Can anyone explain this one’s answer ?
I find no clue for A.
Share your approach.
Start with Blank (ii), Blank (ii) was pretty straightforward
“eschewing jargon in favor of ____ prose” - so rephrase this to “forgo complex words in favor of not complex works.”
So lucid is the only one that fits.
For blank (i)
Author’s work offers ___ critique.
“recondite” is out, because there is no mention of mysterious.
but I cant choose between “penetrating” and “honest”. I mean there is no evidence for both. Authors critique could be penetrating or honest.
Share your evidence of why both would work, and we can try and figure it out
The author’s critique cannot be “recondite” because he uses clear cut language.
But I can’t figure out how “penetrating” is answer,
I can’t figure out any clues for (i)'s blank for support/contrast. So I used usage strategy.
Authors critique could be “penetrating” or it could also be “honest”.
This is what I thought.
How do I choose “penetrating” for the answer ?
What do you think “penetrating” means?
Cutting/trenchant ?
BTW I really appreciate that you guys are forcing me to think. This is really forcing me to justify my answer and its really helpful for learning.
1 Like
I apologize for taking too much of your time. But this is hard for me.
How do i eliminate “honest” ?
No problem at all! Is clarity the same as honesty?
It isn’t. So this comes down to which fits best?
If penetrating was not in options, would honest be an answer?
I would still say there isn’t much evidence for “honest” but maybe
I understand now. Thanks a lot.
1 Like