Re: Sentence completion plz help!!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Liu Ju) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> 1. People of intelligence and achievement can nonetheless be so ------
> and lacking in ------ that they gamble their reputations by breaking
> the law to
>   further their own ends.
>   (A) devious...propensity
>   (B) culpable...prosperity
>   (C) obsequious...deference
>   (D) truculent... independence
> I don't understand the structure with "nonetheless" (=however)" in the
> middle of the sentence like the obove.
> Can you pleaze explain the meaning of the sentence and does
> "nonetheless" mean "however"?

Though I'm a native speaker, this question doesn't make any obvious
sense. Since this is the GRE, however, the test of it may be to pick
the only word-pair that don't imply a contradiction.

In picking answer D, you are accusing these people both of truculence
(being disposed to violence) AND of lacking independence. That sort
implies a contradiction - being truculent AND dependent.

In picking answer C, you are accusing these people both of being
obsequious (servile) AND of lacking deference. That's an outright
contradiction.

In picking answer A, you are accusing these people both of being
devious (dishonest) AND perhaps of lacking the propensity
(inclination) to be devious.

I'd personally pick B, since this answer says these people are so
culpable (already guilty of some misdeed) and lacking in prosperity
(means or money) that they would break the law to further their own
ends.

> 2A number of scientists have published articles ------- global
> warming, stating ------- that there is no solid scientific evidence to
> support the
> theory that the Earth is warming because of increases in greenhouse
> gases.
>   (A) debunking...categorically
>   (B) rejecting...paradoxically
>   (C) deploring...optimistically 
>   (D) dismissing...hesitantly
>   (E) proving...candidly
> 
> Thanks

I'm positive here that the answer is A.

To debunk usually means to disprove. Categorically in this sense means
"without exception".

A number of scientists have published articles DEBUNKING (disproving)
global warming, stating CATEGORICALLY (emphatically, and without
exception) that there is no solid scientific evidence to support the
theory that the Earth is warming because of increases in greenhouse
gases.

E would be a contradiction: The sentence would read that scientists
have proven global warming, only to candidly state that there is no
scientific evidence for it.

D wouldn't make much sense, either: In it, scientists dismiss the idea
of global warming (as being untrue) but only hesitantly claim that
there is no solid scientific evidence to support the existence of
global warming.

C doesn't make any sense at all: In this sentence, scientists deplore
(speak against and despise) global warming, then optimistically deny
its existence.

The same is true of B, which implies a contradiction: Scientists
REJECT the idea of global warming, only to PARADOXICALLY (implying
contradiction against their original point) reject evidence for global
warming.