This book wants to show the newcomer the lie of the land without confusing him with details. In writing it I thought first and foremost of readers in their teens. But I have never believed that books for young people should differ from books for adults except for the fact that they must reckon with the most exacting class of critics, critics who are quick to detect and resent any trace of pretentious jargon or bogus sentiment. I know from experience that these are the vices which may render people suspicious of all writings. I have striven to use plain language even at the risk of sounding casual or unprofessional. I hope that no reader will attribute my decision to ‘talk down’ to him. Apart from this decision, I have tried to follow a number of more specific self-imposed rules, such as limiting myself to real works of art and cutting out anything which might merely be interesting as a specimen of taste or fashion. This decision entailed a considerable sacrifice of literary effects. Praise is so much duller than criticism, and the inclusion of some amusing monstrosities might have offered some light relief. Thus, while I do not claim that all the works illustrated represent the highest standard of perfection, I did make an effort not to include anything which I considered to be without a peculiar merit of its own.
A second rule also demanded a little self-denial. I vowed to resist any temptation to be original in my selection, lest the well-known masterpieces be crowded out by my own personal favourites. This book, after all, is not intended merely as an anthology of beautiful things; it is meant for those who look for bearings in a new field, and for them the familiar appearance of apparently ‘hackneyed’ examples may serve as welcome landmarks.
One more rule I have followed. When in doubt I have always preferred to discuss a work which I had seen in the original rather than one I knew only from photographs. I should have liked to make this an absolute rule, but I did not want the reader to be penalized by the accidents of travel restrictions which sometimes dog the life of the art-lover.
E.H. Gombrich, The Story of Art
(Phaidon, New York - London 1995, p. 7-8 [adapted])
Based on text II, judge whether the following statements are right (C) or wrong (E).
Texto do item:
The excerpt “lest the well-known masterpieces be crowded out by my own personal favourites” (second sentence of the second paragraph) could be, maintaining the coherence and correctness of the original, correctly replaced with to avoid leaving the well-known masterpieces out to fill the book with my own personal favourites.
Participe das discussões abaixo gratuitatmente. Caso não tenha conta no ClippingCACD, basta criar uma conta gratuitamtente. Não é necessário assinar para participar.
Fez a prova? Junte-se ao ranking e confira o gabarito em https://depoisdaprova.com.br .
Let’s analyze both the original excerpt and the suggested replacement to determine if they maintain the same meaning and grammatical correctness.
Original Excerpt:
"I vowed to resist any temptation to be original in my selection, lest the well-known masterpieces be crowded out by my own personal favourites."
Suggested Replacement:
"I vowed to resist any temptation to be original in my selection, to avoid leaving the well-known masterpieces out to fill the book with my own personal favourites."
Explanation:
Meaning Preservation:
The author expresses a decision to avoid prioritizing his personal preferences over well-known masterpieces in his book. He wants to ensure that the classic, familiar works are included for readers who may be new to the subject.
The original phrase uses "lest," which means "for fear that" or "to avoid the risk of." The phrase "lest the well-known masterpieces be crowded out by my own personal favourites" indicates the potential negative outcome the author wishes to prevent.
The suggested replacement uses "to avoid," which also indicates the author’s intention to prevent a particular outcome: leaving out the well-known masterpieces in favor of his personal favorites.
Grammatical Correctness:
Both sentences are grammatically correct and maintain the original sentence structure.
The use of the infinitive "to avoid" parallels the purpose indicated by "lest" in the original.
Coherence and Context:
The replacement fits seamlessly into the context of the paragraph, where the author discusses self-imposed rules to guide his selection process.
The core idea—preventing the exclusion of renowned masterpieces due to personal bias—is preserved.
Conclusion:
The suggested replacement accurately conveys the same meaning as the original excerpt, maintaining both coherence with the surrounding text and grammatical correctness. It effectively communicates the author’s intent to include well-known masterpieces rather than filling the book exclusively with his personal favorites.
Comentário automático feito pela inteligência artificial do Clipping.ai apenas para referência. Comentários dos nossos professores virão a seguir.
I have checked this with chatgpt by addressing a number of issues and it states the other form at the end;
Based on the original text, the correct answer is wrong (E).
Here’s why:
Use of “lest”:
The word “lest” is used to express the author’s concern about preventing a negative outcome, specifically avoiding the well-known masterpieces being crowded out by personal favorites. The replacement phrase “to avoid leaving the well-known masterpieces out to fill the book with my own personal favourites” shifts this meaning. It suggests an active decision to avoid leaving out the masterpieces rather than the preventative intention that “lest” conveys.
Focus and Intent:
The original sentence expresses the author’s concern about the balance between masterpieces and personal favorites, where the author aims to prevent the well-known masterpieces from being overshadowed. The replacement changes the focus to actively ensuring inclusion, which subtly shifts the meaning and intent.
Structure and Coherence:
The suggested replacement does not fully maintain the same precise tone and meaning of the original, as it alters both the intent and the expression of risk.
Therefore, the suggested replacement does not maintain the original meaning and coherence, making the statement wrong (E).
The author vows to resist temptation, LEST for his favourite masterpieces. He does NOT mean to avoid, but EXCEPT for his favourite pieces! These are actually two different concepts: to avoid means to refrain from; to except means allow under conditions; thus, this candidate appeals to change the corresponding key regarding this alternative to FALSE.