Hi, I don’t really understand the logic behind how film came before she became activist in faminist activites in the below question.
If I try to apply pairing strategy I can understand the answer since there are only two pairs here:
antedated and preceded
portrayed and renewed (this does not really makes sense considering the sentence start with though)Is this the only way I can solve this question or is there any other way as well?
If we focus on the word implications(means to hint) and the word active, we can make out the following relationship: While there is a hint of feminism in it ,it was not directly indicated or shown hence, shadowing the YR involvement in feminist politics . Now , if you move on to the pairing you’ll see we have got two pairs (most of the times answer is a pair). Also, the question has mentioned a year (time period) thus, you can see why we choose A and E (it fills the logic + it has a pair ) even thou cloaked can fill the logic but it didn’t have a pair thus eliminating it.
Let’s consider for a while this question is not an SE
question but TC question. On the lines of your last statement
NO, I disagree on your statement that cloaked fits, as per data given in question, how can this film CLOAK YR’s involvement in politics? We don’t have any evidence to back it up right? Besides that from grammar strategy, can a film CLOAK someone’s personal activity? Maybe yes, but the first statement already says about feminist implications which is thereby contradicting CLOAK’ s meaning.
I would say from the given info which is feminist + date, only option can be before, let me know if I am wrong
OP your second option pair portrayed and renewed are not any pair at all. Portrayed is representation whereas renewed is restored