Question 132·Hard·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1 Like academic articles, the essayist’s pieces teem with footnotes, parenthetical citations, and jargon meant to signal precision. Given other echoes of scholarly writing in his prose—qualified claims, lists of sources—the notes and their tone appear to mimic the scholarly voice. They interrupt the main argument so insistently that the essays often read less as reflections than as send-ups of the academy. Thus, the footnotes indicate that the essayist’s project is essentially a parody of academic prose.
Text 2 Although the footnotes recall scholarly conventions, their function in the essays differs from that of academic citation. Like those of many contemporary essayists, the notes slow the argument to make uncertainty visible, invite digression, and cultivate a conversational intimacy with readers. This technique destabilizes linear exposition rather than merely mocking academia. The footnotes, then, participate in a broader essayistic strategy and cannot be explained solely as parody.
Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely characterize the underlined claim in Text 1?
For cross-text connection questions, first isolate the key claim or attitude in the referenced part of Text 1, then summarize in your own words how Text 2 discusses the same feature, person, or idea. Ask, “Does Text 2 agree, partly agree, or disagree, and for what reason?” Before looking at the choices, form a brief prediction of how Text 2 would respond. Then, choose the option that best matches your prediction and is directly supported by specific phrases in Text 2, eliminating any answer that introduces new ideas not in the texts or exaggerates what Text 2 actually says.
Hints
Clarify Text 1’s claim
Reread the underlined sentence in Text 1. What does it say the footnotes show about the overall purpose of the essayist’s project?
Pin down Text 2’s main idea
In Text 2, look for phrases that explain what the footnotes do in the essays (their function) and what they contribute to the reading experience.
Compare the two perspectives
Ask yourself: Does Text 2 agree that parody is the main or only point of the footnotes, or does it say something more complex about their role?
Eliminate mismatches in the choices
Check each answer choice against Text 2. Cross out any option that contradicts what Text 2 explicitly says about scholarly conventions and the footnotes’ function.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify the key claim in Text 1
Focus on the underlined sentence in Text 1: “the footnotes indicate that the essayist’s project is essentially a parody of academic prose.”
This means the Text 1 author thinks the main point of the footnotes is to mock academic writing and that the overall project is basically a parody of academic prose.
Determine how Text 2 describes the footnotes
Now look closely at what Text 2 says the footnotes do:
- their function “differs from that of academic citation”
- they “slow the argument to make uncertainty visible, invite digression, and cultivate a conversational intimacy with readers”
- the technique “destabilizes linear exposition rather than merely mocking academia”
- they “cannot be explained solely as parody”
So Text 2 acknowledges the notes recall scholarly conventions, but insists their main role is part of a broader essayistic practice—not just parody.
Infer how Text 2 would respond to Text 1’s claim
Compare the two views:
- Text 1: the footnotes show the project is essentially parody.
- Text 2: the footnotes cannot be explained solely as parody and are used to reveal uncertainty, invite digression, and create intimacy.
So Text 2 would view Text 1’s claim as reducing the footnotes to mere parody and missing their broader purpose.
Match that response to the best answer choice
The correct option must say that Text 1 (1) treats the academic-looking devices as only parody and (2) overlooks that they function as part of a broader essayistic strategy (disrupting linear exposition and building intimacy).
The first choice states exactly this, so it is the correct answer.