Transcript:
Result:
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Option 4: "Classical music should not be called songs because we should aim to be more sophisticated when referring to them."
Explanation: This option accurately reflects the main idea of the text, which argues for a more sophisticated terminology when discussing classical music. The author explicitly states the desire to avoid simplistic terms like 'songs' in favor of more appropriate descriptors, aligning perfectly with the text's thesis.
Option 1: "Classical music like that of Beethoven and Mozart should be called songs because that is the terminology that is used on iTunes."
Explanation: This option incorrectly suggests that classical music should be called songs based solely on terminology used on iTunes. The text emphasizes the importance of sophistication in terminology rather than conforming to casual labels like 'songs.' Therefore, it misrepresents the author's argument.
Option 2: "Classical music at iTunes should be called songs but only if they have lyrics; opera for example, can be called songs."
Explanation: This option introduces a condition about lyrics that is not supported by the text. The author discusses the distinction between instrumental music and songs but does not state that classical music should be labeled as songs only if they have lyrics. This misinterpretation leads to an incorrect summary.
Option 3: "Classical music should not be called songs because eighty percent is purely instrumental."
Explanation: While this option correctly identifies that a significant portion of classical music is instrumental, it fails to capture the author's main point about the need for a more sophisticated terminology. The text emphasizes sophistication over the mere fact of instrumental music, making this option incomplete.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation