Analysis of Sentence Equivalence Question Day 1/30

Sharing my analysis for the feedback

First I used pairing methodology - could only pair up transitory and passing
I was confused between dynamic and amorphous but then any dynamic can surely be definite or have shape so eliminated that
then used support contrast strategy
however is a contrast, worry of prolonged effects - negative
so blank should is part of an idea that should be positive
but blank is about inflation pressures that is negative so blank should be negative in order to make the first part of idea positive
so chose transitory and passing

@vince @Leaderboard

@vince @Leaderboard
Problem 2:
Step 1": Pairing
commenced, began, {not able to find other pairs} rest the connotation for the other 4 seems negative
Step 2: main idea is around effective collaboration,
so before comma, + thing take place, blank should be positive,

@vince @Leaderboard
Problem 3:
1- Pairing Strategy {blessing, Boon}
Now sentence,
getting kicked out - :frowning:
surprising presents a contrast
so blank should be positive
to confirm this, after semicolon, things went great for him
so blank should be positive

Prob:4
Pairing strategy - captivated, enthralled and oblivious, unmindful
Now sentence, blank is associated with people
unsuspecting people means not very cautious people
since they are not cautious, they fall into manhole as they are are unaware about surroundings while staring at phones
so, oblivious, unmindful suits well
{falling into manhole :frowning: , so blank should be negative too}
that leads to the elimination of captivated or enthralled

Cc. - @vince @Leaderboard

@vince @Leaderboard
Problem 5:
Pairing Strategy - severity and strictness,
wastefulness and profigacy
Now sentence clears states, govt. spends oscillates from time to time, second blank should support this idea, from austerity (without luxury) to luxury spending to again frugal (miser)
so profligate and wastefulness

nice analysis, but please don’t tag people unnecessarily and it’s easier if you just post one question per post.

I however don’t agree with your depiction of “prolonged effects” as negative. I would just think of it as “we need a contrast to prolonged”.

2 Likes

got it Vince. Thanks for the correction and sorry for bothering you.
I wasn’t sure whether someone will see this or correct my logic. But thanks for the direction, I won’t tag. :slight_smile: