TASK DEFINITION: Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix 'Q:' followed by the answer prefix 'A:', and the follow-up question has a prefix 'FOLLOWUP_Q:'.
PROBLEM: CONTEXT: Oh, it's quite simple really. It's alphabetical. Chinese word for car is which is anglicized as Qiche and read as Quizhe, thus making it after the word Quiz. R goes after letter Q in the alphabet. It is believable that the word Qiche is the last section in the library's Q section before the R section, while the "Rash" section is possibly the first section in the library's R section. It might be the small or "weird" library, having many books on odd subjects. That is if you ignore other words starting with R which would come before the word rash, such as race (verb) racial (adjective) radiation radical (adjective) radio (noun) rage rail (noun) railroad (noun) rain rain forest raise (verb) range (noun) rank (noun) rapid (adjective) rare (adjective) rarely It should also be pointed out that almost all those previous words when read start with Re- while the rash is the first one which actually reads like Ra-. So the library might be arranged by phonetic pronunciation of the words and not how they are spelled. <sep> Q: How do rashes relate to chinese cars? A: Oh, it's quite simple really. It's alphabetical Q: How is this alphabetical? A: Chinese word for car is which is anglicized as Qiche and read as Quizhe <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there any other context to this as the series is full of meaning?

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: CONTEXT: I don't think it's a Czech-specific quip, actually. I believe the idea is that the lines are crude and not very intelligently written, as if someone were translating actual decent dialogue from a language they have poor command of, making the translation very rudimentary and child-like. Or possibly, if there was not a robust movie industry in that nation in the early 1980s, the quality of the output was considered pretty poor. Or some combination of the two. So, languages that were pretty common in the "western" and US part of the world would not work, even if the country was not really familiar (where the language was Spanish, French, German or Italian) or if there were not examples of any movies from a country. Portuguese? Maybe, but a Slavic or Balkan nation or language would be ideal for that line. Probably not Poland, because there was already a Polish stereotype about intelligence that was commonly used in jokes, so there might be some confusion about intent. "Czech" was merely chosen because it's a country an English speaking audience would be aware of, but there would be almost no movies, as of that time, that anyone could reference, making it an obscure scenario. They could have easily used Romania, Bulgaria, but could not use Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, etc (nations that were, at that time, considered part of the USSR). <sep> Q: What's wrong with subtitles for a Czech movie, as referenced in Tootsie? A: I don't think it's a Czech-specific quip, actually Q: Why does Julie say my lines sound like subtitles for a Czech movie? A: I believe the idea is that the lines are crude and not very intelligently written, as if someone were translating actual decent dialogue from a language they have poor command of Q: Is there something characteristic about the...like bad grammar? A: Czech" was merely chosen because it's a country an English speaking audience would be aware of, but there would be almost no movies, as of that time, that anyone could reference <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Okay, anything else you can tell me about Tootsie?

SOLUTION: No

PROBLEM: CONTEXT: The comment prior to the conversation with the astronauts' wives (in the control center) clearly states that Capricorn 1 is just close enough to Earth to allow the fluent conversation. Only at the most distant point of the mission the conversation gaps reach 21 minutes. Thus, there seems to be no blooper nor plothole. (I am much more worried about the Apollo mission technology used for a journey of at least a year. Could three astronauts just sit in the command module most of the time? I guess even the strongest personalities would have gone mad. There might have been a strong extended/additional stage of a modified Saturn rocket for the outward and return journey. If this stage was equipped with extra rooms, stores etc. it would appear more realistic than what we see in the movie.) <sep> Q: How is the fluent conversation with spacecraft possible in Capricorn One? A: The comment prior to the conversation with the astronauts' wives (in the control center) clearly states that Capricorn 1 is just close enough to Earth to allow the fluent conversation Q: How close was Capricorn One to earth? A: Only at the most distant point of the mission the conversation gaps reach 21 minutes Q: Would this work in real life as in the movie? Or would it be too far away to communicate with Earth? A: If this stage was equipped with extra rooms, stores etc. it would appear more realistic than what we see in the movie <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Ok, that doesn't really answer my question. How many people were onboard Capricorn One?

SOLUTION:
No