In this task, you are given a question and a context passage. You have to answer the question based on the given passage.

[EX Q]: Which player fumbled the ball?, Context: There would be no more scoring in the third quarter, but early in the fourth, the Broncos drove to the Panthers 41-yard line. On the next play, Ealy knocked the ball out of Manning's hand as he was winding up for a pass, and then recovered it for Carolina on the 50-yard line. A 16-yard reception by Devin Funchess and a 12-yard run by Stewart then set up Gano's 39-yard field goal, cutting the Panthers deficit to one score at 16–10. The next three drives of the game would end in punts.
[EX A]: Manning

[EX Q]: Which language does not contain a second to third evolution, only a beginning to and end evolution?, Context: The other directly attested Old Iranian dialects are the two forms of Avestan, which take their name from their use in the Avesta, the liturgical texts of indigenous Iranian religion that now goes by the name of Zoroastrianism but in the Avesta itself is simply known as vohu daena (later: behdin). The language of the Avesta is subdivided into two dialects, conventionally known as "Old (or 'Gathic') Avestan", and "Younger Avestan". These terms, which date to the 19th century, are slightly misleading since 'Younger Avestan' is not only much younger than 'Old Avestan', but also from a different geographic region. The Old Avestan dialect is very archaic, and at roughly the same stage of development as Rigvedic Sanskrit. On the other hand, Younger Avestan is at about the same linguistic stage as Old Persian, but by virtue of its use as a sacred language retained its "old" characteristics long after the Old Iranian languages had yielded to their Middle Iranian stage. Unlike Old Persian, which has Middle Persian as its known successor, Avestan has no clearly identifiable Middle Iranian stage (the effect of Middle Iranian is indistinguishable from effects due to other causes).
[EX A]: Avestan

[EX Q]: What is a variant reading?, Context: When comparing different documents, or "witnesses", of a single, original text, the observed differences are called variant readings, or simply variants or readings. It is not always apparent which single variant represents the author's original work. The process of textual criticism seeks to explain how each variant may have entered the text, either by accident (duplication or omission) or intention (harmonization or censorship), as scribes or supervisors transmitted the original author's text by copying it. The textual critic's task, therefore, is to sort through the variants, eliminating those most likely to be un-original, hence establishing a "critical text", or critical edition, that is intended to best approximate the original. At the same time, the critical text should document variant readings, so the relation of extant witnesses to the reconstructed original is apparent to a reader of the critical edition. In establishing the critical text, the textual critic considers both "external" evidence (the age, provenance, and affiliation of each witness) and "internal" or "physical" considerations (what the author and scribes, or printers, were likely to have done).
[EX A]:
When comparing different documents, or "witnesses", of a single, original text, the observed differences