renewal

leivev

Senior Member
美之大成, 汉语
Although in eighteenth-century England an active cultural life accompanied the beginnings of middle-class consumerism. the __ of literacy was __ with the rise of such consumerism in the different areas of the country.


A. repudiation.. reconciled
b.renewal..inconsistent
c.promotion..combined
d.spread..compatible
e. degree..uncorrelated













ans: e
my choice : b

Hi there:

why not b? I think b is impeccable. what is your first choice when do not take the answer influence in ?


Many thanks.
 
  • almufadado

    Senior Member
    Português de Portugal
    The "degree of literacy" is a measure of a population's skills to read and write.

    For instance a person with no degree of literacy can not read nor write, in practical terms the person did not went to school to have the basic education (read/write/simple math).

    "Inconsistent" or "uncorrelated" that was the trick in the question. Both can mean "not in agreement", or "discrepant", or to a certain point "varying in degree/level".


    uncorrelated -> Means that there wasn't a similar rise, they were not equality leveled, ended up in different stages of their evolution, their variation was not proportional.

    Conclusion : So what the sentence means is that there wasn't the same rise in the levels of literacy and economical development.
     

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    They all make grammatical sense, but you knew that.

    However, "renewal" of literacy is a very strange concept - implying that literacy had decreased and was now being renewed (or increased AGAIN). Doesn't make sense.

    The first part is suggesting a link between cultural things (an example of which is literacy) with consumerism. The although suggests a contrast is coming later in the sentence. Thus the lack of correlation of literacy with consumerism fits all the hints.
     

    leivev

    Senior Member
    美之大成, 汉语
    My problem is the word uncorrelated, it is a strong word, right? more powerful than "inconsistent"

    And the first clue, indicted there is still some correlation there, between the commercial and
    culture stuff which using the word "accompanied". (Correct me if I am botched)

    So how come the accompanied sudden harsh contrast with the word uncorrelated.

    It seems to me, sorts of obtrusive. sorts of pointing.
     

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    The rise of "active cultural life (as assessed by literacy levels)" and "middle class consumerism" accompanied each other; i.e. both happened at the same time (in the 18th C.). However, they are not correlated with each other; i.e., the one did not cause the other.

    The occurrence of refrigerators is correlated with the occurrence of televisions in modern western households. This means that where you find a refrigerator, you are highly likely to find a television. However, this does not mean that refrigerators cause televisions :D
     

    leivev

    Senior Member
    美之大成, 汉语
    However, they are not correlated with each other; i.e., the one did not cause the other.

    The occurrence of refrigerators is correlated with the occurrence of televisions in modern western households. This means that where you find a refrigerator, you are highly likely to find a television. However, this does not mean that refrigerators cause televisions :D

    I got dizzy here, spinning~~~:D, you said, not correlated is not amount to cause.

    and fridge and tv correlated but not cause.

    I can not quite follow you , Is there something with consistence and correlated?

    I mean commercial and culture, equals to the refrigerator and TV here, right?

    I think the original post is trying to say TV refrigerator comes out together, nevertheless NO-correlated, which is the puzzle here?
     

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    I mean commercial and culture, equals to the refrigerator and TV here, right?
    Yes - if two things are correlated, it tells you nothing about what causes either.

    The sentence starts out by telling us that A and B happened at the same time. Although one might think that A caused B, the second half of the sentence tells us that they are not correlated. If two things are NOT correlated, then we learn that one does not cause the other. The opposite is not true, however. Just because two things are correlated does not mean one causes the other - it may be true, it may not.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top