The new systematic nomenclature was so (i)____ that many chemists preferred to (ii)____ the older trivial names that were at least shorter. At least, that is the ostensible reason. Actually, tradition seems to carry more weight than (iii)____ with some scientists.
Blank (i)
A. succinct
B. cumbersome
C. irrational
Blank (ii)
D. revert to
E. adopt
F. suspend
Blank (iii)
G. chronology
H. longevity
I. system
Is the bold sentence ok? I also cant workout the way “full stop” used in the above bold part. Could someone please help me?
The new systematic nomenclature was so (i)_ cumbersome = difficult to use that many chemists preferred to (ii)_revert/return to the older trivial names that were at least shorter. At least, that is the ostensible reason. [appearing to be true, or stated by someone to be true, but possibly false] Actually, tradition seems to carry more weight than (iii)system with some scientists.
Old habits die hard…
As you can see, the sentence in the bold is OK. So is the full stop, the next sentence revealing the real reason behind their reluctance to use new system.
You mean you can’t accept the passage as a whole?
Nomenclature was so difficult to use that chemists returned to older, shorter names. (That was the reason they put forward, but not true really). [Then the author makes a statement that it’s much easier for some scientists to keep to tradition than accept new methods/systems, etc.–which is actually true]
Better the devil you km\now than the devil you don’t…
The new systematic nomenclature was so (i)____ that many chemists preferred to (ii)____ the older trivial names that were at least shorter. At least, [size=150]that[/size] is the ostensible reason. Actually, tradition seems to carry more weight than (iii)____ with some scientists.
sorry I should have indicated. I am talking about the bold “that”.
“At least, that is the ostensible reason.” --At least, that (=the fact that “the new systematic nomenclature was so cubersome”) they put forward as the (ostensible/false) reason why they are against new system.
I believe you can describe it as “any scheme of classification or arrangement (a chronological system for instance), a method of organizing or doing things”.
In the text we’re dealing with an attempt to introduce new classification/system in chemistry in order to make it understandable for any scientist. (It didn’t reveal which century was meant; there were several attempts to create a unified classification in chemistry.)
Of course, not everyone was happy to accept that new system, with new names, principles etc. preferring to stick to old rules…
Correct fill in:
The new systematic nomenclature was so cumbersome that many chemists [color=red]preferred torevert to the older trivial names that were at least shorter. At least, that is the ostensible reason. Actually, tradition seems to carry more weight than system with some scientists.
Wrong fill in:
The new systematic nomenclature was so cumbersome that many chemists [color=red]preferred toadopt the older trivial names that were at least shorter. At least, that is the ostensible reason. Actually, tradition seems to carry more weight than system with some scientists.
I feel uneasy with “preferred to revert to”. Back to back use of “to” makes me uneasy. Could someone please help me to remove my uneasiness?
“adopt” doesn’t fit there. Could someone please write me why?