Loading...

FILING AND ARRANGING FRONT OFFICE DOCUMENTS
Quiz by leny farro
Customize this quiz to suit your class
Instantly translate to 100+ languages
Tag the questions with any skills you have. Your dashboard will track each student's mastery of each skill.
Give this quiz to my class
unit_203_2_handout_3_filing_and_archiving
Chapter 3- Filing Methods and Systems
4.12 Filing for an Extension and Avoiding an Audit
[Text] Grammar - Unit 11, 12 recap - Gap filling and question making - Part 2
[Scrambled] Grammar - Unit 11, 12 recap - Gap filling and question making
[Text] Grammar - Unit 11, 12 recap - Gap filling and question making
1. What does the name Mlungisi mean? A. The Helper B. The Fixer C. The Brave One D. The Giver â B 2. What kind of person is Mlungisi? A. Rebellious and lazy B. Always fixing problems and helping others C. A mysterious, quiet boy D. A selfish older cousin â B 3. What does the name Velile mean? A. One Who Builds B. The Beloved One C. He Who Popped Out of Nowhere D. He Who Carries Others â C 4. How does Velile behave according to Trevor? A. He is very responsible and hardworking B. He often vanishes and suddenly reappears C. He is a caring father figure D. He is always around to help the family â B 5. Patriciaâs name means: A. She Who Gives Back B. She Who Demands More C. The Fighter D. The Lost One â A 6. What did Patricia do as a child in Soweto? A. She went to school and stayed away from others B. She took care of abandoned children and fed them C. She ran away from home frequently D. She helped her father manage a shop â B 7. Where did Patricia find the money to buy food for the children? A. From her allowance B. From selling her toys C. From collecting bottles from shebeens D. From stealing it â C 8. What is a shebeen in this context? A. A school for orphans B. A place for young kids to play C. An informal bar where men would drink D. A shelter for street children â C 9. How old was Patricia when she started helping other children? A. 4 or 5 B. 6 or 7 C. 10 or 11 D. Teenager â B 10. Why did Trevorâs mother choose the name âTrevorâ? A. It was the name of her favorite Bible character B. It was her fatherâs name C. It had no meaning, and she wanted him to be free D. It was a popular name in her family â C 11. What does it mean that Trevor's name had âno precedentâ in South Africa? A. It was illegal to use B. It had no cultural or family history C. It came from ancient African myths D. It was a translation of a Zulu name â B 12. What is the deeper reason behind Patricia giving Trevor a name with no meaning? A. She didnât like traditional names B. She didnât know what the name meant C. She wanted him to escape fate and create his own identity D. She thought names were unimportant â C 13. According to Trevor, what kind of effect do traditional Xhosa names usually have? A. They are just for decoration B. They are often meaningless C. They tend to become self-fulfilling D. They reflect colonial history â C 14. What literary device is mainly used in the idea of names becoming destiny? A. Hyperbole B. Irony C. Symbolism D. Pun â C 15. Trevorâs mother wanted him to be: A. Bound to cultural tradition B. Free to be anyone he wanted C. A preacher D. Another fixer like Mlungisi â B â
True or False Questions (ĺ¤ćé˘)ďźĺ
ą10é˘ďź 16. Trevorâs cousin Mlungisi was known for always creating trouble. â False 17. Velileâs name and personality are both connected to sudden appearances and disappearances. â True 18. Patricia started caring for others when she was already an adult. â False 19. Shebeens were places where children gathered to play and eat. â False 20. Patricia used money she earned at a job to feed other children. â False ďźĺĽšç¨ć˘çśĺçéąďź 21. Trevorâs name has no Biblical or cultural background. â True 22. Patricia believed that names could shape a personâs life. â True 23. Trevorâs mother gave him a name with no meaning because she didnât care about names. â False 24. Xhosa names often carry strong cultural or symbolic meanings. â True 25. Trevorâs mother gave him a name with no meaning so that he could be free from expectations. â True
Auteur Theory is a way of looking at films that state that the director is the âauthorâ of a film. A film is a reflection of the directorâs artistic vision; so, a movie directed by a given filmmaker will have recognizable, recurring themes and visual queues that inform the audience who the director is (think a Hitchcock or Tarantino film) and shows a consistent artistic identity throughout that directorâs filmography. The 3 Components of Auteur Theory Andrew Sarris, film critic for The New York Times, expanded on Truffautâs writing and set out a more comprehensive definition for auteurs according to three main criteria: technical competence, distinguishable personality, and interior meaning. 1. Technical competence: Auteurs must be at the top of their craft in terms of technical filmmaking abilities. Auteurs always have a hand in multiple components of filmmaking and should be operating at a high level across the board. 2. Distinguishable personality: What separates auteurs from other technically gifted directors is their unmistakable personality and style. When looking at an auteurâs collected works, you can generally see shared filming techniques and consistent themes being explored. One of the primary tenets of auteur theory is that auteurs make movies that are unmistakably theirs. This is in sharp contrast with the standard studio directors of the era who were simply translating script to screen with little interrogation of the source material or editorial input. 3. Interior meaning: Auteurs make films that have layers of meaning and have more to say about the human condition. Films made by auteurs go beyond the pure entertainment-oriented spectacles produced by large studios, to instead reveal the filmmakers unique perspectives and ruminations on life. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/film-101-what-is-an-auteur#3ClNjwO6Gkgjd8ix2Cm5qI Who is the author of a TV program? It seems like it ought to be an easy question to answer, but it is not. There are, of course, scriptwriters, who are the literal authors of episodes in the sense of generating words that an actor eventually speaks, but in a soap opera or a sitcom there may be a dozen or more scriptwriters working on dialogue as the months go by. Is any one of them truly responsible for the overall tenor of the show, or are they just following rigid guidelines set down by other scriptwriters ahead of them? And the script is just the blueprint of an episode anyway. Actors, production designers, directors, videographers, editors, and on and on, are all necessary to construct an episode from that blueprint. Should we call one of them the author? And, at a more basic level, should we even bother looking for authors in television? Do viewers need to know who created a program in order to enjoy it? What does it add to our appreciation or understanding of television if we assign authorship of a program to an individual? In the closely related medium of the cinema, questions such as these have been answered by the auteur theory, which stems from the French word for âauthor,â auteur. Its basic precept is that a single individual is, and should be, the âauthorâ of a work in order for it to be a good, artistically valuable work. A book, poem, film, or television show should express this individualâs personality, his âvisionâ (the masculine pronoun is significant; auteurist studies almost all focus on men). This notion stems from the nineteenth-century Romantic image of the author as a figure who sits alone in a dingy room, scratching out angst-ridden poems with a quill pen. The tormented, misunderstood author or artist is a cherished character type that can be traced back to the poet Lord Byron (1788â1824) and observed in numerous portrayals of demented painters, musicians, and writers in television programs and other media. Consider this: Have you ever seen or read a story about a creative person who wasnât somehow strange or crazy? The auteur theory originated in French film criticism of the 1950s, where it was initially theorized that auteurs could be drawn from the ranks of producers, directors, scriptwriters, actors, and other filmmaking personnel.1 However, the vast bulk of auteurist film criticism has been about directors: Alfred Hitchcock, John Ford, and Quentin Tarantino, among many others.