<p>characterization of spice trade- ironic vs. dramatic
professor- pompous and stuffy
photographs take away from the novelty
question repeated w/ the pakistani people- growing indignant feeling
peremptory/ordeal
circumvent
assiduous
proper is closest to correct
snide vs pedantic
flop
easygoing
neophyte
articulate and mocking position vs predict reaction and refute (i think its the latter)
tennis spectators- close attention
primacy
disconcerted for the guy who had to extemporize
fundamentally vs solely (most ppl think its solely, i think it’s solely)
peremptory/ideal
method or whatever used in writing- analogous thinking
grandma was being adamant when she stood in place
grandma was being a bully in the other one
sphinx’s gaze holds
similar thing in both passages- faculty’s role vs coursework can lead to good civil character
assertion followed my comical anecdote
idealistic
realistic
evocative for sphinx (NOOOO)
hard to believe
familiar vs exhausting??? (familiar!)
author 2 asking a q by author 1
library sensory details
ephemereal but powerful
first paragraph provided context (vs established timeline but idts)
confounded/inscrutable
she left resentfully achknowledged
conflicts
adjust the power instead of using maximum power
reflective but informative
he bought a book electronically while sitting in a loibrary
systematically discredits vs 2 presents view 1 finds objectionable
eludes classification
defining a quality
adequate pinpoint
shortcomings</p>
<p>credit to a fellow colleague who compiled 95% of this list</p>
<p>The Pakistani question with “Familiar” vs “Exhausting” is definitely the former. The very first sentence of the paragraph that the question referred to started with “Whenever we went to Nanima’s house” or whatever.</p>
<p>Ok what did you all get for these questions? snide vs. pedantic, “solely” means fundamentally vs. simply, passage 1 and passage 2’s relation- systematically refutes vs. poses objectionable viewpoint, </p>
<p>I got snide, fundamentally, and systematically refutes</p>
<p>For the sphinx dispute, I still believe it’s evocative.</p>
<p>Universal =<br>
Of, affecting, or done by all people or things in the world or in a particular group.</p>
<p>Appeal = the quality of being attractive or interesting</p>
<p>If this appeal is universal, then it should also apply to the pompous academic also mentioned in the passage. However, the author explicitly states that the academic views the Sphinx’s importance as negligible. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, evocative might still apply to this critic because strong negative emotions are still strong emotions. </p>
<p>What were Other choices for the one with indignant? And i think he was definitely refuting a position not mocking one. He said like " they will say you, but you really dont" how is that mocking in anyway? Hes refuting a response</p>
<p>WHY CANT I EDIT MY POST???
Anyway those little parenthetical marks are not necessarily the answers I got, they were the answers my colleague got</p>
<p>It was definitely refuting by the way. mocking is too strong a word</p>
<p>Sphinx was definitely evocative. Why? Well, evocative means that it causes everyone to feel something in response, whether good or bad. Universal appeal means that it appeals to everyone, meaning everyone has positive feelings towards it. However, the stuffy academic didn’t like the sphinx, so the passage does not support this.</p>
<p>For the parenthesis it was “anticipate/predict a reaction and respond to it” since he said “they will say…” but then did not provide any hugely negative statement, he only gave a statement opposing it</p>
<p>@krungle
Yes the academic’s view is negligible but that’s only according to the author. The academic still found the sphinx stimulating to the mind. The definition that I used for appeal is one that stimulates thought or emotion NOT the quality of being attractive. Also throughout the passage the author continually tries to point out that a variety of people have developed their own personal opinions from the sphinx…thus it has a universal appeal. If the author truly had wanted to bring out the evocative qualities of the sphinx he would not have shared so many different accounts of the sphinx…he could have just written about the sphinx being evocative. Early on in the passage the author also writes about how a variety of people have interpreted the sphinx incorrectly. There are no mentions here about them having strong opinions for or against the sphinx…but he does mention that lots of people have interpreted and viewed them for themselves. Thus it has universal appeal in that it stimulates</p>
<p>I thought that evocative was good because it was strong enough to cause Twain to embellish his typical writing style and called forth an individual reaction from many people.</p>
<p>@system I think his response still constitutes mocking because he not only asserts that the previous position is incorrect but he also states that the exact opposite is occurring in reality. Mind you, I’m going off the definition of mock being “to make something seem laughably unreal or impossible”.</p>
<p>I don’t know, I don’t think he was derisive enough to constitute mocking. Wasn’t the word before it articulate? I felt like it was too short of a mention to go with that. I feel like possibly 3 answers could’ve worked with this, though</p>
<p>Krungle: Mocking would constitute an extreme tone (and even according to the definition, the author would have responded with something that would cause the audience to laugh at his opponents’ stupidity), which was not present in the author’s parenthetical annotation.</p>