The following is an excerpt from Night and Day, a novel by Virginia Woolf that was first published in 1919. The novel tells the story of two main female characters in London in the early 20th century.

It was a Sunday evening in October, and in common with many other young ladies of her class, Katharine Hilbery was pouring out tea. Perhaps a fifth part of her mind was thus occupied, and the remaining parts leapt over the little barrier of day which interposed between Monday morning and this rather subdued moment, and played with the things one does voluntarily and normally in the daylight. But although she was silent, she was evidently mistress of a situation which was familiar enough to her, and inclined to let it take its way for the six hundredth time, perhaps, without bringing into play any of her unoccupied faculties. A single glance was enough to show that Mrs. Hilbery was so rich in the gifts which make tea-parties of elderly distinguished people successful, that she scarcely needed any help from her daughter, provided that the tiresome business of teacups and bread and butter was discharged for her.

As used in the highlighted line, “mistress” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from Night and Day, a novel by Virginia Woolf that was first published in 1919. The novel tells the story of two main female characters in London in the early 20th century.

It was a Sunday evening in October, and in common with many other young ladies of her class, Katharine Hilbery was pouring out tea. Perhaps a fifth part of her mind was thus occupied, and the remaining parts leapt over the little barrier of day which interposed between Monday morning and this rather subdued moment, and played with the things one does voluntarily and normally in the daylight. But although she was silent, she was evidently mistress of a situation which was familiar enough to her, and inclined to let it take its way for the six hundredth time, perhaps, without bringing into play any of her unoccupied faculties. A single glance was enough to show that Mrs. Hilbery was so rich in the gifts which make tea-parties of elderly distinguished people successful, that she scarcely needed any help from her daughter, provided that the tiresome business of teacups and bread and butter was discharged for her.

As used in the highlighted line, “mistress” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from Night and Day, a novel by Virginia Woolf that was first published in 1919. The novel tells the story of two main female characters in London in the early 20th century.

It was a Sunday evening in October, and in common with many other young ladies of her class, Katharine Hilbery was pouring out tea. Perhaps a fifth part of her mind was thus occupied, and the remaining parts leapt over the little barrier of day which interposed between Monday morning and this rather subdued moment, and played with the things one does voluntarily and normally in the daylight. But although she was silent, she was evidently mistress of a situation which was familiar enough to her, and inclined to let it take its way for the six hundredth time, perhaps, without bringing into play any of her unoccupied faculties. A single glance was enough to show that Mrs. Hilbery was so rich in the gifts which make tea-parties of elderly distinguished people successful, that she scarcely needed any help from her daughter, provided that the tiresome business of teacups and bread and butter was discharged for her.

As used in the highlighted line, “mistress” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from Night and Day, a novel by Virginia Woolf that was first published in 1919. The novel tells the story of two main female characters in London in the early 20th century.

It was a Sunday evening in October, and in common with many other young ladies of her class, Katharine Hilbery was pouring out tea. Perhaps a fifth part of her mind was thus occupied, and the remaining parts leapt over the little barrier of day which interposed between Monday morning and this rather subdued moment, and played with the things one does voluntarily and normally in the daylight. But although she was silent, she was evidently mistress of a situation which was familiar enough to her, and inclined to let it take its way for the six hundredth time, perhaps, without bringing into play any of her unoccupied faculties. A single glance was enough to show that Mrs. Hilbery was so rich in the gifts which make tea-parties of elderly distinguished people successful, that she scarcely needed any help from her daughter, provided that the tiresome business of teacups and bread and butter was discharged for her.

As used in the highlighted line, “mistress” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from Night and Day, a novel by Virginia Woolf that was first published in 1919. The novel tells the story of two main female characters in London in the early 20th century.

It was a Sunday evening in October, and in common with many other young ladies of her class, Katharine Hilbery was pouring out tea. Perhaps a fifth part of her mind was thus occupied, and the remaining parts leapt over the little barrier of day which interposed between Monday morning and this rather subdued moment, and played with the things one does voluntarily and normally in the daylight. But although she was silent, she was evidently mistress of a situation which was familiar enough to her, and inclined to let it take its way for the six hundredth time, perhaps, without bringing into play any of her unoccupied faculties. A single glance was enough to show that Mrs. Hilbery was so rich in the gifts which make tea-parties of elderly distinguished people successful, that she scarcely needed any help from her daughter, provided that the tiresome business of teacups and bread and butter was discharged for her.

As used in the highlighted line, “mistress” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from “Human Life and Migration - an Origin Story,” (2020)

It is now commonly accepted that human life originated in East Africa. There is less agreement as to whether the humans that left Africa in a final exodus as recently as 100,000 years ago replaced all other hominids (thus becoming ancestors to everyone now alive) or humans evolved independently in geographically separated regions. Recently, the replacement scenario, as it is sometimes called, has been lent support from genetic research.

Genetic investigations into the origins of human life most often focus on mitochondrial DNA. As opposed to nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA is transmitted only from the mother. This allows for the tracing of mutations that arise independently of changes that occur because of the combining of the mother’s and father’s DNA. As useful as this is, the high mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA allows scientists a look at only relatively recent prehistory. Nuclear DNA, on the other hand, has a low mutation rate, making it ideal for looking into the more distant past. Studying the nuclear DNA of fossils now shows a substantial decrease in population size in Europe and Asia approximately 50—80 thousand years ago. No such decrease happened in Africa. This supports the idea that migrants from Africa replaced all previous humans, and did not interbreed with earlier migrants.

Other research shows less genetic diversity the farther human populations are located from Africa. This difference in diversity, which continues to the present day, also supports the hypothesis that modern human life came from Africa and gradually spread throughout the world. It is worth noting that there is no discontinuity in the decrease of diversity as one travels from Africa; this points to less distinct ethnic and racial divisions than is popularly thought to be the case.

As used in the highlighted portion, “discontinuity” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from “Human Life and Migration - an Origin Story,” (2020)

It is now commonly accepted that human life originated in East Africa. There is less agreement as to whether the humans that left Africa in a final exodus as recently as 100,000 years ago replaced all other hominids (thus becoming ancestors to everyone now alive) or humans evolved independently in geographically separated regions. Recently, the replacement scenario, as it is sometimes called, has been lent support from genetic research.

Genetic investigations into the origins of human life most often focus on mitochondrial DNA. As opposed to nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA is transmitted only from the mother. This allows for the tracing of mutations that arise independently of changes that occur because of the combining of the mother’s and father’s DNA. As useful as this is, the high mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA allows scientists a look at only relatively recent prehistory. Nuclear DNA, on the other hand, has a low mutation rate, making it ideal for looking into the more distant past. Studying the nuclear DNA of fossils now shows a substantial decrease in population size in Europe and Asia approximately 50—80 thousand years ago. No such decrease happened in Africa. This supports the idea that migrants from Africa replaced all previous humans, and did not interbreed with earlier migrants.

Other research shows less genetic diversity the farther human populations are located from Africa. This difference in diversity, which continues to the present day, also supports the hypothesis that modern human life came from Africa and gradually spread throughout the world. It is worth noting that there is no discontinuity in the decrease of diversity as one travels from Africa; this points to less distinct ethnic and racial divisions than is popularly thought to be the case.

As used in the highlighted portion, “discontinuity” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from “Human Life and Migration - an Origin Story,” (2020)

It is now commonly accepted that human life originated in East Africa. There is less agreement as to whether the humans that left Africa in a final exodus as recently as 100,000 years ago replaced all other hominids (thus becoming ancestors to everyone now alive) or humans evolved independently in geographically separated regions. Recently, the replacement scenario, as it is sometimes called, has been lent support from genetic research.

Genetic investigations into the origins of human life most often focus on mitochondrial DNA. As opposed to nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA is transmitted only from the mother. This allows for the tracing of mutations that arise independently of changes that occur because of the combining of the mother’s and father’s DNA. As useful as this is, the high mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA allows scientists a look at only relatively recent prehistory. Nuclear DNA, on the other hand, has a low mutation rate, making it ideal for looking into the more distant past. Studying the nuclear DNA of fossils now shows a substantial decrease in population size in Europe and Asia approximately 50—80 thousand years ago. No such decrease happened in Africa. This supports the idea that migrants from Africa replaced all previous humans, and did not interbreed with earlier migrants.

Other research shows less genetic diversity the farther human populations are located from Africa. This difference in diversity, which continues to the present day, also supports the hypothesis that modern human life came from Africa and gradually spread throughout the world. It is worth noting that there is no discontinuity in the decrease of diversity as one travels from Africa; this points to less distinct ethnic and racial divisions than is popularly thought to be the case.

As used in the highlighted portion, “discontinuity” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from “Human Life and Migration - an Origin Story,” (2020)

It is now commonly accepted that human life originated in East Africa. There is less agreement as to whether the humans that left Africa in a final exodus as recently as 100,000 years ago replaced all other hominids (thus becoming ancestors to everyone now alive) or humans evolved independently in geographically separated regions. Recently, the replacement scenario, as it is sometimes called, has been lent support from genetic research.

Genetic investigations into the origins of human life most often focus on mitochondrial DNA. As opposed to nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA is transmitted only from the mother. This allows for the tracing of mutations that arise independently of changes that occur because of the combining of the mother’s and father’s DNA. As useful as this is, the high mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA allows scientists a look at only relatively recent prehistory. Nuclear DNA, on the other hand, has a low mutation rate, making it ideal for looking into the more distant past. Studying the nuclear DNA of fossils now shows a substantial decrease in population size in Europe and Asia approximately 50—80 thousand years ago. No such decrease happened in Africa. This supports the idea that migrants from Africa replaced all previous humans, and did not interbreed with earlier migrants.

Other research shows less genetic diversity the farther human populations are located from Africa. This difference in diversity, which continues to the present day, also supports the hypothesis that modern human life came from Africa and gradually spread throughout the world. It is worth noting that there is no discontinuity in the decrease of diversity as one travels from Africa; this points to less distinct ethnic and racial divisions than is popularly thought to be the case.

As used in the highlighted portion, “discontinuity” most nearly means

The following is an excerpt from “Human Life and Migration - an Origin Story,” (2020)

It is now commonly accepted that human life originated in East Africa. There is less agreement as to whether the humans that left Africa in a final exodus as recently as 100,000 years ago replaced all other hominids (thus becoming ancestors to everyone now alive) or humans evolved independently in geographically separated regions. Recently, the replacement scenario, as it is sometimes called, has been lent support from genetic research.

Genetic investigations into the origins of human life most often focus on mitochondrial DNA. As opposed to nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA is transmitted only from the mother. This allows for the tracing of mutations that arise independently of changes that occur because of the combining of the mother’s and father’s DNA. As useful as this is, the high mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA allows scientists a look at only relatively recent prehistory. Nuclear DNA, on the other hand, has a low mutation rate, making it ideal for looking into the more distant past. Studying the nuclear DNA of fossils now shows a substantial decrease in population size in Europe and Asia approximately 50—80 thousand years ago. No such decrease happened in Africa. This supports the idea that migrants from Africa replaced all previous humans, and did not interbreed with earlier migrants.

Other research shows less genetic diversity the farther human populations are located from Africa. This difference in diversity, which continues to the present day, also supports the hypothesis that modern human life came from Africa and gradually spread throughout the world. It is worth noting that there is no discontinuity in the decrease of diversity as one travels from Africa; this points to less distinct ethnic and racial divisions than is popularly thought to be the case.

As used in the highlighted portion, “discontinuity” most nearly means