Rearrange the labelled sentences to form a coherent paragraph about the German practice of "lapanka" in occupied Poland.

Introduction / Context:
This is a paragraph arrangement or para jumble question. You are given four labelled sentences that together describe a German practice in occupied Poland during the Second World War, associated with the term "lapanka". Your task is to arrange them so that they produce a logical, smoothly flowing paragraph that introduces the practice, explains the term, and then provides statistics and an example.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Q: A common German practice in occupied Poland was to round up random civilians on the streets of Polish cities.
• S: The term "lapanka" carried a sardonic connotation from the word earlier use for the children game known in English as "tag".
• P: According to various estimates, between 1942 and 1944 there were approximately 400 victims of this practice daily in Warsaw alone, with numbers on some days reaching several thousands.
• R: For example, on 19 September 1942 close to 3000 men and women were transported by train to Germany they had been caught in the massive round ups all over Warsaw the previous two days.
• We seek the most natural narrative order explaining the practice, naming it, quantifying it, and illustrating it with an example.

Concept / Approach:
A coherent paragraph usually starts with a general statement or definition, then may introduce terminology, provide quantitative details, and end with a specific example. Sentence Q clearly introduces the general practice of rounding up civilians. Sentence S explains the term "lapanka", which refers to that practice. Sentence P gives statistical data about how frequent it was, and sentence R supplies a concrete example on a particular date. Therefore the logical order is Q, S, P, R, which corresponds to option QSPR.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Find the best opening sentence. Q introduces "a common German practice in occupied Poland" and is independent, so it is a strong candidate for the opening. Step 2: After defining the practice in Q, it makes sense to introduce the technical or colloquial term for this practice. Sentence S does exactly that by explaining the meaning and origin of "lapanka". Hence S should follow Q. Step 3: Once the practice and term are introduced, we can provide numerical detail. P quantifies the scale of the practice, referring back to "this practice", which naturally links to Q (and implicitly to the term mentioned in S). Step 4: Finally, a specific example often comes after general statistics. Sentence R provides an example with a precise date and number of victims, illustrating what P described. Step 5: This gives the order Q S P R, matching option C (QSPR).

Verification / Alternative check:
Check alternative sequences. If we start with S, the term "lapanka" is introduced before the reader knows what practice it refers to, which can be confusing. If we put R before P, the example would come before the general statistical summary, which is less natural in formal exposition. Ending with Q, as in some other options, would move the basic definition to the end of the paragraph, which is clearly illogical. Only QSPR gives a smooth flow from general overview to term explanation, then to data, and finally to a specific illustration.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
SQRP starts by discussing the term "lapanka" without first describing the practice itself, which can leave readers puzzled.

SRPQ moves from the term to an example and then to statistics, and ends with the basic definition, which is backward.

QPRS places the statistics before the term explanation. Ending with S feels abrupt and leaves the paragraph with a definition of the term instead of a summarising statement or example.

Common Pitfalls:
Many candidates focus only on pronoun references like "this practice" without considering the overall informational flow. A more reliable strategy is to first identify a sentence that can stand alone as a topic sentence. Then, look for sentences that explain terms, give numerical details, and finally provide examples. Checking for phrases like "for example" or "according to estimates" also helps decide what should follow what. Here, those cues strongly support the QSPR order.

Final Answer:
The most logical order is Q S P R, so the correct option is QSPR.