[1] In the late nineteenth century, New York City's postal system struggled with delivery delays caused by congested streets and slow horse-drawn carriages. [2] To expedite service, the postal department built a network of pneumatic tubes beneath the city streets. [3] Heavy brass canisters stuffed with hundreds of letters were propelled through these underground pipes at speeds exceeding thirty miles per hour. [4] These tubes, which operated until 1953, were incredibly efficient at moving mail between sorting facilities. [5] Similar pneumatic systems were also utilized by post offices in cities like Paris and Berlin.
The writer is considering deleting sentence 5 from the passage. Should the writer make this deletion?
- ANo, because it provides essential details that explain how the canisters were propelled through the underground tubes.
- BNo, because it establishes that New York City was the only city to successfully implement a pneumatic postal network.
- Yes, because it shifts the focus of the paragraph away from New York City's pneumatic mail network to systems in other countries.Answer
- DYes, because it contradicts the earlier claim that the New York City pneumatic tubes were exceptionally fast.
Answer
Yes, because it shifts the focus of the paragraph away from New York City's pneumatic mail network to systems in other countries.
The correct answer is the option stating that the sentence should be deleted because it shifts the focus of the paragraph away from New York City's pneumatic mail network to systems in other countries. The paragraph is tightly focused on the history and operation of the pneumatic tube system in New York City. Introducing information about Paris and Berlin breaks the cohesion of the paragraph by shifting the topic to international applications.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Evaluating relevance for adding or deleting content