1. They are not real tails. They just look like beavers' tail. In Ottawa, a beaver tail is a big, flat bread.

=======================
In the second sentence, what is the meaning of 'just'?
Does 'just' mean 'exactly' or 'only'?

They look like beaver tails, they are really a flat bread with icing and all sorts of fillings (cinamon, apples etc). So they "look" that is, take the shape of a beaver tail (but they are a lovely treat), unlike a beaver tail that would slap the water!

It means 'only'. I'd love to have a beaver tail right now...

2. It means 'exactly'.

3. I would make 'tail' plural: ' They look exactly like beavers' tails.' So, no.
4. No, I don't really think that's right.

Thank you.

2. They look just like beavers' tail.
[In this sentence, does 'just' mean 'only' or 'exactly'?]

3. They look exactly like beavers' tail.
4. They look only like beavers' tail.
[Are both correct?]

1. They are not real tails. They just look like beavers' tails. In Ottawa, a beaver tail is a big, flat bread.

=======================
In the second sentence, what is the meaning of 'just'?
Does 'just' mean 'exactly' or 'only'?

1. They are not real tails. They just look like beavers' tails. In Ottawa, a beaver tail is a big, flat bread.

Does 'just' mean 'exactly' or 'only'? only

2. They look just like beavers' tail.
[In this sentence, does 'just' mean 'only' or 'exactly'?]
exactly

3. They look exactly like beavers' tail.
4. They look only like beavers' tail.
[Are both correct?]
No, only 3 is correct.

The word "just" in the sentence "They are not real tails. They just look like beavers' tail" means "only." In this context, it emphasizes that the object being referred to (in this case, the tails) are not actual or genuine beaver tails, but rather they resemble them. The word "just" is used to indicate that there is nothing more to it than that - no further significance or complexity.