# contemporary landmass



## 77Cat77

Hi, dear members!
I have a difficulty in understanding the following sentence.
_In Tokyo Bay, for example, shell mounds of the Jomon period (about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.) mark the position of the shoreline at a time of maximum inundation by the sea (6,500-5,500 years ago), when, through tectonic movement, the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present. _

Does “contemporary” in the sentence mean “existing at the same time” or “current?”
I see it as “current”.


----------



## lingobingo

It clearly means at *that* time, since it’s contrasted with the present.


----------



## 77Cat77

lingobingo said:


> It clearly means at *that* time, since it’s contrasted with the present.


Can “than at present” be seen as an elliptical expression of “than the sea is in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan at present”


----------



## Chasint

lingobingo said:


> It clearly means at *that* time, since it’s contrasted with the present.


I agree.

_"contemporary"  _relates to _" a time of maximum inundation by the sea" _


----------



## 77Cat77

I should give more context. I appreciate your time spent on the reading.

The assessment of past rises and falls in sea level requires study of submerged land surfaces off the coast and of raised of elevated beaches on land.
_<-----Excess quote removed by moderator (Florentia52)----->_
Raised beaches often consist of areas of sand, pebbles, or dunes, sometimes containing seashells or piles of debris comprising shells and bones of marine animals used by humans. In Tokyo Bay, for example, shell mounds of the Jomon period (about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.) mark the position of the shoreline at a time of maximum inundation by the sea (6,500-5,500 years ago), when, through tectonic movement, the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present. Analysis of the shells themselves has confirmed the changes in marine topography, for it is only during the maximum phase that subtropical species of mollusc are present, indicating a higher water temperature.

From TOEFL Official Practice

Which of the following can be inferred from paragraph 4 about Tokyo Bay?
A   The coastal land currently available is smaller than it was during the Jomon period.
B   The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is a poor indicator of ancient sea levels.
C   The water temperature in Tokyo Bay is lower at present than it was during the Jomon period.
D   Tectonic movement during the Jomon period was not responsible for the formation of Tokyo Bay’s raised beaches.

Both B and C, I think, are correct. This question has been confusing me for a couple of days.


----------



## kentix

I don't think you can infer B from that paragraph. You can infer B from the previous paragraph.


----------



## trellis

I think you can infer B as the raised shell mounds have been created by tectonic movement and as such do not give an accurate measure of sea level.



77Cat77 said:


> Can “than at present” be seen as an elliptical expression of “than the sea is in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan at present”


'than at present' is quite confusing and not good English. 'Compared to the present' would be better I think...


----------



## Roxxxannne

Also, C is incorrect: there's nothing in the two paragraphs about the temperature of water in Tokyo Bay nowadays.  'Higher water temperature' is in comparison to the water temperature during the ice age.
I'd say "than the sea is in relation to the present landmass of Japan."


----------



## 77Cat77

kentix said:


> I don't think you can infer B from that paragraph. You can infer B from the previous paragraph.


As trellis mentioned in #8, the sea was higher through tectonic movement.



lingobingo said:


> It clearly means at *that* time, since it’s contrasted with the present.


I was taught that the structures before and after “than” should be similar.
For example, You speak faster than me/I speak/do I.
Could you please tell me  about “than at present?”



trellis said:


> 'than at present' is quite confusing and not good English. 'Compared to the present' would be better I think...


I’m still unclear about the comparison.

If
_“the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present”_
equals to
_“the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than the sea is in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan at present”,_
I think “simultaneous” as the meaning for the two “contemporary” .
Can I?


----------



## Edinburgher

77Cat77 said:


> As trellis mentioned in #8, the sea was higher through tectonic movement.


That's irrelevant, because paragraph 4 doesn't tell us that they were caused by tectonic movement.  That information comes from paragraph 3, and the question is specifically about what we can infer from paragraph 4.


trellis said:


> 'than at present' is quite confusing and not good English.


I disagree.  It's quite clear and straightforward.  The word "than" belongs to the comparative "higher":
_the sea was three to five meters *higher *{when measured} in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan* than {it is} at present*._


----------



## 77Cat77

But the original context is “when, *through tectonic movement*, the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present.



Edinburgher said:


> I disagree.  It's quite clear and straightforward.  The word "than" belongs to the comparative "higher":
> _the sea was three to five meters *higher *{when measured} in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan* than {it is} at present*._


What do you think about what I said in #14?


----------



## lingobingo

To my mind, quite apart from anything else, this is a well written text on an academic subject. The writer would not use the word contemporary to mean modern. He or she would use it to mean “of the time in question”.


----------



## Edinburgher

77Cat77 said:


> But the original context is “when, *through tectonic movement*, the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present.


Oh yes, sorry, my mistake.  What I meant was that para 4 doesn't tell us that the height of raised beaches is not a good indicator of sea level.  That information comes from para 3.  I don't know how strict the test wants you to be about where the basis of the inference comes from.


77Cat77 said:


> What do you think about what I said in #14?


I don't think "simultaneous" would be a suitable substitute for "contemporary".  Of course in your expanded sentence, where you are using "contemporary" twice, the two occurrences refer to different times: the first to the time of maximum inundation, and the second to now.


----------



## kentix

_In Tokyo Bay, for example, shell mounds of the Jomon period (about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.) mark the position of the shoreline at a time of maximum inundation by the sea (6,500-5,500 years ago), when, through tectonic movement, the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present. _

To me, this is saying the overall sea level was not higher then. It's saying that the land was three to five meters lower at that time, because the tectonic effects had lowered the land. So the shoreline where the ancient people lived was higher on the land. Over time, the tectonics raised the land three to five meters until we've reached today's situation.

It's essentially the same landmass; geology doesn't change things that much in two thousand years. But at present, the shoreline is now three to five meters lower - not because the water went down, but because the land came up.

It seems to me they might be using contemporary in a geological sense. For serious geological changes to take place, millions of years have to pass. If that is the sense, the land in the Jomon period and the land now are the same land.


----------



## trellis

lingobingo said:


> To my mind, quite apart from anything else, this is a well written text on an academic subject. The writer would not use the word contemporary to mean modern. He or she would use it to mean “of the time in question”.


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally I find this text quite difficult and I'm not so very stupid!
What if I were to suggest that the word 'contemporary' is unnecessary here, and that the punctuation could be improved, for example...
 "_when, through tectonic movement, the sea was three to five meters higher, in relation to the landmass of Japan, than at present."_


----------



## kentix

I'd vote for that.


----------



## 77Cat77

I'm sorry to interrupt you guys again, but I can't help to tell out my new consideration about the inference question.
Choice C is not right.
C is correct unless "During the Jomon period (about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.)" is changed into "during a time of maximum inundation by the sea (6,500-5,500 years ago)".
Except for the time of maximum inundation by the sea, we can hardly say for sure that the sea water temperature is lower at present. Jomon period is a wider time range, which covers the time of maximum inundation.


----------



## boozer

Like most exams, the IELTS is timed. If you spend too much time on one question, you are... you fail royally 

My thoughts:

 A. The coastal line now available should be larger, if anything, as tectonics raised the whole landmass and more of it is above the water line today.
 B. They would not have given the beaches of Tokyo Bay as an example, if they were a poor indicator of what was being analysed.
 C. It does look like that is what they are saying at the end
 D. I think tectonic movement is responsible for the raised beaches.


----------



## trellis

Roxxxannne said:


> Also, C is incorrect: there's nothing in the two paragraphs about the temperature of water in Tokyo Bay nowadays.  'Higher water temperature' is in comparison to the water temperature during the ice age.


I agree...


----------



## lingobingo

Me too. Although that’s not what was originally asked in this thread, of course.

 C   The water temperature in Tokyo Bay is lower at present than it was during the Jomon period.​​… shell mounds of the Jomon period … mark the position of the shoreline at a time of maximum inundation by the sea …… ​Analysis of the shells … has confirmed the changes in marine topography, for it is only during the maximum phase that subtropical species of mollusc are present, indicating a higher water temperature [at that time].​


----------



## 77Cat77

it is only during the maximum phase that subtropical species of mollusc are present, indicating a higher water temperature.

The time constraint and the tense of the sentence implies that except the maximum phase, subtropical species of mollusc are not present.


----------



## trellis

In the end it's your call! 
Do let us know what the official correct answers are, when you receive them.....


----------



## 77Cat77

trellis said:


> In the end it's your call!
> Do let us know what the official correct answers are, when you receive them.....


There is no official correct answer. I’m sorry for annoying you.


----------



## boozer

There *has *to be an official correct answer!!! There is no IELTS test that does not have an answer sheet - they are excellent tests made by people who know their job.

In fact, you have made me look for an answer and according to this Chinese site, it is C
托福TPO49阅读原文+答案+MP3音频下载-Ancient Coastlines-三立在线
Or, at least, the letter C is given special attention alongside several Chinese hieroglyphs


----------



## Chasint

boozer said:


> There *has *to be an official correct answer!!! There is no IELTS test that does not have an answer sheet - they are excellent tests made by people who know their job.
> 
> In fact, you have made me look for an answer and according to this Chinese site, it is C
> 托福TPO49阅读原文+答案+MP3音频下载-Ancient Coastlines-三立在线
> Or, at least, the letter C is given special attention alongside several Chinese hieroglyphs


Of course C is correct. lingbingo has clearly said this right from the beginning - and has given reasons.  I have no idea why anyone would think otherwise.


----------



## lingobingo

But aren’t A, B and D all clearly untrue anyway? I’m inclined to think that a process of elimination is the easy way to arrive at this answer!


----------



## 77Cat77

boozer said:


> There *has *to be an official correct answer!!! There is no IELTS test that does not have an answer sheet - they are excellent tests made by people who know their job.
> 
> In fact, you have made me look for an answer and according to this Chinese site, it is C
> 托福TPO49阅读原文+答案+MP3音频下载-Ancient Coastlines-三立在线
> Or, at least, the letter C is given special attention alongside several Chinese hieroglyphs



I’m sorry that the answer C is not given by ETS (Educational Test Service). In China, ETS does not provide answer keys for TPO (TOFEL Practice Online). I saw the question online, too.


----------



## boozer

Chasint said:


> Of course C is correct. lingbingo has clearly said this right from the beginning - and has given reasons.  I have no idea why anyone woulds think otherwise.


Of course.
I agree, as seen in post 18.

However:


Roxxxannne said:


> Also, C is incorrect:


and


trellis said:


> I agree...


----------



## 77Cat77

lingobingo said:


> But aren’t A, B and D all clearly untrue anyway? I’m inclined to think that a process of elimination is the easy way to arrive at this answer!


In the previous paragraph, the author has stated that “ the height of a raised beach above the present shoreline, however, does not generally give a straightforward indication of the height of a former sea level. In the majority of cases, the beaches lie at a higher level because the land has been raised up through isostatic uplift or tectonic movement....Tectonic movements involve displacements in the plates that make up Earth’s crust, Middle and Late Pleistocene raised beaches in the Mediterranean are one instance of such movements.”

My quote was deleted by Moderator Florentia52 in #5


----------



## trellis

Well, I've just read the complete  test text
I still maintain that only B can be inferred from paragraph 4 !!


----------



## 77Cat77

trellis said:


> Well, I've just read the complete  test text
> I still maintain that only B can be inferred from paragraph 4 !!


I agree.


----------



## Andygc

I've just come to this thread. The question asked is "What can be inferred from the quoted paragraph?" That means that other paragraphs are completely irrelevant. The only answer that can be inferred is C.


Roxxxannne said:


> Also, C is incorrect: there's nothing in the two paragraphs about the temperature of water in Tokyo Bay nowadays.


Untrue.


77Cat77 said:


> Analysis of the shells themselves has confirmed the changes in marine topography, for it is only during the maximum phase that subtropical species of mollusc are present,* indicating a higher water temperature.*


The mollusc mounds were deposited in the past, when there was a higher water temperature. Higher than what? Higher than now.


----------



## Edinburgher

Andygc said:


> Higher than what? Higher than now.


I don't think it specifically implies higher than now.  It means higher than at any time *other than during the maximum phase* (6500-5500 years ago).
It's unclear whether it means at any other time *within the Jomon period* (which would exclude now, because it ends 300BCE) or at any other time *since the beginning of the Jomon period* (which is all they have data for, and which would of course include now).

Thus, whether C can be inferred depends on your interpretation of the paragraph.  I guess if you *can* interpret it the second way above, then C *can* be inferred.


----------



## 77Cat77

Andygc said:


> I've just come to this thread. The question asked is "What can be inferred from the quoted paragraph?" That means that other paragraphs are completely irrelevant. The only answer that can be inferred is C.
> 
> Untrue.
> 
> The mollusc mounds were deposited in the past, when there was a higher water temperature. Higher than what? Higher than now.


First, I’m sorry to say that the expression “in the past” from your response is not precise, for the author writes in the sentence “during the maximum phase,” which refers to 6500-5500 years ago. This means the water temperature was higher during that phase than other period, including now. But the time in choice C was replaced by “during Jomon period”  (about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.) . This time span covers “maximum phase. So, it’s hard to say that temperatures all through the Jomon period, say in 500 BCE, was higher than now.

Second, “through tectonic movement,” which modifies the fact that the sea was higher than at present, is a piece of information from this paragraph.


----------



## kentix

It gets tricky because the whole idea of tectonics is that the land is not fixed in place, which is what was formerly assumed.

The sea can be higher, the land can be lower, or there can be a combination of the two. So when you find "beaches" far from the shore is that because the water used to be higher or because the land used to be lower?

"maximum inundation by the sea" doesn't tell you the cause of that inundation. It doesn't necessarily mean the overall sea level was higher. It just means the level was higher in that piece of land, which might have been lower in that area at that time than it was later.


----------



## trellis

In Tokyo Bay, for example, shell mounds of the Jomon period (*about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.*) mark the position of the shoreline at a time of *maximum inundation* by the sea (*6,500-5,500 years ago)*, when, through *tectonic movement, *the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan than at present. Analysis of the shells themselves has confirmed the changes in marine topography, for it is only during the *maximum phase* that subtropical species of mollusc are present, indicating a higher water temperature.

We have:
1. the Jomun period - *about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E*
2. a period of maximum inundation, the *maximum phase* - *6,500-5,500 years ago*
3. the land moves relative to the sea due to -  *tectonic movement*
4. only during the *maximum phase* is there a higher water temperature.

Therefore the water temperature around the *maximum phase* is lower. At no time is there any comparison or inference concerning todays temperatures.
Therefore_ C   The water temperature in Tokyo Bay is lower at present than it was during the Jomon period. _
cannot be inferred. For a start, the water temperature during the Jomun period is not even stable!!

similarly _B   The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is a poor indicator of ancient sea levels. _
Must be true since the raised beaches have been created by *- tectonic movement, *not a change in sea level.


----------



## RM1(SS)

77Cat77 said:


> the sea was three to five meters higher in relation to the contemporary landmass of Japan *than at present*.


The maximum phase (which occurred during the Jomon period) had warmer water.
Therefore, the water was warmer then.


----------



## Roxxxannne

For what it's worth, the paragraphs in question are from an archaeology textbook, _Archaeology: Theories, Methods, Practices_, by Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn (the edition in the link is from the 1998 edition) pp. 215 or 216 (I don't know exactly from the page numbering in the electronic text). 

In their bibliography Renfrew and Bahn cite H. Koike, "Jomon shell mounds and growth-line analysis of molluscan shells" in _Windows on the Japanese Past: Studies in Archaeology and Prehistory_ (R.J. Pearson & others eds.). 267-78. Center for Japanese Studies, Univ. of Michigan.   The answer is probably somewhere in that article. 

This gives me new respect for people who score high on the IELTS.


----------



## Andygc

RM1(SS) said:


> Therefore, the water was warmer then.


Agreed. It's not what you might call difficult.


----------



## trellis

Andygc said:


> Agreed. It's not what you might call difficult.


Of course! if only I had realised - it's a shame that you didn't pass by earlier.....


----------



## 77Cat77

Edinburgher said:


> It's unclear whether it means at any other time *within the Jomon period*


If the author made the comparison within the Jomon period, he or she should specify the time range.
Without a definite time range, and with the fact that subtropical species of  mollusc only appeared in Tokyo Bay during maximum inundation phase, but not other periods, even now, temperature was higher than other periods when that species do not exist there.


----------



## Andygc

As I said, it's not difficult.





RM1(SS) said:


> The maximum phase (which occurred during the Jomon period) had warmer water.
> Therefore, the water was warmer then.


That is, the water was warmer during the Jomon period than at other times, which includes now.


77Cat77 said:


> But the time in choice C was replaced by “during Jomon period” (about 10,000 to 300 B.C.E.) . This time span covers “maximum phase. So, it’s hard to say that temperatures all through the Jomon period, say in 500 BCE, was higher than now.


"During" does not mean "all through". The Battle of Agincourt occurred during the 100 Years War. The battle did not last for 100 years; it lasted less than a day.

As for B, the text makes no comment whatsoever that would justify inferring that raised beaches are a poor indicator of past sea levels. The paragraph tells you that tectonic activity affected the sea level. Since the raised beaches have deposits of molluscs, and those molluscs lived in the sea, the raised beaches show exactly where the sea level used to be. How the sea level got there is irrelevant - that's where it was.


Roxxxannne said:


> because of the verb 'inferred' in the test question



That takes me back to my student days: "Always read the question", as my lecturers used to say.


----------



## trellis

Andygc said:


> As I said, it's not difficult.That is, the water was warmer during the Jomon period than at other times, which includes now.
> 
> "During" does not mean "all through".


If I were to say 'During the 100 years war there were many battles' then what would 'during' mean?
WR during

If you wish to infer that 'indicating a higher water temperature' includes the current Tokyo Bay temperature, or any other period in geological time, then OK, it's your choice!

Concerning B, tectonic activity affected the perceived sea level with respect to the Tokyo shore line. But it's the land mass that moved, not the sea level.


----------



## trellis

Roxxxannne said:


> We _infer _that the water temperature is lower now in Tokyo Bay than it was in the Jomon period because we know (and this is not stated in the text) that Tokyo Bay is not in a subtropical zone now.


Well if you know that Tokyo Bay is not in a subtropical zone then evidently the temperature is lower than at the 'maximum phase'.

Just out of interest -Tokyo climate - The former city of Tokyo and the majority of mainland Tokyo lie in the humid subtropical climate zone.....


----------



## Roxxxannne

trellis said:


> Well if you know that Tokyo Bay is not in a subtropical zone then evidently the temperature is lower than at the 'maximum phase'.
> 
> Just out of interest -Tokyo climate - The former city of Tokyo and the majority of mainland Tokyo lie in the humid subtropical climate zone.....


Thanks for your correction! I deleted the evidence of my ignorance.


----------



## RM1(SS)

trellis said:


> If you wish to infer that 'indicating a higher water temperature' includes the current Tokyo Bay temperature, or any other period in geological time, then OK, it's your choice!


It is specifically stated that the present time is included.  See #37.


----------



## Roxxxannne

I agree with trellis in #7 and I will try not to make any more comments on this thread until I have read the original article.


----------



## Andygc

trellis said:


> If I were to say 'During the 100 years war there were many battles' then what would 'during' mean?


I would remind you that it doesn't mean "all through". 56 battles in 116 years is hardly going at it for the entire period. I suspect people spent much more of their time farming, eating, sleeping and having sex than actually fighting.

I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of the term "sea level". Sea level is measured relative to the land. It varies through the day as the tide rises and falls, so we have the concept of mean sea level. That is, of course a local concept - it's where, on average, the upper surface of the sea meets the land at a particular place. If the land rises, the sea level falls. If the water locked in planetary ice melts, the sea level rises. It's even possible for both underlying changes to happen at the same time, as in the case of the west coast of Scotland where the reducing weight of melting glaciers resulted in vertical land movement that was greater than any rise in sea level due to melt, with the overall result that the sea level fell. It's an area where there are many raised beaches - all a result of land moving up relative to the surface of the sea - otherwise known as a fall in sea level.

I suppose it's a shame nobody explained that to you earlier.


----------



## trellis

Andygc said:


> I would remind you that it doesn't mean "all through". 56 battles in 116 years is hardly going at it for the entire period. I suspect people spent much more of their time farming, eating, sleeping and having sex than actually fighting.
> 
> I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of the term "sea level". Sea level is measured relative to the land. It varies through the day as the tide rises and falls, so we have the concept of mean sea level. That is, of course a local concept - it's where, on average, the upper surface of the sea meets the land at a particular place. If the land rises, the sea level falls. If the water locked in planetary ice melts, the sea level rises. It's even possible for both underlying changes to happen at the same time, as in the case of the west coast of Scotland where the reducing weight of melting glaciers resulted in vertical land movement that was greater than any rise in sea level due to melt, with the overall result that the sea level fell. It's an area where there are many raised beaches - all a result of land moving up relative to the surface of the sea - otherwise known as a fall in sea level.
> 
> I suppose it's a shame nobody explained that to you earlier.


Did you read this WR during ?

dur•ing _/ˈdʊrɪŋ, ˈdyʊr-/_  prep. 

throughout the duration of:He lived in Florida during the winter.
at some time or point in the course of:They departed during the night.


There is the local *perceived* sea level that changed due to tectonic movement.
Then there is the general, global sea level. The question was:
B   The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is a poor indicator of ancient sea levels. 

I assumed that the question was refering to the global sea levels.
Maybe I was wrong - if so I will bow to your evidently greatly superior intellect...


----------



## 77Cat77

https://tpo.xdf.cn/quiz-bank/toefl/question/details/23479?qId=23479
The original text. Please, pay a little bit attention to Question 13


----------



## Andygc

There is no such thing as the global sea level. The distance from the centre of the Earth to the water surface varies with latitude because of the Earth's rotation. It is also affected by salinity because that affects density.

The true statement is: "The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is an excellent indicator of ancient sea levels"

I hope making puerile comments helps you to feel better. They are hardly in the spirit of this forum.


trellis said:


> if so I will bow to your evidently greatly superior intellect...


----------



## 77Cat77

Andygc said:


> There is no such thing as the global sea level. The distance from the centre of the Earth to the water surface varies with latitude because of the Earth's rotation. It is also affected by salinity because that affects density.
> 
> The true statement is: "The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is an excellent indicator of ancient sea levels"
> 
> I hope making puerile comments helps you to feel better. They are hardly in the spirit of this forum.


Question 13, the inserted sentence says an accurate indicator of coastline, not an excellent indicator of ancient sea level. Coastline belongs to the landmass, but not the sea. If a coastline has formed on a landmass, it moves with the landmass.


----------



## Edinburgher

Andygc said:


> There is no such thing as the global sea level.


But environmentalists have been warning us for years that global warming will lead to rises in global sea level, and in turn to more coastal flooding, because ice reservoirs such as glaciers or polar ice caps will shrink through faster melting.  Have they been talking a load of bullshit?

If not, there can be two possible reasons why you might have raised beaches.  One is that sea levels have dropped, the other that the land has risen up.


----------



## Andygc

Edinburgher said:


> But environmentalists have been warning us for years that global warming will lead to rises in global sea level, and in turn to more coastal flooding, because ice reservoirs such as glaciers or polar ice caps will shrink through faster melting.  Have they been talking a load of bullshit?
> 
> If not, there can be two possible reasons why you might have raised beaches.  One is that sea levels have dropped, the other that the land has risen up.


No bullshit. Global sea levels (plural) (=sea levels globally) will go up, leading to coastal flooding.
Two possible reasons? See


Andygc said:


> If the land rises, the sea level falls. If the water locked in planetary ice melts, the sea level rises. It's even possible for both underlying changes to happen at the same time,


Obviously the opposites are true.

EDIT  This graphic illustrates why talking of a global sea level (singular) is dubious.


----------



## Andygc

77Cat77. I have referred to the text you quoted in the thread. I have no intention of searching another website. A coastline is where the surface of the sea meets the land. That's called the sea level. If the sea level changes, there will be a new coastline. The old coastline - the raised or sunken beach - shows where the sea level used to be.


----------



## trellis

B   The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is a poor indicator of ancient sea levels.


----------



## Andygc

Chasint said:


> Of course C is correct. lingbingo has clearly said this right from the beginning - and has given reasons. I have no idea why anyone would think otherwise.





boozer said:


> Of course.
> I agree, as seen in post 18.


Of course.


----------



## manfy

trellis said:


> B   The height of raised beaches around Tokyo Bay is a poor indicator of ancient sea levels.


 You're persistent!
For what it's worth, I think B is a reasonable inferrence.
Paragraph 4 explicitly states "...when, *through tectonic movement*, the sea was three to five meters higher *in relation to the contemporary landmass* of Japan *than at present.*"
So we know the exact relative movement from then to now. The statement "through tectonic movement" makes clear that the land mass was 3-5 meters lower and not that the sea level was 3-5 meters higher than now. This is substantiated with the description in paragraph 3, explaining that the raising of the landmass through isostatic uplift or tectonic movement is the major cause for raised beaches. (and this description also strongly suggests that the original author is talking about global sea level here and not relative sea level)
The rest of paragraph 4 does not say anything about rising sea levels or why and how the land mass and the sea reached their current relative level. This allows the reasonable inferrence that raised beaches are an inconclusive parameter as long as we don't know whether it was the altitude of the landmass that cahnged or the sea level.

Ultimately it was a bad question by the designer of this test. He or she is asking for a specific answer without providing a precise, unambiguous question. The writer should have known that "sea level" may refer to relative sea level between landmass and local sea level, local mean sea level (that's what Andy is talking about, an arbitrarily chosen point that is defined as 0m altitude and which may be different from country to country) or the global mean sea level, which is defined by the GPS system as a geometric ellipsoid, an idealized shape of the globe, or as a geoid, which is a mathematical approximation of the actual global mean sea level based on actual gravitational variances on our planet.

PS: Of course, the actual winner is Andy, as the link in boozer's post #24 shows.
The test designer claims that answer C is correct.
The analysis given (translated with Google Translate from Chinese):


> The second sentence of this paragraph mentions that Tokyo Bay is the shell mounds of the Jomon period. The last sentence mentions that the analysis of shellfish itself can confirm the change of ocean topography, because subtropical mollusks exist only at the highest stage of seawater inundation. This implies a higher water temperature. (Analysis of the shells themselves has confirmed the changes in marine topography, for it is only during the maximum phase that subtropical species of mollusc are present, indicating a higher water temperature.)
> *Reasoning*: The presence of mollusks implies a high water temperature, while Tokyo Bay is a shellfish made up of mollusks during the Jomon period, so the temperature of the water that can be launched in Tokyo Bay is higher during the Jomon period than it is now. So the answer is c.



Whether you agree with this or not, the test writer of such standardized tests like TOEFL is practically always right - maybe not literally right but you usually can't debate your way out of an answer that is different from what the test designer thinks.


----------



## trellis

Thanks, @manfy for your interesting post.
I reposted question B because @Andygc explains there is no such thing as a global sea level in the singular. He is right, but the question is not in the singular.
Also that there is not one global sea level is hardly news. One assumes that one is talking about 'global mean sea level'.
I said at the end of post #49 that 'I assumed that the question was refering to the global sea levels.'
I also said that if I was wrong I would bow to @Andygc - I do so (in the Japanese manner of course!)

Concerning C, I thought I had made the knockout blow when pointing out that the current Tokyo climate is subtropical.
Ho hum!
PS I have made a resolution never to get involved in this sort of debate again. It has nothing to do with the original question, and has proved to be ultimately sterile.


----------



## manfy

trellis said:


> Concerning C, I thought I had made the knockout blow when pointing out that the current Tokyo climate is subtropical.


Yes, that was an interesting piece of information. I live in Asia and have been to Japan a few times, but I wouldn't have guessed that. 
But it also made me realize that you're probably on the wrong track by looking at such specific details. TOEFL is a practical language test and designing it in a way that requires such specific knowledge to be able to complete it would create a bias in the test results.
In any case, it was easy to rule out A and D as correct answer, but for B & C I found good arguments for and against each of them. You need to do a couple of those practice tests before you go to the actual test that counts; you will see a pattern and start to understand the type of answer the creator of the test is looking for without getting hung up on informative but non-essential and often distracting details.


----------



## trellis

manfy said:


> . TOEFL is a practical language test and designing it in a way that requires such specific knowledge to be able to complete it would create a bias in the test results.


Yes indeed, which is why I thought C was a trick question. As @Roxxxannne says in #8, there is no information about current temperatures.



manfy said:


> You need to do a couple of those practice tests before you go to the actual test that counts; you will see a pattern and start to understand the type of answer the creator of the test is looking for without getting hung up on informative but non-essential and often distracting details.


Useful information for @77Cat77 . I'm glad that I will never be required to take a TOEFL test !


----------



## boozer

Incidentally, that is the IELTS test, which, just like TOEFL, determines your level of command of the language, but goes all the way up to the highest level. In short, TOEFL is easier, but the principles are the same, as described by Manfy. At a certain point you know the test setter's psychology and expectations so you do not need to know English so well. With practice, you become a good test taker.


----------



## 77Cat77

trellis said:


> Useful information for @77Cat77 . I'm glad that I will never be required to take a TOEFL test !


Thank you! I have taken TOEFL-ibt for several times and got full marks in reading section at least 4 times.


----------

