the passage, just in the some specific lines. In those lines it talked about how many countries wanted him to come over and help with their traffic problems.</p>
<p>@000
Underscoring a need question was the one that asked the significance of all the mixed and confusing signals before traffic regulation began</p>
<p>If I do remember correctly, the answer choices were…</p>
<p>Passage 1 describes a philosophy while passage 2 expounds on it in detail
Passage 1 describes a methodology(?) while passage 2’s author is cautious/reserved about its repercussions.</p>
<p>passage 1 was mainly saying how photographs can depict truth that normal words cannot.</p>
<p>and passage 2 refuted that photographs distort reality and are manipulative… thus showing how the author has certain reservations with this controversial topic</p>
<p>@jimmy
I maybe wrong on this, but please explain why it may be methodology. I don’t remember passage one pointing out any steps or procedures, just an account of a photographer’s and author’s influence on social change through their philosophical ideals when it came to their fields.</p>
<p>i also put philosophical. even though i agree that passage II was more reserved than explanatory, i just didnt see how passage I explained anything step by step</p>
<p>@drac
I came to remember the answer choice solely for its Passage 2 description. (Passage 2’s author is cautious/reserved about its repercussions)</p>
<p>For all I know, the first part of the question could have been “Positive Medium”, “Philosophy”, “Methodology” or blah. I just distinctly remember that answer choice being the only one in which passage 2’s description was correct and full.</p>
<p>It’s a methodology because someone acted it out. Obvious. And also, for the one about the blogs, it has to be characterization of a blog reader…because an inviting distraction cant be a stranger…it’s an object. Read between the lines.</p>
<p>And why is evasiveness even an argument? He talked about a wide range of topics be reasonable…That doesn’t mean he knew what he was talking about. He was an effective PUBLIC speaker. I can name for you infinitely many politicians who are “Effective” public speakers. Learn to read in between the lines. The answer was adroit, erudtion. gg.</p>