Text 1
The diary is the most trustworthy of historical sources. Unlike a memoir, it is written before the outcome is known, and unlike a letter, it is addressed to nobody who must be impressed.
Text 2
Nineteenth-century diarists knew their volumes would be read by children and executors, and many wrote with that reader in view; a number left instructions for which years were to be destroyed. The absence of an addressee is an assumption, not a feature of the form.
Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the claim in Text 1 that a diary is addressed to nobody?
Tegish nuqtasi savolda ko'rsatilgan: addressed to nobody. Text 2 ning javob beruvchi jumlasi — oxirgisi: The absence of an addressee is an assumption, not a feature of the form.
TO‘G‘RIBy arguing that diarists often did write with a future reader in mind — aynan Text 2 ning dalili: bolalar va vasiylar o'qishini bilgan, ba'zilari qaysi yillarni yo'q qilishni ko'rsatib ketgan.
TUZOQBy agreeing that diaries are more trustworthy than memoirs because they precede the outcome — bu Text 1 ning fikri, va Text 2 uni umuman muhokama qilmaydi — uning e'tirozi faqat manzil masalasida.
TUZOQBy claiming that most nineteenth-century diaries have not survived — saqlanish darajasi eslatilmaydi. So'z-tuzoq: destroyed so'zidan yozilgan, lekin u ayrim yillarga tegishli, umumiy saqlanishga emas.
TUZOQBy asserting that letters are a more reliable source than diaries are — Text 2 xatlarni umuman tilga olmaydi. Text 1 dagi qiyoslash teskari qilingan.