THE VILLAGE SCHOOLMASTER (Q/A)

 THE VILLAGE SCHOOLMASTER

 

1.     Why do you think the furze is described as ‘unprofitably gay’?

 

Ans: The phrase suggests that the flowers that were blooming beautifully were not being admired or appreciated.

2.     How did his pupils know when to expect trouble?

Ans: The speaker states that he "knew him well," which means that he had an in-depth understanding of his teacher and could probably read into his expressions and gestures. This familiarity could also have been the result of the many personal and individual encounters he had had with his educator. Further aspects about the teacher's personality indicate that he had an expressive face and that his pupils could easily read his mood as a result. They would, for example, know that a certain ominous look spelled trouble coming, especially for those who had been disobedient. They would be trembling in anticipation and fear of what was to come.

3.     Why did some pupils pretend to be gleeful?

 

 

Ans: The students would feign pleasure at his funny stories and laugh at them to avoid being reprimanded.

 

4.     What language skills did the schoolmaster have?

Ans: The village schoolmaster had the ability to debate intelligently and be involved in discussions with the village parson. He seemed to be a fierce opponent in such discourse, for he would continue arguing a point even after he had already lost the dispute. The master would use difficult words and emotive language to sound convincing and impress the poorly educated village folk.

 

5.     What was the most remarkable thing about the schoolmaster?

Ans: The schoolmaster was not only much admired and respected by his students but was evidently also looked up to by the village residents. Everyone seemed to have praise for his great knowledge. It was a known fact in the village that he could write, do mathematics, and predict weather patterns and tides. It was also assumed that he was an accurate surveyor who could determine borders easily. It is apparent that he could also debate intelligently and be involved in discussions with the village parson, a person who was greatly respected by his parishioners. The teacher seemed to be a fierce opponent in such discourse, for he would continue arguing a point even after he had already lost the dispute. The master would use difficult words and emotive language to sound convincing and impress the poorly educated village folk. People in this rural community were in awe that the teacher could know so much. They could not understand how his small head could contain so much knowledge. This was the most remarkable thing about the schoolmaster.

 

Reference to the context: (Only Answers)

 

1.     Well had the boding…morning face.

a.     ‘Boding tremblers’ referred to the students who could predict the mood of their schoolmaster. This meant that he had an expressive face and that his pupils could easily read his mood as a result. They would, for example, know that a certain ominous look spelled trouble coming, especially for those who had been disobedient. They would be trembling in anticipation and fear of what was to come.

b.     The ‘boding tremblers’ learned to read the mood of the teacher by observing the expressions on his face.

c.      The students would feign pleasure at his funny stories and laugh at them, probably to avoid being reprimanded.

 

2.     In arguing too…he could argue still.

              a.     The term ‘own’d’ means admitted.

b.     The teacher seemed to be a fierce opponent in debates, for he would continue arguing a point even after he had already lost the dispute.

c.      The schoolmaster was not only much admired and respected by his students but was evidently also looked up to by the village residents. Everyone seemed to have praise for his great knowledge. It was a known fact in the village that he could write, do mathematics, and predict weather patterns and tides. It was also assumed that he was an accurate surveyor who could determine borders easily. It is apparent that he could also debate intelligently and be involved in discussions with the village parson, a person who was greatly respected by his parishioners. The teacher seemed to be a fierce opponent in such discourse, for he would continue arguing a point even after he had already lost the dispute. The master would use difficult words and emotive language to sound convincing and impress the poorly educated village folk. People in this rural community were in awe that the teacher could know so much. They could not understand how his small head could contain so much knowledge. This was the most remarkable thing about the schoolmaster.