<p>yes i got sardonic.</p>
<p>Did people get alliance? for a SC</p>
<p>yes to alliance.</p>
<p>Can somebody update the compiled list?</p>
<p>hey please, i post again this question, what did you guys do?</p>
<p>The celebrity one, what does the author of passage one most likely view the point made in passage two, I remember something like " because it decreases the authority of publisher", " [something] about loyal readers"?</p>
<p>Grasp would NOT have fit into context, unless you feel the author has a bad habit of repeating everything he says twice.</p>
<p>New update:</p>
<p>Any new confirmed answers, please add to this:</p>
<p>Confirmed answers
Let’s keep this updated:</p>
<p>flippant;
dismay;
platitudinous…permissible
cavalier or humble
sardonic
mildly ridiculous? or shamelessly conceited
particular…universal…
photographer one: flustered
russian one: details;
characterize
contentious
thoughtful
plummet…infinitesimal
idealized?
erode
compunction
bookish
friendship has much to offer
natural characteristics
critique a trend
conspicuous
inflated?
maintain
alliance
provocative</p>
<p>confirm the ones with ?s
WHAT ELSE</p>
<p>satirize is wrong; it was characterize the narrator</p>
<p>Yeah satirize was clearly not the answer.</p>
<p>In regards to alliance, that shouldn’t be under discussion. It was the first question of a section.</p>
<p>Everything else looks good though I think.</p>
<p>i agree with mildly ridiculous. the guy was tooting a horn blah blah blah which supports mildly ridiculous. but the passage never says he was shameless about his conceit.</p>
<p>i agree with 1a1 i put characterize the narrator. if i got that wrong then that would be -8which is really bad considering ive scored 750+ on most of my practice tests.</p>
<p>which part is " satirize" by the way? i don’t remember it… besides, there is one question about the archeologist, the one ’ we are scavengers", was she being provocative to say that?</p>
<p>@genie17: yes, she was</p>
<p>The satirize part was the question asking about the overall meaning/message of the archaeologist passage.</p>
<p>my support of “characterize the narrator” lies in that he describes himself as different from the usual crowd of archaelogists. but satirizing could just as easily fit i guess. </p>
<p>…</p>
<p>and yes i put provocative genie.</p>
<p>what was it, if not satirize</p>
<p>i also support characterize the narrator. i dont think it was satirizing the profession more than the colleagues.</p>
<p>I’m on the side of satirizing, don’t know why, just feel like it, but I really bombed it today.</p>
<p>welcome to the “I think I bombed it” club</p>
<p>Not just bomb, I atomic bombed it…sigh…</p>