The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
To defend the sequence of alphabetisation may seem bizarre, so obvious is its application that it is hard to imagine a reference, catalogue or listing without it. But alphabetical order was not an immediate consequence of the alphabet itself. In the Middle Ages, deference for ecclesiastical tradition left scholars reluctant to categorise things according to the alphabet - to do so would be a rejection of the divine order. The rediscovery of the ancient Greek and Roman classics necessitated more efficient ways of ordering, searching and referencing texts. Government bureaucracy in the 16th and 17th centuries quickened the advance of alphabetical order, bringing with it pigeonholes, notebooks and card indexes.
Started 2 months ago by Shashank in
Explanatory Answer
According to the given paragraph, alphabetical order was not an immediate consequence of the alphabet itself. Religious beliefs led to the rejection of alphabetical order in the Middle Ages and it was only with the need for more efficient ways of ordering and referencing texts as well as the need to deal with government bureaucracy in the 16th and 17th centuries that alphabetical order became popular. Option B captures all key ideas and summarizes the paragraph well.
Option A says that the adoption of the written alphabet was easily accomplished. This is something the paragraph given does not touch upon.
Option C is incorrect as it says there was a 'ban' on the use of any form of categorisation but a divinely ordained one. This is not what the paragraph given says. Further, religious beliefs hindering the widespread adoption of alphabetical order is just one idea in the given paragraph.
Option D states that 'unlike the alphabet', the use of the alphabetic sequence became widespread once its efficacy became known. This is not what the paragraph given says.
-
No one is replied to this question yet. Be first to reply!
