All Common Core: 12th Grade English Language Arts Resources
Example Questions
Example Question #1 : Distinguishing What Is Directly Stated From What Is Meant Using Pov: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.6
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
In context, the underlined and bolded words "social philosophy" serves what function?
It creates irony when read in the contrast to the saying to which it refers
It undermines saying to which it refers by associating it with a debunked pseudo-science
It figures the author of the saying as a figure of academic authority on the subject
It sets up a major argument made in the text
It creates irony when read in the contrast to the saying to which it refers
The key here is understanding the connotations of the phrase and the context in which the phrase appears, while also recognizing how the overall tone of the narration alters those connotations. While the tone of the text is hardly colloquial, it is not, in general, academic, so the sudden turn towards a parenthetical aside calling a joke/"daring" phrase as "social philosophy [coined] into axiom" is notable in the context of the text. By prefacing the phrase with this elevated academic label the author sets our expectations at a high level, only to reveal the simple (and pretty distasteful) sentiment that "we all have our pet common people," thereby subverting our initial expectations, creating irony.
To be absolutely sure, let's examine our other options. To say that a major theme of the overall passage is that "[upper class individuals] all have [their] pet common people" is not borne out in the text. Indeed, the exposition presented about the Beauforts reveals them to be complex and interesting people, hardly mere "pets," especially given Mrs. Beaufort's apparent social sway (as evidenced by the social gravity of her party).
Social philosophy is, first of all, neither a pseudo-nor an actual science, it is a humanities discipline (and one that has not, in fact, been debunked). The association of Mrs. Archer's saying with the discipline makes no claims about her actual qualifications to make such claims, it stands to reason that she is an amateur social philosopher (with a notably narrow sphere of "academic" interest).
Example Question #2 : Distinguishing What Is Directly Stated From What Is Meant Using Pov: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.6
Passage adapted from Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Spring" (1921).
To what purpose, April, do you return again?
Beauty is not enough.
You can no longer quiet me with the redness
Of leaves opening stickily.
I know what I know. 5
The sun is hot on my neck as I observe
The spikes of the crocus.
The smell of the earth is good.
It is apparent that there is no death.
But what does that signify? 10
Not only under the ground are the brains of men
Eaten by maggots.
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs. 15
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
When read in the context of the rest of the poem, what is the purpose of the bolded and underlined sentence?
To emphasize the beauty of spring by calling attention to a different sensory experience: smell
To ironically call attention to the odor of the adressee
To straightforwardly assert the value of the sensory experiences of spring
To emphasize the inevitability of death by contrasting with the imagery that follows it
To emphasize the inevitability of death by contrasting with the imagery that follows it
In order to answer this question, you needed to have a firm grasp on the overall message and tone of the passage. The bolded and underlined sentence is a simple and a positive one: "The smell of the earth is good." In a poem that was praising spring, this would "straightforwardly assert the value of the sensory experiences of spring" or, perhaps, "emphasize the beauty of spring by calling attention to a different sensory experience: smell." This is, however, the opposite of the poem's overall message. The poem is negative about spring from the very opening, when it asks why April has bothered to return, and immediately thereafter flatly asserts that "beauty is not enough." The end of the poem characterizes April (and by association spring and its beauty) as an "idiot, babbling and strewing flowers. Ok, so we can safely eliminate the two answers that take this statement at its face value. Now, the question becomes if this simple sentence is intended to ironically call attention to the addressee's odor, or is being used as part of a contrast with ugly imagery immediately following it. Since the speaker is April, the month, itself, (established in line 1) the question is whether or not the statement is intended ironically, and there is no indication that it is. The speaker willingly acknowledges the "beauty" of this time, but simply dismisses it as existentially meaningless in the face of certain death.
So, we are left with the sentence functioning in contrast with the "brains of men/ eaten by maggots" that directly follows.
Example Question #3 : Distinguishing What Is Directly Stated From What Is Meant Using Pov: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.6
Adapted from Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen (1817)
It is now expedient to give some description of Mrs. Allen, that the reader may be able to judge in what manner her actions will hereafter tend to promote the general distress of the work, and how she will, probably, contribute to reduce poor Catherine to all the desperate wretchedness of which a last volume is capable — whether by her imprudence, vulgarity, or jealousy — whether by intercepting her letters, ruining her character, or turning her out of doors.
Mrs. Allen was one of that numerous class of females, whose society can raise no other emotion than surprise at there being any men in the world who could like them well enough to marry them. She had neither beauty, genius, accomplishment, nor manner. The air of a gentlewoman, a great deal of quiet, inactive good temper, and a trifling turn of mind were all that could account for her being the choice of a sensible, intelligent man like Mr. Allen. In one respect she was admirably fitted to introduce a young lady into public, being as fond of going everywhere and seeing everything herself as any young lady could be. Dress was her passion. She had a most harmless delight in being fine; and our heroine’s entree into life could not take place till after three or four days had been spent in learning what was mostly worn, and her chaperone was provided with a dress of the newest fashion. Catherine too made some purchases herself, and when all these matters were arranged, the important evening came which was to usher her into the Upper Rooms. Her hair was cut and dressed by the best hand, her clothes put on with care, and both Mrs. Allen and her maid declared she looked quite as she should do. With such encouragement, Catherine hoped at least to pass uncensured through the crowd. As for admiration, it was always very welcome when it came, but she did not depend on it.
Mrs. Allen was so long in dressing that they did not enter the ballroom till late. The season was full, the room crowded, and the two ladies squeezed in as well as they could. As for Mr. Allen, he repaired directly to the card–room, and left them to enjoy a mob by themselves. With more care for the safety of her new gown than for the comfort of her protegee, Mrs. Allen made her way through the throng of men by the door, as swiftly as the necessary caution would allow; Catherine, however, kept close at her side, and linked her arm too firmly within her friend’s to be torn asunder by any common effort of a struggling assembly. But to her utter amazement she found that to proceed along the room was by no means the way to disengage themselves from the crowd; it seemed rather to increase as they went on, whereas she had imagined that when once fairly within the door, they should easily find seats and be able to watch the dances with perfect convenience. But this was far from being the case, and though by unwearied diligence they gained even the top of the room, their situation was just the same; they saw nothing of the dancers but the high feathers of some of the ladies. Still they moved on — something better was yet in view; and by a continued exertion of strength and ingenuity they found themselves at last in the passage behind the highest bench. Here there was something less of crowd than below; and hence Miss Morland had a comprehensive view of all the company beneath her, and of all the dangers of her late passage through them. It was a splendid sight, and she began, for the first time that evening, to feel herself at a ball: she longed to dance, but she had not an acquaintance in the room. Mrs. Allen did all that she could do in such a case by saying very placidly, every now and then, “I wish you could dance, my dear — I wish you could get a partner.” For some time her young friend felt obliged to her for these wishes; but they were repeated so often, and proved so totally ineffectual, that Catherine grew tired at last, and would thank her no more.
The bolded and underlined sentence is intended to communicate that ________________.
Mrs. Allen's efforts are extremely minimal
the ball is very exciting
Mrs. Allen does not want to be at the ball
Mrs. Allen is doing her best to make Miss Morland feel better
Mrs. Allen's efforts are extremely minimal
Here, you're being asked to examine the language of a selection of the passage and to determine whether or not what is being directly stated is what the author means to communicate. The author opens the sentence by telling the reader that "Mrs. Allen did all that she could do in such a case," which, on a surface level (and in isolation), is a direct statement in favor of the option stating that "Mrs. Allen is doing her best to make Miss Morland feel better." Next, the author elaborates on what "all that she could do in such a case" actually entailed, namely "saying very placidly, every now and then, 'I wish you could dance, my dear — I wish you could get a partner.'" Wait a minute! It stands to reason that Mrs. Allen, or really anyone, could actually be able to do no more than repeating a tepid, almost taunting refrain. The author's word choice also provides us with a clear clue that Mrs. Allen is not, in fact, doing her best when she says that Mrs. Allen's refrain is not even repeated with any intensity, not just "placidly," but "very placidly."
Reading on, things only get worse for Mrs. Allen's level of helpfulness, in the next sentence we discover that not only do Mrs. Allen's efforts seem half-hearted and "ineffectual" to us, but also that "Catherine grew tired at last, and would thank her no more."
Remember, your task is to choose the best answer that is most supportable with direct textual evidence. While it may well be true that Mrs. Allen doesn't want to be at the party, the purpose of the highlighted portion is to ironically highlight Mrs. Allen's subpar efforts to support Catherine.
Example Question #1 : Analyze Multiple Interpretations Of A Work: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.7
Adapted from Walt Whitman's "Crossing Brooklyn Ferry" in Leaves of Grass (1855)
Flood-tide below me! I see you face to face!
Clouds of the west—sun there half an hour high—I see you also face to face.
Crowds of men and women attired in the usual costumes, how curious you are to me!
On the ferry-boats the hundreds and hundreds that cross, returning home, are more curious to me than you suppose,
And you that shall cross from shore to shore years hence are more to me, and more in my meditations, than you might suppose.
2
The impalpable sustenance of me from all things at all hours of the day,
The simple, compact, well-join’d scheme, myself disintegrated, every one disintegrated yet part of the scheme,
The similitudes of the past and those of the future,
The glories strung like beads on my smallest sights and hearings, on the walk in the street and the passage over the river,
The current rushing so swiftly and swimming with me far away,
The others that are to follow me, the ties between me and them,
The certainty of others, the life, love, sight, hearing of others.
Others will enter the gates of the ferry and cross from shore to shore,
Others will watch the run of the flood-tide,
Others will see the shipping of Manhattan north and west, and the heights of Brooklyn to the south and east,
Others will see the islands large and small;
Fifty years hence, others will see them as they cross, the sun half an hour high,
A hundred years hence, or ever so many hundred years hence, others will see them,
Will enjoy the sunset, the pouring-in of the flood-tide, the falling-back to the sea of the ebb-tide.
3
It avails not, time nor place—distance avails not,
I am with you, you men and women of a generation, or ever so many generations hence,
Just as you feel when you look on the river and sky, so I felt,
Just as any of you is one of a living crowd, I was one of a crowd,
Just as you are refresh’d by the gladness of the river and the bright flow, I was refresh’d,
Just as you stand and lean on the rail, yet hurry with the swift current, I stood yet was hurried,
Just as you look on the numberless masts of ships and the thick-stemm’d pipes of steamboats, I look’d.
I too many and many a time cross’d the river of old,
Watched the Twelfth-month sea-gulls, saw them high in the air floating with motionless wings, oscillating their bodies,
Saw how the glistening yellow lit up parts of their bodies and left the rest in strong shadow,
Saw the slow-wheeling circles and the gradual edging toward the south,
Saw the reflection of the summer sky in the water,
Had my eyes dazzled by the shimmering track of beams . . .
Which of the following statements most closely reflects the overriding theme of this work?
Aesthetic appreciation precludes interpersonal connection
Experience is intensely personal and informed by one’s own history
Personal experiences can be meaningfully shared across time, space, and generations
Connecting with nature is more important than connecting with other people
Personal experiences can be meaningfully shared across time, space, and generations
This question asks you to choose from four possible interpretations of the main theme of the work. The best way to solve this kind of question is to have read and decided on what you think the main, most powerful and overriding theme of the text is yourself, and then check your interpretation against the presented options.
Repeatedly, the speaker expresses his conviction that shared experience connects people across time and distance. This might be most clear in the lines that begin the third stanza: "It avails not, time nor place—distance avails not, / I am with you, you men and women of a generation, or ever so many generations hence." While nature and aesthetic appreciation are heavily emphasized, the main (and directly) stated point that experience is universal supersedes these elements. This theme is also directly reinforced by the structure and form of the text, the direct address "you" seeks to directly include the reader, and especially readers from "so many generations hence."
Example Question #1 : Knowledge Of Foundational Works Of American Literature: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.9
Passage adapted from Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Spring" (1921).
To what purpose, April, do you return again?
Beauty is not enough.
You can no longer quiet me with the redness
Of leaves opening stickily.
I know what I know. 5
The sun is hot on my neck as I observe
The spikes of the crocus.
The smell of the earth is good.
It is apparent that there is no death.
But what does that signify? 10
Not only under the ground are the brains of men
Eaten by maggots.
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs. 15
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
Which of the given lines from a seminal American poem most directly contrasts the message of the passage?
"The spring decoys./ And as the summer nears—/ And as the Rose appears,/ Robin is gone./ Yet do I not repine"
"Now the sun walks in the forest,/ He touches the bows and stems with his golden fingers;/ They shiver, and wake from slumber./ Over the barren branches he shakes his yellow curls./ Yet is the forest full of the sound of tears"
"As the uncertain harvest; keep us here/ All simply in the springing of the year."
"A light exists in spring/ Not present on the year/ At any other period./ When March is scarcely here"
"The spring decoys./ And as the summer nears—/ And as the Rose appears,/ Robin is gone./ Yet do I not repine"
All of the given passages were from poems directly concerned, as this poem is, with spring. None of these poems, however, are purely about that season, all demonstrate a distinct perspective on that season. This is where we need to query the lines, on the level of tone and the quality of the author's take on spring.
First, lets keep firmly in mind the perspective of the passage: namely that the beauty of spring is ultimately illusory and pointless. Now, this is a notably dark and unique perspective on what is, objectively, just a great time of year (in the Norther Hemisphere), so it stands to reason that most of these other passages will have a more positive perspective, we must look for the one that most directly contrasts with the message of the poem.
The key phrase in the correct answer is "yet I do not repine." By initially making statements in line with the message of our given passage ("spring decoys," "as the rose appears the Robin is gone") and then directly contrasting that sentiment with "yet," we see our most direct contrast to our given poem.
Answer options are adapted from: "A Prayer in Spring" by Robert Frost (1913), "A light exists in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1885), and "I have a bird in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1886), and "Very Early Spring" by Katherine Mansfield (who was from New Zealand) (1923).
Example Question #2 : Knowledge Of Foundational Works Of American Literature: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.9
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
The primary focus of the work excerpted here is _______________.
A criminal plot masterminded by Mr. Beaufort
The aftermath of World War I on the moneyed class of American society
The complex dynamics of social class and wealth in America
The complex dynamics of race and poverty in America
The complex dynamics of social class and wealth in America
The Age of Innocence is clearly a seminal work of American Literature. It was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1921, and Wharton became the first woman to be awarded the prize. So, it is reasonable to expect that you would have some prior knowledge of the work, or at least of Wharton's oeuvre of social satire and observation. But this knowledge simply would have made this question easier; the question is still eminently solvable, even if your only familiarity with the work came from the passage in front of you.
Remember, the answer to any question will always have direct evidence to support it in the passage itself. Now, the novel was written in 1920, so the option suggesting that a primary theme was the aftermath of World War I may be tempting, but there is no evidence of this in the text, no mention of that war, nor of any date (in fact, the novel is set in the Gilded Age of the 19th century). Text date is NOT evidence of the temporal setting of the story.
While it is suggested, at one point, that Mr. Beaufort is in some way deceptive (namely about being British), to say that the focus of the entire text is a criminal plot of his is not supportable with evidence.
The dynamics of social class and wealth are certainly at play in this passage, as evidenced by the fact that although they are apparently wealthy, the Beauforts are also referred to as "common." This kind of complex distinction reveals the inherent complexity of a nation focused on the pursuit of wealth, and without an underlying aristocratic history.
Example Question #1 : Read And Comprehend Literature, Including Stories, Dramas, And Poems: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.10
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
Mrs. Beaufort schedules her party _______________.
to precede the opera performance, acting as an unofficial fundraiser for the Opera society
the evening after the opera performance
to begin almost immediately after the close of the opera performance
to begin before the opera performance
to begin almost immediately after the close of the opera performance
This question interrogates your literal understanding of the sequence of events described in the text. The second paragraph establishes definitively that "[Mrs. Beaufort] always gave her ball on an Opera night," so we can immediately limit ourselves to the three answer choices that assert the performance as being scheduled on the same evenings as the Opera. In the final paragraph, when Mrs. Beaufort "[rises] at the end of the third act ... and disappeared" begins the half hour long countdown to the party. Most operas have three acts, so the end of the third act is the end of the performance, half an hour after that can safely be characterized as "almost immediately after the close of the opera performance."
Example Question #2 : Read And Comprehend Literature, Including Stories, Dramas, And Poems: Ccss.Ela Literacy.Rl.11 12.10
Adapted from Walt Whitman's "Crossing Brooklyn Ferry" in Leaves of Grass (1855)
Flood-tide below me! I see you face to face!
Clouds of the west—sun there half an hour high—I see you also face to face.
Crowds of men and women attired in the usual costumes, how curious you are to me!
On the ferry-boats the hundreds and hundreds that cross, returning home, are more curious to me than you suppose,
And you that shall cross from shore to shore years hence are more to me, and more in my meditations, than you might suppose.
2
The impalpable sustenance of me from all things at all hours of the day,
The simple, compact, well-join’d scheme, myself disintegrated, every one disintegrated yet part of the scheme,
The similitudes of the past and those of the future,
The glories strung like beads on my smallest sights and hearings, on the walk in the street and the passage over the river,
The current rushing so swiftly and swimming with me far away,
The others that are to follow me, the ties between me and them,
The certainty of others, the life, love, sight, hearing of others.
Others will enter the gates of the ferry and cross from shore to shore,
Others will watch the run of the flood-tide,
Others will see the shipping of Manhattan north and west, and the heights of Brooklyn to the south and east,
Others will see the islands large and small;
Fifty years hence, others will see them as they cross, the sun half an hour high,
A hundred years hence, or ever so many hundred years hence, others will see them,
Will enjoy the sunset, the pouring-in of the flood-tide, the falling-back to the sea of the ebb-tide.
3
It avails not, time nor place—distance avails not,
I am with you, you men and women of a generation, or ever so many generations hence,
Just as you feel when you look on the river and sky, so I felt,
Just as any of you is one of a living crowd, I was one of a crowd,
Just as you are refresh’d by the gladness of the river and the bright flow, I was refresh’d,
Just as you stand and lean on the rail, yet hurry with the swift current, I stood yet was hurried,
Just as you look on the numberless masts of ships and the thick-stemm’d pipes of steamboats, I look’d.
I too many and many a time cross’d the river of old,
Watched the Twelfth-month sea-gulls, saw them high in the air floating with motionless wings, oscillating their bodies,
Saw how the glistening yellow lit up parts of their bodies and left the rest in strong shadow,
Saw the slow-wheeling circles and the gradual edging toward the south,
Saw the reflection of the summer sky in the water,
Had my eyes dazzled by the shimmering track of beams . . .
What do we NOT know about the speaker's immediate physical setting?
It is after the beginning of the Industrial Revolution
He is in New York
It is spring
It is daytime
It is spring
Let's begin at the beginning and evaluate the task with which we are being presented in this question. We are being asked to select the ONLY of the provided answer choices that is not definitely true. Therefore, we should be able to find evidence to directly support the three other options, which are not the correct answer to the question, but ARE true statements about "the speaker's immediate physical setting." Negative questions like this can sometimes be a bit confusing (as you've just seen from the length of that explanation!), so it's important to take a moment to definitely establish in your mind what the question is asking of you before you launch back into a close reading of the poem.
So, what's true? The first one is pretty obvious, but brings up an important note when you're analyzing texts: the title of the text is a valid and useful bit of text of which to make note! The poem is called "Crossing Brooklyn Ferry," the text gives us no reason to doubt this assertion of setting, nor to assume that it is metaphorical, so it's very safe to assume that the speaker is in New York. See, all we've done is read the title and we've already eliminated a quarter of the possible answers!
Let's skip (clicking our heels with glee as we go) straight along to the opening lines of the poem, where we see immediately that the "sun [is] half an hour high." Boom! We've eliminated another option, since it is guaranteed to be daytime if the sun is "high" at all.
We're now in the enviable position of having two options to choose between and the rest of the poem in which to find our evidence. Now, the poem certainly has a spring-poetry vibe to it. The narrator is gleefully talking about the sun and the beauty of nature, common features of springtime poetic tropes in poetry. Looking through the poem, however, we don't see any direct references to spring, and we even see references to other times of year ("the reflection of the summer sky in the water," the "twelve month [i.e December] gull"). This is starting to seem like our correct option, but let's make absolutely sure by checking in with our other option, that the poem is set "after the beginning of the industrial revolution." Well, the poem certainly has the feel of a post-industrial world, we see crowds in an urban center (and American urban center, no less), and we're on a seemingly large ferry, including, and this is key, "a rail." Metal railings on a large urban ferry is a pretty definite indication that this poem takes place after the beginning of the production of industrial steel products. Note that the date of the poem does NOT help us with this option, as the date of a poems publication has no definite bearing on the time in which that writing is set (George Orwell's 1984, for instance, was published in 1949).
So, having confirmed, and thereby eliminated all other options, we can safely say that our answer is that the poem is NOT definitely set in the spring.
Example Question #11 : Common Core: 12th Grade English Language Arts
Adapted from the First Inaugural Address of Thomas Jefferson (March 4th, 1801)
During the contest of opinion through which we have passed, the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety.
But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.
From the content of his argument, it is reasonable to assume that Jefferson is a _______________.
A religious leader
A former elected member of the United States Congress
There is not sufficient evidence in the passage to support any of these inferences
A former military general
There is not sufficient evidence in the passage to support any of these inferences
This question interrogates your ability to recognize the sufficiency of evidence for a given inference. We start with the question text handing us the specific inference we are to investigate, namely that the text gives us direct evidence that Jefferson is a former general or US Senator, or a religious leader. There is absolutely no indication or mention of the military in the speech. Although conflicts are mentioned Jefferson's role, and indeed the military particulars of these conflicts are not mentioned, so we can rule out this answer fairly quickly. Now, we run into the key distinction this, and any inference question, will ask of you: the distinction between what is reasonable or even logical to assume about the situation and what is a logical inference to draw from the text. Now, from the title and knowledge of the basics of American history, you will know that Jefferson has just been elected President of the United States, and while you might not directly remember that Jefferson was a congressman (he was), it is certainly reasonable to assume that the President elect was previously elected to Congressman, but this is NOT indicated directly by the text. Take a look! You will not find any reference to Jefferson's personal past roles in government, only his vision for how these offices will interact with the people going forward.
None of these inferences can be supported by textual evidence.
Example Question #12 : Common Core: 12th Grade English Language Arts
Adapted from “Geographical Evolution” by Archibald Geikie (1879)
In the quaint preface to his Navigations and Voyages of the English Nation, Hakluyt calls geography and chronology "the sunne and moone, the right eye and the left of all history." The position thus claimed for geography three hundred years ago by the great English chronicler was not accorded by his successors, and has hardly been admitted even now. The functions of the geographer and the traveller, popularly assumed to be identical, have been supposed to consist in descriptions of foreign countries, their climate, productions, and inhabitants, bristling on the one hand with dry statistics, and relieved on the other by as copious an introduction as may be of stirring adventure and personal anecdote. There has indeed been much to justify this popular assumption. It was not until the key-note of its future progress was struck by Karl Ritter, within the present century, that geography advanced beyond the domain of travellers' tales and desultory observation into that of orderly, methodical, scientific progress. This branch of inquiry, however, is now no longer the pursuit of mere numerical statistics, nor the chronicle of marvelous and often questionable adventures by flood and fell. It seeks to present a luminous picture of the earth's surface, its various forms of configuration, its continents, islands, and oceans, its mountains, valleys, and plains, its rivers and lakes, its climates, plants, and animals. It thus endeavours to produce a picture which shall not be one of mere topographical detail. It ever looks for a connection between scattered facts, tries to ascertain the relations which subsist between the different parts of the globe, their reactions on each other and the function of each in the general economy of the whole. Modern geography studies the distribution of vegetable and animal life over the earth's surface, with the action and reaction between it and the surrounding inorganic world. It traces how man, alike unconsciously and knowingly, has changed the face of nature, and how, on the other hand, the conditions of his geographical environment have moulded his own progress.
With these broad aims geography comes frankly for assistance to many different branches of science. It does not, however, claim in any measure to occupy their domain. It brings to the consideration of their problems a central human interest in which these sciences are sometimes apt to be deficient; for it demands first of all to know how the problems to be solved bear upon the position and history of man and of this marvelously-ordered world wherein he finds himself undisputed lord. Geography freely borrows from meteorology, physics, chemistry, geology, zoology, and botany; but the debt is not all on one side. Save for the impetus derived from geographical research, many of these sciences would not be in their present advanced condition. They gain in vast augmentation of facts, and may cheerfully lend their aid in correlating these for geographical requirements.
In no respect does modern geography stand out more prominently than in the increased precision and fullness of its work. It has fitted out exploratory expeditions, and in so doing has been careful to see them provided with the instruments and apparatus necessary to enable them to contribute accurate and definite results. It has guided and fostered research, and has been eager to show a generous appreciation of the labours of those by whom our knowledge of the earth has been extended. Human courage and endurance are not less enthusiastically applauded than they once were; but they must be united to no common powers of observation before they will now raise a traveller to the highest rank. When we read a volume of recent travel, while warmly appreciating the spirit of adventure, fertility of resource, presence of mind, and other moral qualities of its author, we instinctively ask ourselves, as we close its pages, what is the sum of its additions to our knowledge of the earth? From the geographical point of view - and it is to this point alone that these remarks apply - we must rank an explorer according to his success in widening our knowledge and enlarging our views regarding the aspects of nature.
The demands of modern geography are thus becoming every year more exacting. It requires more training in its explorers abroad, more knowledge on the part of its readers at home. The days are drawing to a close when one can gain undying geographical renown by struggling against man and beast, fever and hunger and drought, across some savage and previously unknown region, even though little can be shown as the outcome of the journey. All honour to the pioneers by whom this first exploratory work has been so nobly done! They will be succeeded by a race that will find its laurels more difficult to win - a race from which more will be expected, and which will need to make up in the variety, amount, and value of its detail, what it lacks in the freshness of first glimpses into new lands.
The bolded and underlined sentence implies that _________________.
that geographers do not require formal training
that geographers should not, in fact, visit the places they study
that geographers and travelers fulfill the same functions
that the true functions of the geographer and the traveller are, in fact, different
that the true functions of the geographer and the traveller are, in fact, different
This question tests your ability to recognize specific textual evidence of implicit meaning. None of the answers provided reflect direct statements made in the text, so we need to read the sentence and surrounding context to determine what implications we can tie directly back to evidence.
The key phrase here is "assumed to be identical." If we are "assuming" two things to be identical we are "recognizing" or "understanding" it to be the case, as we would if that were, in fact, the case. Assumptions are specifically not necessarily true, so by including this assumption in a parenthetical aside, the author is trying to give the reader the implication that he does not share the "popular" assumption.
This question also highlights for us the necessity of reading past the immediate context! If you simply read the next sentence "there has been much to justify this popular assumption," you might immediately, and injudiciously, select the wrong answer. Had you waited but one more sentence you would have encountered the key phrase "it was not until..." Aha! We find out that, thanks to Karl Ritter, geography has "advanced beyond the domain of travelers' tales."
Certified Tutor
Certified Tutor