Hello, I have some questions.
Hello, I would like to inquire why my questions have not been answered!
“nothing could be further from the truth” is implying they are NOT GUILTY right? Now if it said “accused of being guilty” then it would work, but you can’t say “guilty” by itself because that’s been contradicted.
Shipler lacked morals. He isn’t motivated by conscious to do the right thing or to not do the wrong thing, and equally he doesn’t care about the negative criticism from his conscience (guilt for example) after doing something.
Any language actually goes against experience because languages break experiences down into small pieces to manage them better.
I have no idea what the second sentence means, but we shouldn’t be focused on interpreting the sentences to solve TC questions, right?
Hello Ganesh,
Thank you for your responses!
Regarding Question 5 of Section 2, the first part suggests that something is a lie (although nothing could be further from the truth). For the following blank, I believe we could use “guilty” since it carries a negative connotation and aligns with the idea of a lie. Why is “accused of” considered correct as a negative option, but “guilty” is not? Both seem valid to me.
Additionally, I understand the Shipler sentence, but I still find the sentence about languages and experiences quite unclear. While I appreciate your advice not to focus too much on interpretation, I feel it’s essential to grasp the overall meaning, which remains quite ambiguous in this case.
Thank you!
Both are negative, but as I said you can’t say they are “guilty” if nothing could be further from the truth. It’s directly contradicting what is mentioned in the sentence.
I got no clue tbh sorry
Thank you alot for your help, Ganesh!
