OA RC 02 NOV 09

1-3

Though the passage mentions a few political events and cultural aspects of Mesopotamia and its surrounding areas, the focus is on the

linguistic aspect: the 'story opens' with the mention of 'two cultures with the skill of writing' and ends with the introduction of alphabetic

writing by the Aramaeans. So [2] is incorrect. [1], which focuses only on Sumer, with the exclusion of all the other places mentioned in the

passage, is also incorrect. The timeframe mentioned in [4] is too narrow: the passage begins with the thirty-first BC and ends in the eighth

century BC, i.e. the fourth to first millennia BC. [3] best states the topic of the passage, and correctly identifies the location and timeframe.

Hence, [3].

2 -4

According to the second paragraph, the Sumerians reclaimed their independence 'spearheaded by the city of Ur', so it can be inferred

that Ur was a part of Sumer. As stated in the last sentence of the first paragraph, Eblaite was a Semitic language, and therefore Sumerian

cuneiform was a poor fit for it. So the implication is that Sumerian was not a Semitic language. [3] can be inferred from the second paragraph, especially the sentence 'Politically, the boot was on the other foot'. Only [4] cannot be inferred: according to paragraph 3,

Akkadian was used as a diplomatic language in the second millennium BC, not Sumerian. Hence, [4].

3 -2 

According to the first paragraph, Sumer was called the 'land of Shin'ar' in the Bible, so the pair in [1] is connected. According to paragraph

4, the Aramaeans came from northern Syria, so [3] is a correct pairing. We can infer from the second paragraph that Sargon was the king

of the Akkadians, so [4] is also a correct pairing. Only the pair in [2] is not connected in any way: according to the first paragraph, Elamite

was one of the three official media of the Persian empire, but Eblaite had no connection with the latter. Hence, [2].

4 -3

Option [1] is definitely true, as can be inferred from the inscription of the Assyrian ruler Tiglath Pileser I, mentioned in paragraph 4. As

stated in the last paragraph, alphabetic writing was the invention of the Phoenicians, so [2] is true. According to the first paragraph, the

Elamite language script died out around 2400 BC, while the language lasted till the late first millennium, so [4] is definitely false. However,

[3] cannot be inferred to be either true or false: the example of Akkadian in the third paragraph suggests that cultural prestige played an

important role in its spread; but in the last paragraph, it is stated that the spread of the language of the Aramaeans was not a culture-led

expansion. Hence, [3].