<p><span style="color:#e74c3c;"><span style="font-size:16px;">The Right Answers</span></span></p>
<p><strong>Blank 2:</strong> It's easier to start with Blank 2 here. We can use <strong><span style="color:#8e44ad;">Math Strategy</span></strong> from "despite" onwards. On the RHS of the comma, it says that he is never unclear, so the LHS should be contrasting to that, specifically something that suggests he might have appearedunclear. Blank 2 describes his "orthographic" or language rules, so in order to be unclear, it should be something like "bad".</p>
<p>The best match for this blank is <span style="color:#27ae60;">disregard for</span> , which suggests he rarely followed language rules, indicating a reason why he might be considered unclear.</p>
<p><strong>Blank 1:</strong> Now that we filled in Blank 2, we can solve Blank 1 using the <strong><span style="color:#8e44ad;">Previously Referenced</span></strong> strategy. Later on in the sentence, when filling Blank 2, we deduced that his "orthographic rules" were bad. Just before that, we can spot a "this", which means that the idea is the same as one previously referenced in the sentence, specifically the nature of his spelling. So, similarly Blank 1 should also be something like "bad"..</p>
<p>The best match for this blank is <span style="color:#27ae60;">defiant</span>, which suggests that he is not following correct spelling rules.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:#e74c3c;"><span style="font-size:16px;">The Wrong Answers</span></span></p>
<p>Blank 1</p>
<ul>
<li><span style="color:#e74c3c;">indefatigable:</span> This choice has <strong>no evidence</strong>. There's nothing suggesting he was persistent in the way he spelled things.</li>
<li><span style="color:#e74c3c;">fastidious:</span> This choice <strong>contradicts the logic</strong>. The blank should convey that he was a bad speller, not one who took great care with his spellings.</li>
</ul>
<p>Blank 2</p>
<ul>
<li><span style="color:#e74c3c;">partiality toward:</span> This choice <strong>contradicts the logic</strong>. If he had partiality toward the rules, there's no reason to contrast this by saying he is never unclear.</li>
<li><span style="color:#e74c3c;">unpretentiousness about:</span> This choice has <strong>no evidence</strong>. We don't know anything about how "pretentious" Clark was, from this sentence.</li>
</ul>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>