SAT Practice Test – Section 9

Each sentence below has one or two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Beneath the sentence are five words or sets of words labeled A through E.

Choose the word or set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Example:

Hoping to ____ the dispute, negotiators proposed a compromise that they felt would be ___ to both labor and management.

(A) enforce . . useful

(B) end . . divisive

(C) overcome . . unattractive

(D) extend . . satisfactory

(E) resolve . . acceptable

Answer: E

 

1. The writer came to be labeled ____ because she isolated herself in her apartment, shunning outside contact.

Each sentence below has one or two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Beneath the sentence are five words or sets of words labeled A through E.

Choose the word or set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Example:

Hoping to ____ the dispute, negotiators proposed a compromise that they felt would be ___ to both labor and management.

(A) enforce . . useful

(B) end . . divisive

(C) overcome . . unattractive

(D) extend . . satisfactory

(E) resolve . . acceptable

Answer: E

 

2. Some Tibetan nomads used yak butter as a ______, one that often took the place of money in commercial transactions.

Each sentence below has one or two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Beneath the sentence are five words or sets of words labeled A through E.

Choose the word or set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Example:

Hoping to ____ the dispute, negotiators proposed a compromise that they felt would be ___ to both labor and management.

(A) enforce . . useful

(B) end . . divisive

(C) overcome . . unattractive

(D) extend . . satisfactory

(E) resolve . . acceptable

Answer: E

 

3. Geysers vary widely: some may discharge _____, whereas others may have only a brief explosive eruption and then remain ____ for hours or days.

Each sentence below has one or two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Beneath the sentence are five words or sets of words labeled A through E.

Choose the word or set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Example:

Hoping to ____ the dispute, negotiators proposed a compromise that they felt would be ___ to both labor and management.

(A) enforce . . useful

(B) end . . divisive

(C) overcome . . unattractive

(D) extend . . satisfactory

(E) resolve . . acceptable

Answer: E

 

4. Although the administration repeatedly threatened to use its authority in order to _____ the student protestors into submission, they refused to be intimidated.

Each sentence below has one or two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Beneath the sentence are five words or sets of words labeled A through E.

Choose the word or set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Example:

Hoping to ____ the dispute, negotiators proposed a compromise that they felt would be ___ to both labor and management.

(A) enforce . . useful

(B) end . . divisive

(C) overcome . . unattractive

(D) extend . . satisfactory

(E) resolve . . acceptable

Answer: E

 

5. Only after the campaign volunteers became aware of their candidate’s questionable motives could they recognize the _____ statements made in his seemingly _____ speeches.

Each sentence below has one or two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Beneath the sentence are five words or sets of words labeled A through E.

Choose the word or set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Example:

Hoping to ____ the dispute, negotiators proposed a compromise that they felt would be ___ to both labor and management.

(A) enforce . . useful

(B) end . . divisive

(C) overcome . . unattractive

(D) extend . . satisfactory

(E) resolve . . acceptable

Answer: E

 

6. No longer narrowly preoccupied with their own national pasts, historians are increasingly _____ in that they often take a transnational perspective.

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

7. The primary purpose of the first three paragraphs (lines 1-38) is to

 Read the passage below and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

8. The author of the passage uses the quotation in lines 5-6 primarily as a

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

9. By presenting both versions of the grandfather’s words (lines 9-10 and lines 15-16), the author primarily conveys the

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

10. The comparisons in lines 26-27 serve primarily to

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

11. In lines 29-34 (“a kind . . . follow”), the author uses the idea of a dance to

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

12. In line 34, “follow” most nearly means

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

13. In lines 39-62, the author reveals herself to be someone who believes that

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

14. Lines 39-70 present the author’s argument primarily by

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

15. The author’s explanation in the fourth paragraph suggests that the “self-oriented method” (line 45) rests on the assumption that

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

16. Which statement best captures the author’s point in lines 54-56 (“Most characters . . . students”) ?

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

17. In line 60, the phrase “home of the character” most nearly means

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

18. In lines 63-64, “psychological reality” describes which quality?

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

 

In the introduction to one of her dramas, a well-known playwright and actor discusses some of her ideas about acting.

 

Words have always held a particular power for me.

I remember leafing through a book of Native American

poems one morning while I was waiting for my Shakespeare

class to begin and being struck by a phrase from the preface,

“The word, the word above all, is truly magical, not only by                                    5

its meaning, but by its artful manipulation.”

This quote, which I added to my journal, reminded

me of something my grandfather had told me when I was

a girl: “If you say a word often enough it becomes your

own.” I added that phrase to my journal next to the quote                                     10

about the magic of words. When I traveled home to

Baltimore for my grandfather’s funeral a year after my

journal entry, I mentioned my grandfather’s words to my

father. He corrected me. He told me that my grandfather

had actually said, “If you say a word often enough, it                                               15

becomes you.” I was still a student at the time, but I knew

even then, even before I had made a conscious decision to

teach as well as act, that my grandfather’s words would be

important.

Actors are very impressionable people, or some would                                          20

say, suggestible people. We are trained to develop aspects

of our memories that are more emotional and sensory than

intellectual. The general public often wonders how actors

remember their lines. What’s more remarkable to me is

how actors remember, recall, and reiterate feelings and                                        25

sensations. The body has a memory just as the mind does.

The heart has a memory, just as the mind does. The act of

speech is a physical act. It is powerful enough that it can

create, with the rest of the body, a kind of cooperative

dance. That dance is a sketch of something that is inside a                                    30

person, and not fully revealed by the words alone. I came

to realize that if I were able to record part of the dance—

that is, the spoken part—and reenact it, the rest of the

body would follow. I could then create the illusion of being

another person by reenacting something she had said as she                                 35

had said it. My grandfather’s idea led me to consider that

the reenactment, or the reiteration, of a person’s words

would also teach me about that person.

I had been trained in the tradition of acting called

“psychological realism.” A basic tenet of psychological                                            40

realism is that characters live inside of you and that you

create a lifelike portrayal of the character through a process

of realizing your own similarity to the character. When I

later became a teacher of acting, I began to become more

and more troubled by the self-oriented method. I began to                                     45

look for ways to engage my students in putting themselves

in other people’s shoes. This went against the grain of the

psychological realism tradition, which was to get the char-

acter to walk in the actor’s shoes. It became less and less

interesting intellectually to bring the dramatic literature of                                     50

the world into a classroom of people in their late teens and

twenties, and to explore it within the framework of their

real lives. Aesthetically it seemed limited, because most

of the time the characters all sounded the same. Most char-

acters spoke somewhere inside the rhythmic range of the                                        55

students. More troubling was that this method left an

important bridge out of acting. The spirit of acting is the

travel from the self to the other. This “self-based” method

seemed to come to a spiritual halt. It saw the self as the

ultimate home of the character. To me, the search for char-                                     60

acter is constantly in motion. It is a quest that moves back

and forth between the self and the other.

I needed evidence that you could find a character’s psy-

chological reality by “inhabiting” that character’s words. I

needed evidence of the limitations of basing a character on                                       65

a series of metaphors from an actor’s real life. I wanted to

develop an alternative to the self-based technique, a tech-

nique that would begin with the other and come to the self,

a technique that would empower the other to find the actor

rather than the other way around.                                                                                     70

 

19. The “metaphors” in line 66 are best described as