Inferences and conclusions: reading practice set 4

Answer: A. The photograph was taken in 1937 or later.

The explicitly identified completed tower provides an earliest possible year of 1937, but it does not establish that the photograph was made in that year. It shows the completed tower, which was not finished until 1937. The completed tower could have been photographed later; the passage supplies no upper date limit. The tower is already complete and visible in the photograph.

Answer: B. They emphasize different goals: a continuous appearance and convenient access for later work.

Rafi demonstrates appearance while Mara demonstrates access; their shared knowledge and unchanged connection isolate differing priorities as the source of the disagreement. Both have assembled this kind of joint before, and neither proposes changing its internal connection. Both point to and discuss the same existing joint. The passage explicitly describes two finishes for the same completed structure.

Answer: C. She is hoping or preparing for a possible visitor despite what she says.

The extra cup and repeated attention to the gate suggest anticipation, but they do not establish that anyone will arrive. The gate moves in the wind, and no arrival is described. She sets out the narrator’s cup and gives no indication of wanting the narrator to leave. She keeps it beside the teapot when the narrator offers to put it away.

Answer: B. The channel has carried water even though it is dry during this visit.

A photograph of the same bend with water supplies direct evidence of past flow without contradicting today’s dry conditions. One photograph after rain does not establish year-round flow. The evidence concerns an earlier flow, not the date of a future one. The passage agrees that no flowing water is visible during the visit.

Answer: B. It confirms the scarf’s location but leaves the response to Nell’s apology unstated.

The practical question receives an explicit answer; neither acceptance nor rejection of the apology is expressed. The reply says nothing about the apology or the departure. Silence about the apology does not establish a refusal to forgive. The reply answers the scarf question contained in the letter, and the passage provides no basis for asserting nonreceipt.

Answer: D. Removing the old trunk had not ended all living growth associated with that tree.

The connected shoots and living roots show that the loss of the trunk did not mean the loss of every living part. The passage describes fresh shoots beside a stump, not a restored full-height trunk. The gardener reveals their connection to the old roots. The passage establishes continued life for this tree, not a universal rule about all trees.

Answer: D. The frame was adapted to hold the present painting after the dark finish had been applied.

The insert accommodates a smaller work, and its cuts interrupt an existing finish, supporting a sequence of finishing followed by adaptation. Intact painting edges and absent historical documentation rule out the more specific alternatives. The painting’s edges show no trimming, while the insert reduces the opening around it. Cuts for the insert pass through an existing finish, indicating that this adaptation followed that finishing stage. The card establishes association on arrival but identifies neither who adapted the frame nor when relative to donation.

Answer: C. It preserves a personal connection to her father and the beginning of the shop.

Her attention to the original handwriting and the shop’s first week explains why an outdated, damaged object retains value for her. The prices are outdated and customers no longer see the label. She does not criticize the readability of a new copy; she points to her father’s original handwriting. The passage connects the label to memory and handwriting, not to necessary accounting data.

Answer: B. Its method allows some ingredients to vary with local availability.

The stable preparation method and unspecified fish species support flexibility within the recipe. The fish changes, and the written recipe names no required species. The notes specify how to build the broth and when to add fish. Sela learned the soup from her uncle and follows a familiar method.

Answer: A. Its exterior shows no obvious sign that the case was opened or damaged, but the contents still need checking.

The intact bands and unchanged exterior support a limited observation about the case, not a guarantee about the fragile contents. The exterior signs do not establish the condition of the unseen glass objects. The bands remain attached with aligned initials; no evidence of their replacement is given. He is only beginning to open the case for that examination.

Answer: C. The wrapping and the parcel’s connection with his friend matter to him apart from knowing its contents.

Displaying the parcel and discussing its sender before inspecting the contents suggest that its journey and personal association already have value. He has not looked inside and makes no such comparison. No prohibition is mentioned; his attention is on the wrapping, writing and friend. He talks about the friend who wrapped it and displays the address handwriting.

Answer: D. It gave too much weight to differences in clothing as evidence of elapsed time.

A same-afternoon record with an explicit costume change undermines the assumption that different dress necessarily indicates different years. The log places both portraits on the same afternoon. The passage identifies Orin as the subject of both images. The log concerns when it was used, not when the costume’s style originated.