ACT Exam  >  ACT Questions  >  Adapted from “A Defense of Slang”... Start Learning for Free
Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” in The Romance of the Commonplace by Gelett Burgess (1902)
Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.
The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.
Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to __________.
  • a)
    honor an accomplishment
  • b)
    refute an argument
  • c)
    explain a situation
  • d)
    establish an argument
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Com...
When approaching questions that ask you to identify the author’s primary purpose, it is important to consider the passage as a whole. There are two useful ways in which this problem could be solved if you did not immediately know the answer. The first is to identify a thesis or topic sentence. In this passage, the topic is laid out in the first two sentences. The author states that had Shakespeare found himself in contemporary Chicago, he would recognize a nation of poets using slang in creative and useful ways. This topic should lead you to believe that this passage is establishing an argument. The second way to solve a “primary purpose” question is to look for key words that provide clues as to the author’s direction. In this passage, the author uses the word “surely” to begin a point and “should” to convey a perceived truth. This is argumentative but affirmative language. If, for example, the passage featured heavy usage of words such as “however” or “nonetheless” it would be more likely that the primary purpose was the refutation of an argument.
Explore Courses for ACT exam

Similar ACT Doubts

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageHUMANITIES: This passage is adapted from The Nature of Goodness by George Herbert Palmer ©1903My reader may well feel that goodness is alreadythe most familiar of all the thoughts we employ, and yethe may at the same time suspect that there is somethingabout it perplexingly remote. Familiar it certainly is. It(5) attends all our wishes, acts, and projects as nothingelse does, so that no estimate of its influence can beexcessive. When we take a walk, read a book, pick outa dress, visit a friend, attend a concert, cast a vote, enterinto business, we always do it in the hope of attaining(10) something good. Since they are so frequently encoun-tering goodness, both laymen and scholars are apt toassume that it is altogether clear and requires no expla-nation. But the very reverse is the truth. Familiarityobscures. It breeds instincts and not understanding. So(15) woven has goodness become with the very web of lifethat it is hard to disentangle.Consequently, we employ the word or somesynonym of it during pretty much every waking hour ofour lives. Wishing some test of this frequency I turned(20) to Shakespeare, and found that he uses the word “good”fifteen hundred times, and its derivatives “goodness,”“better,” and “best,” about as many more. He couldnot make men and women talk right without incessantreference to this concept.(25) How then do we employ the word “good”? I donot ask how we ought to employ it, but how we actuallydo. For the present, we shall be engaged in a psycho-logical inquiry, not an ethical one. We need to get atthe plain facts of usage. I will therefore ask each reader(30) to look into his own mind, see on what occasions heuses the word, and decide what meaning he attaches toit. Taking up a few of the simplest possible examples,we will through them inquire when and why we callthings good.(35) Here is a knife. When is it a good knife? Why,a knife is made for something, for cutting. Wheneverthe knife slides evenly through a piece of wood, andwith a minimum of effort on the part of him who steersit, when there is no disposition of its edge to bend or(40) break, but only to do its appointed work effectively,then we know that a good knife is at work. Or, lookingat the matter from another point of view, whenever thehandle of the knife neatly fits the hand, following itslines and presenting no obstruction, we may say that(40) in these respects also the knife is a good knife. That is,the knife becomes good through adaptation to its work,an adaptation realized in its cutting of the wood and inits conformity to the hand. Its goodness always hasreference to something outside itself, and is measured(50) by its performance of an external task.Or take something not so palpable. What gloriousweather! When we woke this morning, drew aside ourcurtains and looked out, we said “It is a good day!”And of what qualities of the day were we thinking? We(55) meant, I suppose, that the day was well fitted to itsvarious purposes. Intending to go to our office, we sawthere was nothing to hinder our doing so. We knew thatthe streets would be clear, people in an amiable mood,business and social duties would move forward easily.(60) In fact, whatever our plans, in calling the day a goodday we meant to speak of it as excellently adapted tosomething outside itself.A usage more curious still occurs in the nursery.There when the question is asked, “Has the baby(65) been good?” one discovers by degrees that the anx-ious mother wishes to know if it has been crying orquiet. This elementary life has as yet not acquiredpositive standards of measurement. It must be reckonedin negative terms, a failure to disturb.(70) This signification of goodness is lucidly put in theremark of Shakespeare’s Portia, “Nothing I see is goodwithout respect.” We must have some respect or end inmind in reference to which the goodness is compared.Good always means good “for.” That little preposition(75) cannot be absent from our minds, though it need notaudibly be uttered. The knife is good for cutting and theday for business. Omit the “for,” and goodness ceases.To be bad or good implies external reference. To begood means to be an efficient means; and the end to(80) be furthered must be already in mind before the wordgood is spoken.In short, whenever we inspect the usage of theword good, we always find behind it an implication ofsome end to be reached. Good is a relative term. The(85) good is the useful, and it must be useful for something.Silent or spoken, it is the mental reference to some-thing else which puts all meaning into it. So Hamletsays, “There’s nothing either good or bad, but thinkingmakes it so.” No new quality is added to an object or(90) act when it becomes good.Q.According to the passage, why does the author concern himself with Shakespeare’s usage of the word good?

Adapted from “Advice to Youth” by Mark Twain(1882)Being told I would be expected to talk here, I inquired what sort of talk I ought to make. They said it should be something suitable to youth--something didactic, instructive, or something in the nature of good advice. Very well. I have a few things in my mind which I have often longed to say for the instruction of the young; for it is in one’s tender early years that such things will best take root and be most enduring and most valuable. First, then I will say to you my young friends--and I say it beseechingly, urgently-- Always obey your parents, when they are present. This is the best policy in the long run, because if you don’t, they will make you. Most parents think they know better than you do, and you can generally make more by humoring that superstition than you can by acting on your own better judgment.Be respectful to your superiors, if you have any, also to strangers, and sometimes to others. If a person offends you and you are in doubt as to whether it was intentional or not, do not resort to extreme measures; simply watch your chance and hit him with a brick. That will be sufficient. If you shall find that he had not intended any offense, come out frankly and confess yourself in the wrong when you struck him; acknowledge it like a man and say you didn’t mean to.Go to bed early, get up early--this is wise. Some authorities say get up with the sun; some say get up with one thing, others with another. But a lark is really the best thing to get up with. It gives you a splendid reputation with everybody to know that you get up with the lark; and if you get the right kind of lark, and work at him right, you can easily train him to get up at half past nine, every time--it’s no trick at all.Now as to the matter of lying. You want to be very careful about lying; otherwise you are nearly sure to get caught. Once caught, you can never again be in the eyes to the good and the pure, what you were before. Many a young person has injured himself permanently through a single clumsy and ill finished lie, the result of carelessness born of incomplete training. Some authorities hold that the young ought not to lie at all. That of course, is putting it rather stronger than necessary; still while I cannot go quite so far as that, I do maintain, and I believe I am right, that the young ought to be temperate in the use of this great art until practice and experience shall give them that confidence, elegance, and precision which alone can make the accomplishment graceful and profitable. Patience, diligence, painstaking attention to detail--these are requirements; these in time, will make the student perfect; upon these only, may he rely as the sure foundation for future eminence.But I have said enough. I hope you will treasure up the instructions which I have given you, and make them a guide to your feet and a light to your understanding. Build your character thoughtfully and painstakingly upon these precepts, and by and by, when you have got it built, you will be surprised and gratified to see how nicely and sharply it resembles everybody else’s.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.

Adapted from"Why a Classic is a Classic" inLiterary Taste: How to Form Itby Arnold Bennet(1909)The large majority of our fellow-citizens care as much about literature as they care about airplanes or the policies of the Legislature. They do not ignore it; they are not quite indifferent to it. But their interest in it is faint and perfunctory; or, if their interest happens to be violent, it is spasmodic. Ask the two hundred thousand persons whose enthusiasm made the vogue of a popular novel ten years ago what they think of that novel now, and you will gather that they have utterly forgotten it, and that they would no more dream of reading it again than of reading Bishop StubbssSelect Charters. Probably if they did read it again they would not enjoy it—not because the said novel is worse now than it was ten years ago; not because their taste has improved—but because they have not had sufficient practice to be able to rely on their taste as a means of permanent pleasure. They simply dont know from one day to the next what will please them.In the face of this one may ask: Why does the great and universal fame of classical authors continue? The answer is that the fame of classical authors is entirely independent of the majority. Do you suppose that if the fame of Shakespeare depended on the man in the street it would survive a fortnight? The fame of classical authors is originally made, and it is maintained, by a passionate few. Even when a first-class author has enjoyed immense success during his lifetime, the majority have never appreciated him as sincerely as they have appreciated second-rate men. He has always been reinforced by the ardor of the passionate few. And in the case of an author who has emerged into glory after his death the happy sequel has been due solely to the obstinate perseverance of the few. They could not leave him alone; they would not. They kept on savoring him, and talking about him, and buying him, and they generally behaved with such eager zeal, and they were so authoritative and sure of themselves, that at last the majority grew accustomed to the sound of his name and placidly agreed to the proposition that he was a genius; the majority really did not care very much either way.And it is by the passionate few that the renown of genius is kept alive from one generation to another. These few are always at work. They are always rediscovering genius. Their curiosity and enthusiasm are exhaustless, so that there is little chance of genius being ignored. And, moreover, they are always working either for or against the verdicts of the majority. The majority can make a reputation, but it is too careless to maintain it. If, by accident, the passionate few agree with the majority in a particular instance, they will frequently remind the majority that such and such a reputation has been made, and the majority will idly concur: "Ah, yes. By the way, we must not forget that such and such a reputation exists." Without that persistent memory-jogging the reputation would quickly fall into the oblivion which is death. The passionate few only have their way by reason of the fact that they are genuinely interested in literature, that literature matters to them. They conquer by their obstinacy alone, by their eternal repetition of the same statements. Do you suppose they could prove to the man in the street that Shakespeare was a great artist? The said man would not even understand the terms they employed. But when he is told ten thousand times, and generation after generation, that Shakespeare was a great artist, the said man believes--not by reason, but by faith. And he too repeats that Shakespeare was a great artist, and he buys the complete works of Shakespeare and puts them on his shelves, and he goes to see the marvelous stage-effects which accompanyKing LearorHamlet, and comes back religiously convinced that Shakespeare was a great artist. All because the passionate few could not keep their admiration of Shakespeare to themselves. This is not cynicism; but truth. And it is important that those who wish to form their literary taste should grasp it.Q. Why does the author believe the majority can be convinced of Shakespeare’s genius?

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageNATURAL SCIENCE: A Short History of HomeopathyHomeopathy is a system for treating physical dis-ease and other ailments using the theory of treating“like with like.” In practice, homeopathic medicineseeks substances that mimic an ailment’s symptoms;(5) this sameness is considered “likeness.” The substanceis then diluted to infinitesimal amounts and admin-istered to the patient in order to cure the problem.Homeopathic treatment is currently in use for every-thing from cancer to colds and flu, though many(10) scientists remain heavily skeptical about its efficacy.Homeopathy was developed in the late 18thcentury by the German medical doctor SamuelHahnemann. Despite being a physician himself,Hahnemann was deeply skeptical of the medical prac-(15) tices of his time. In general, 18th century medicinewas founded on the theory of the four temperaments,or “humors”: Choleric, Melancholic, Sanguine, andPhlegmatic. These temperaments were based on thevarious possible combinations of hot and cold and wet(20) and dry. A choleric, or angry, disposition meant thata person had a constitution that was essentially hotand dry. Phlegmatic, or unemotional, persons werethought to be cold and wet. Melancholy was caused byan excess of cold and dry, whereas Sanguine, or(25) passionate, persons were hot and wet.Humors theory was first developed by theGreek physician Hippocrates, the founder of westernmedicine, and later expanded upon by Galen. When aperson became ill, doctors believed it was because one(30) or more of the humors had come out of balance. Someof the best treatments were thought to be bloodlettingand purgation —the assumption being that these treat-ments would effectively drain off the excess humors.Other popular treatments included blistering plasters(35) and emetics. Often the treatment proved worse thanthe disease. Many patients died from excessive blood-loss or were poisoned by unregulated medications. Inthis environment, Hahnemann’s skepticism was wellwarranted.(40) Hahnemann first stumbled upon his theory whenhe was investigating a common treatment for malaria,cinchona bark. Modern scientists now know thatcinchona bark contains quinine—a substance still usedto treat malaria—but at the time, no one knew why(45) the bark was effective. Hahnemann chose to imple-ment the concept of treating “like with like” by testingan undiluted dose of the bark on himself. Finding thathe had symptoms similar to those of malaria sufferers,Hahnemann concluded that effective drugs must pro-(50) duce symptoms in healthy people that are similar tothose produced by the diseases that the drugs wouldbe expected to treat. Hahnemann further hypothesizedthat, while undiluted substances would only worsensymptoms in the sick, heavily diluted substances could(55) be effective for a cure. The doctor and his colleaguesthen proceeded to test a variety of substances to seewhat symptoms they induced, in the hopes of find-ing cures for diseases with similar symptoms. Perhapsnot surprisingly, Hahnemann’s new field of homeopa-(60) thy (i.e. “similar suffering”) was met with considerableresistance from doctors comfortable with their usualpractices.In fact, Hahnemann’s methodology for scien-tifically testing potential treatments was remarkably(65) modern. Nevertheless, his conclusions remain extraor-dinarily controversial. One of the main points ofcontention involves the standard homeopathic prac-tice of heavy dilution to create the appropriate doseof a substance. Dilution of homeopathic substances(70) happens in stages. Hahnemann had hypothesized thatshaking the solution after each dilution would imprintthe molecular “memory” of the original substance intothe solution, which would allow the diluted dose to beeffective without the possibility of overdose or adverse(75) side effects.Modern scientists have been unable to find anyevidence to support the theory of molecular memory. Infact, the idea that diluting a substance makes it strongerruns against the principles of chemistry and physics.(80) Moreover, scientists point to a lack of standardizedclinical data on homeopathic treatment. Clinical studiesthat do show effectiveness indicate that homeopathiccure rates are generally equal to those of placebos.Today, many conventional medical practitioners(85) generally disregard homeopathy. Homeopathic prac-titioners are frequently termed quacks by conven-tional scientists. Nevertheless, homeopathy remainsextremely popular both in the United States and abroad.In European countries such as France and England,(90) conventional doctors frequently prescribe homeopathictreatments for common illnesses such as colds and flu.Pharmacists who are trained to answer questions aboutthe homeopathic treatments’ use and desired effectsthen fill the prescriptions.Q.According to the passage, why did Hahnemann use heavily diluted substances to treat patients?

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageNATURAL SCIENCE: A Short History of HomeopathyHomeopathy is a system for treating physical dis-ease and other ailments using the theory of treating“like with like.” In practice, homeopathic medicineseeks substances that mimic an ailment’s symptoms;(5) this sameness is considered “likeness.” The substanceis then diluted to infinitesimal amounts and admin-istered to the patient in order to cure the problem.Homeopathic treatment is currently in use for every-thing from cancer to colds and flu, though many(10) scientists remain heavily skeptical about its efficacy.Homeopathy was developed in the late 18thcentury by the German medical doctor SamuelHahnemann. Despite being a physician himself,Hahnemann was deeply skeptical of the medical prac-(15) tices of his time. In general, 18th century medicinewas founded on the theory of the four temperaments,or “humors”: Choleric, Melancholic, Sanguine, andPhlegmatic. These temperaments were based on thevarious possible combinations of hot and cold and wet(20) and dry. A choleric, or angry, disposition meant thata person had a constitution that was essentially hotand dry. Phlegmatic, or unemotional, persons werethought to be cold and wet. Melancholy was caused byan excess of cold and dry, whereas Sanguine, or(25) passionate, persons were hot and wet.Humors theory was first developed by theGreek physician Hippocrates, the founder of westernmedicine, and later expanded upon by Galen. When aperson became ill, doctors believed it was because one(30) or more of the humors had come out of balance. Someof the best treatments were thought to be bloodlettingand purgation —the assumption being that these treat-ments would effectively drain off the excess humors.Other popular treatments included blistering plasters(35) and emetics. Often the treatment proved worse thanthe disease. Many patients died from excessive blood-loss or were poisoned by unregulated medications. Inthis environment, Hahnemann’s skepticism was wellwarranted.(40) Hahnemann first stumbled upon his theory whenhe was investigating a common treatment for malaria,cinchona bark. Modern scientists now know thatcinchona bark contains quinine—a substance still usedto treat malaria—but at the time, no one knew why(45) the bark was effective. Hahnemann chose to imple-ment the concept of treating “like with like” by testingan undiluted dose of the bark on himself. Finding thathe had symptoms similar to those of malaria sufferers,Hahnemann concluded that effective drugs must pro-(50) duce symptoms in healthy people that are similar tothose produced by the diseases that the drugs wouldbe expected to treat. Hahnemann further hypothesizedthat, while undiluted substances would only worsensymptoms in the sick, heavily diluted substances could(55) be effective for a cure. The doctor and his colleaguesthen proceeded to test a variety of substances to seewhat symptoms they induced, in the hopes of find-ing cures for diseases with similar symptoms. Perhapsnot surprisingly, Hahnemann’s new field of homeopa-(60) thy (i.e. “similar suffering”) was met with considerableresistance from doctors comfortable with their usualpractices.In fact, Hahnemann’s methodology for scien-tifically testing potential treatments was remarkably(65) modern. Nevertheless, his conclusions remain extraor-dinarily controversial. One of the main points ofcontention involves the standard homeopathic prac-tice of heavy dilution to create the appropriate doseof a substance. Dilution of homeopathic substances(70) happens in stages. Hahnemann had hypothesized thatshaking the solution after each dilution would imprintthe molecular “memory” of the original substance intothe solution, which would allow the diluted dose to beeffective without the possibility of overdose or adverse(75) side effects.Modern scientists have been unable to find anyevidence to support the theory of molecular memory. Infact, the idea that diluting a substance makes it strongerruns against the principles of chemistry and physics.(80) Moreover, scientists point to a lack of standardizedclinical data on homeopathic treatment. Clinical studiesthat do show effectiveness indicate that homeopathiccure rates are generally equal to those of placebos.Today, many conventional medical practitioners(85) generally disregard homeopathy. Homeopathic prac-titioners are frequently termed quacks by conven-tional scientists. Nevertheless, homeopathy remainsextremely popular both in the United States and abroad.In European countries such as France and England,(90) conventional doctors frequently prescribe homeopathictreatments for common illnesses such as colds and flu.Pharmacists who are trained to answer questions aboutthe homeopathic treatments’ use and desired effectsthen fill the prescriptions.Q.Information in the last paragraph indicates that

Top Courses for ACT

Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for ACT 2025 is part of ACT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the ACT exam syllabus. Information about Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for ACT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for ACT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for ACT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Adapted from “A Defense of Slang” inThe Romance of the Commonplaceby Gelett Burgess(1902)Could Shakespeare come to Chicago and listen curiously to "the man in the street," he would find himself more at home than in London. In the mouths of messenger boys and clerks he would find the English language used with all the freedom of unexpected metaphor and the plastic, suggestive diction that was the privilege of the Elizabethan dramatists; he would say, no doubt, that he had found a nation of poets. There was hardly any such thing as slang in his day, for no graphic trope was too virile or uncommon for acceptance, if its meaning were patent. His own heroes often spoke what corresponds to the slang of today.The word, indeed, needs precise definition, before we condemn all unconventional talk with vigor. Slang has been called "poetry in the rough," and it is not all coarse or vulgar. There is a prosaic as well as a poetic license. The man in the street calls a charming girl, for instance, a "daisy." Surely this is not inelegant, and such a reference will be understood a century from now. Slang, to prove adjuvant to our speech, which is growing more and more rigid and conventional, should be terse; it should make for force and clarity, without any sacrifice of beauty.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to__________.a)honor an accomplishmentb)refute an argumentc)explain a situationd)establish an argumentCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice ACT tests.
Explore Courses for ACT exam

Top Courses for ACT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev