<p>The question asked what both passages did. In the second passage, the quote was something like “Given that blah blah blah blah…” which is classic qualifying language. Plus, the entire passage he was arguing that rock was a huge revolution…</p>
<p>what was the answer to the painting passage question where it asked what the watch was?
was it symbol or anachronism?</p>
<p>anachronism</p>
<p>what was the answer to the question about the vocab one with the women who took both sides of the issue?</p>
<p>for the qualifying assertions one…i thought about that a lot, and i think for the second passage he was qualifying an assertion. however, in the first passage he was just emphasizing his real point, so i put the most literal-- dismissing tendencies. they both do that</p>
<p>in the rock and roll one was the answer to the second question about the difference between the 2 passage the one with demographics?</p>
<p>Question changes from tone of article from the past to present.</p>
<p>What was the “question” that it was referring to?</p>
<p>can you explain why it was anachronism? wasn’t it a symbol of the artist’s mark on the product?</p>
<p>for one of my answers i put analyzes the causes vs. places into contemporary context</p>
<p>It said past to future, not present, therefore it was wrong because it implies sea nomads do not exist anymore.</p>
<p>i concur with 1a1</p>
<p>i thought about that point 1a1, but if you look at the language used in the first paragraph it was all past tenses…what really did it for me was the second choice, diversity vs. the future. every other sentence had a future tense in it…and diversity was only ancillary to his main point</p>
<p>I thought the answer choice for the comparison between the two rocknroll question was rebut a possible argument, since the two passages were anticipating negations…or at least that’s how I remember it.</p>
<p>^im really not sure. i thought that was the only pretty tricky question- i could justify all the choices in my head. however, i decided to go with the most literal (dismissing tendencies)…after all, all the answers are in the passage, even the inference ones</p>
<p>had to be anachronomsim because wrist watches didn’t exist in the 18th Century. They carried pocket watches I think.</p>
<p>this is going back aways in the discussion.
I’m relatively sure it is feigned innocence and not wry amusement. Why?
Well, feigned innocence -> The corporate managers are trying to trick their board members into being impressed with having such expensive paintings.
And NOT
wry amusement -> they were not “humorously sarcastic or mocking” when they used fake paintings (definition from google search of define: wry)</p>
<p>It also references “innocent” in the passage.</p>
<p>@van_sant: the passage said something about “imagine if sea nomads lost their way of life”, implying that it hasn’t happened yet.</p>
<p>@simple1: that’s what I thought, too.</p>
<p>there were 2 comparison ones between the 2 passages…they were hte last 2 questions of the section</p>
<p>for one of them i put complex way of life vs. simple
the other one i put that it talked about the demographics vs. something else?</p>
<p>I don’t remember if it was simple, but I put that it was a “positive attitude toward a particular way of life.”</p>
<p>oh i meant the very first paragraph which was an expose on the sea nomads, sorry…what if" thing supports the past vs future i think, since its not in that same paragraph. (i realize i come across as overthinking things…)</p>