The PaGaLGuY UnderDogs Team 2012

@allan89 4,4,4,2:splat:
@allan89 4,4,3,2
Very gud RC with close options...whats the source of this RC..??
It feels lyk i have read something lyk this b4...
@allan89 4,4,1,2
@allan89 D,D,B(??),D(??).

Q3 I would have skipped in an exam scenario, can't figure out the difference between statement C and D. :S Even the 4th one is very iffy, dunno if "National Pride" is implied when the author says the citizens assert their American-ness even if they are rioting. :P

@allan89
29. 4
30 4
31 1
32 4
@allan89 4 4 3 2
@allan89 4 4 2 2
@allan89 4,4,1,2
@allan89 ab toh de sakte hain OA...
@allan89 4,4,4,1
@allan89 : 4,4,2,4 my take. Plz tag me while posting OA if possible :)
@allan89
4 4 2 4
Last one, am I really missing something or worse, assuming?

Please post the OA

my take 4 4 1 4

@allan89 4,4,3,2ďťż

good RC...
@allan89 Oye, OA! 20 mins, you said... Bangali standard time? :P
Koi iska approach bata do pls
@mohit07 said:
ďťż
Koi iska approach bata do pls
OA:16 1/2?
ďťż

Net cnnection problems...LOlz............


OA .. 4 ,4 2,4.......................

29.4. The author is exploring why patriotism in America is different
and more inclusive as compared to that in Australia and Europe.
This is the main theme. The author also shows a slight
preference of American Patriotism to that of Europe and
Australia. This leads us to option 4. Option 1 is not the primary
objective of the author. The author does not use harsh words
to criticize Europe or Australia. Option 2 is too general. The
attempt is not to learn but to study the difference in patriotism
among America, Australia and Europe. Option 3 again is part
of the discussion but does not encompass the whole of the
passage.

30. 4 The context here is that nations like America have been created
from migration and settlement and hence there is nothing
organic about them. 'Organic' in the context would take a
sense of 'having a common history/tradition/culture/ ancestry'
for the people of a particular country (of the 'New World').
Option 1 conveys the opposite of the intended meaning. Option
2 is incorrect as we are talking of common principles/ tradition/
evolution and not 'rigid principles'. As regards option 3, the
author is not worried about the outlook of people— whether
they are traditional /modern in outlook. But he is definitely
indicating that the entire population has not evolved in a similar
way and the people do not have a common history, which
renders 4 correct.

31. 2 Statements B, C and D are implied by the author in the fourth
paragraph where the author brings out the similarities between
US and Australian backgrounds as opposed to that of Europe.
A can be eliminated as it speaks about a characteristic that is
peculiar only to the US.

32. 4 Option 1 can be inferred from Para 2. Option 2 can be inferred
from the 3rd paragraph. Option 3 can be inferred from the last
2 paras of the passage.


@FSOG said:
sir woh batao...diffeerent number of regions created.....
sir bolkar aap mujhse sharminda na kare.... different number of regions created when all are non-parallel non-concurrent are n(n+1)/2 + 1 ... if u ever forget this formula.. and u need to crosscheck den u can check dat 2 lines create 4 regions, 3 create 7... hence this formula

for n concurrent lines.. regions created are 2n..
incase n parallel lines regions created are n+1
@allan89 said:
Net cnnection problems...LOlz............
OA .. 4 ,4 2,4.......................
29.4. The author is exploring why patriotism in America is different
and more inclusive as compared to that in Australia and Europe.
This is the main theme. The author also shows a slight
preference of American Patriotism to that of Europe and
Australia. This leads us to option 4. Option 1 is not the primary
objective of the author. The author does not use harsh words
to criticize Europe or Australia. Option 2 is too general. The
attempt is not to learn but to study the difference in patriotism
among America, Australia and Europe. Option 3 again is part
of the discussion but does not encompass the whole of the
passage.
30. 4 The context here is that nations like America have been created
from migration and settlement and hence there is nothing
organic about them. 'Organic' in the context would take a
sense of 'having a common history/tradition/culture/ ancestry'
for the people of a particular country (of the 'New World').
Option 1 conveys the opposite of the intended meaning. Option
2 is incorrect as we are talking of common principles/ tradition/
evolution and not 'rigid principles'. As regards option 3, the
author is not worried about the outlook of people— whether
they are traditional /modern in outlook. But he is definitely
indicating that the entire population has not evolved in a similar
way and the people do not have a common history, which
renders 4 correct.
31. 2 Statements B, C and D are implied by the author in the fourth
paragraph where the author brings out the similarities between
US and Australian backgrounds as opposed to that of Europe.
A can be eliminated as it speaks about a characteristic that is
peculiar only to the US.
32. 4 Option 1 can be inferred from Para 2. Option 2 can be inferred
from the 3rd paragraph. Option 3 can be inferred from the last
2 paras of the passage.
But just a small doubt...in the last question it says which of these cannot be inferred...option 4 says none of the above...so i thot it meant we cannot infer anything...i was sure of 1 and 3...so dint bother to chek for 2 and marked it...the options are ambiguous in this case...