<p>^^^^like^^^^</p>
<p>i said satisfied as well. the previous paragraph talked about her being conscientious. the line reference supported self satisfied.</p>
<p>Its definitely conversational for the Paige’s autobiography</p>
<p>How would it be scholarly… He wasn’t using big words or being sophisticated</p>
<p>i too put self satisfied…however, I completely forget why :b … was it me or were some of the CR ambiguous?</p>
<p>"Its definitely conversational for the Paige’s autobiography "</p>
<p>Why???</p>
<p>I haven’t taken too many practice tests but I felt many of the questions were indeed ambiguous… similar to the AP Lang passage type questions…
Did you choose her desire for others to read her work for the parenthetical one?</p>
<p>what were the other choices for the controversial one?</p>
<p>^No its to tailor her work for others</p>
<p>what were the other choices for the controversial one? </p>
<p>hmm all i remember:
scholarly
ambivalent
controversial</p>
<p>the fact that the grandma considered writing as art explains why she wanted a nice signature?</p>
<p>^There also was Conversational. Not controversial?</p>
<p>I started making this, but the thread just got longer and longer. soo… here it is so far complied
Sentence Completion:
made a historian compelled to _____ their motives from ______ instead of records?</p>
<p>i put surmise, deeds
this artist lamenting something
arrest and preserve
deleterious: vaccine/medicine. They were afraid it would be bad
NA <strong>(-) new, but </strong>(+)old eschew/adhere (not the propound one)- also not flout and relinquish</p>
<p>Nutcracker: indelible
-Other short passages:
Idyllic sesame street
“fancy schools” and “apartment buildings to get into” reveal about the author’s attitude
Facing issues now
- Pain:
No questions so far - Environmental:
Conducted preformed
author of passage 2 would respond to the author of passage 1? evidence for a need of education - Paige - Lying about age guy
birth certificate and the bible? supporting evidence
What would the author of Passage 1 respond to the Satchel Paige’s claim “I did nothing to stop it.”
I put like he contributed to the stories
unnecessarily trivial
was it conversational???</p>
<ul>
<li>Ceeve girl and house
What was “resolute” about the Tribulations passages? She was so sure or something/determination?</li>
</ul>
<p>What did the example of the chandelier in Tribulation serve to do?
example of recurrent phenomenon</p>
<p>What did the Ceeve family believe the purpose of memories was?</p>
<p>protect cherished beliefs</p>
<ul>
<li>Girl writing for G-ma
Why did the grandma learn to write love?
I put to contribute more directly to letter
“and i was off to the races” indicate?
b) the narrator enthusiastically went to work
depicting the formative stage of the development of the writer
self- satisfied (definitely, she was glad of taking over her g-mas live not conscientious: characterized by extreme care and great effort) she said she breezily took over
What was the purpose of the parenthesis (it talked about Californians and hockey)</li>
<li>to show the writer catering to her audience
used “8 1/2 by 11” paper?"</li>
</ul>
<p>Needed more space.
resignation</p>
<p>violin,
i could have sworn it was controversial and not conversational</p>
<p>but i might be wrong. idk</p>
<p>about the anomalous/mercurial…i googled anomalous cosmic rays and things actually came up…nothing for mercurial cosmic rays, though</p>
<p>what was Pallatial and modern explanations?</p>
<p>clearly everyone seems to recall conversational so they’re probably right</p>
<p>Was it not exceedingly comlplicated?</p>
<p>i put anomalous aka NOT normal, mercurial is like changeable</p>
<p>so do you guys know which section was experimental?</p>
<p>it was anomalous</p>
<p>also, I got the performed/directed question wrong. what an ambiguous question. you can perform and direct an evaluation or whatever it was. I guess direct works a little better…</p>
<p>I personally don’t think it was to protect cherished beliefs. They were altering their memories to support their fatalistic world view.</p>
<p>is it really modern research?</p>
<p>Or is it irreverent to the theory?</p>