Question Description
Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The passage below IS followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The categorization by literary historians can be to some extent a precarious venture. When Asian poets are discussed independently as a set, for example, the degree to which their work reveals the advancement of poetry in broad–spectrum should not be forgotten, or a misrepresentation of literary history may be the consequence. This prudence is predominantly pertinent in an appraisal of the divergence between Asian poets at the start century (1900–1909) and those of the generation of the 1920s. These dissimilarities include the intrepid and more candid vocalizations of the later generation and its methodological ingenuity. It should not be forgotten, though, that analogous differences also existed for parallel generations of British poets.When poets of the 1910s and 1920s are considered collectively, however, the peculiarities that literary historians might make out between "traditional" and "experimental" would be of little consequence in a debate of Asian poets, although these remain supportive classifications for British poets of these decades. Positively differences can be noted between "traditional" Asian poets such as Tagore and Seth and "experimental" ones such as Chan and Qayuum. But Asian poets were not fighting over old or fresh styles; rather, one consummate Asian poet was ready to welcome another, without caring for his or her styles, for what weighed was racial pride.But, in the 1920s, Asian poets deliberated over the issue whether they should deal with particularly racial themes. The questions were raised like whether they should only write about Asian experience for an Asian audience or whether such demands were restraining. It may be believed, though, that nearly all these poets wrote their finest poems when they spoke out of racial sentiment, race being, as Kim Sun rightly put it,"Necessarily the thing the Asian poet knows best".At the start of the century, by comparison, most Asian poets generally wrote in the conformist manner of the age and articulated noble, if ambiguous, sentiments in their poetry. These poets were not extraordinarily gifted, though Rosh Jannah and J. Mitra may be segregated from the group. They decided not to write in vernacular, which as Stuart Bergmann has suggested, "Intended a refutation of stereotypes of Asian life," and they declined to write solely about racial issues. This denial had both a positive and negative results. As Bergmann observes, "Usefully persisted that Asian poets should not be cramped to issues of race, these poets made error .... They declined to introspect and write". These are vital perspicacities, but one must accentuate that this refusal to look within was also characteristic of most British poets of the time. They, too, often ignored their own familiarity and consequently fashioned some very ordinary poems about indistinct topics, such as the tranquility of nature.Q.Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author toward categorization as a technique in literary history?a)Eagerb)Apatheticc)Cautiousd)Scathinge)CondescendingCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.