Most scholars agree that King Alfred (A.D 849 - 899) personally

questioning the plausibility of an assumption on which another argument depends.

Not able to understand . Can expert give some idea here.

thanks

One historian says that the linguistic similarities between the law code and Alfred's translations outweigh the differences. The historian thus concludes that Alfred wrote that law code. The underlying assumption in that argument is that if you compare the work of a known author (Work A) to the work of an unknown author (Work B) and the linguistic similarities between those works outweigh the differences, then Work B was most likely also written by the author of Work A. The author of this passage then states, "Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region." In other words, the similarities can be explained by other factors (shared language/time/region), not only by shared authorship. Furthermore, because there are only two other extant works, we do not have enough evidence to rule out the possibility that the similarities are due to shared language/time/region rather than shared authorship. Thus, as indicated in choice B, the author of the passage questions the plausibility of the historian's argument.

I also answer opted for (c) for the exactly same reason explained above. should I assume the OA is wrong?

My previous post explains why choice (B) is correct, but I made a typo and wrote "C". I have corrected the mistake... thanks for checking!

As for choice (C), although generalizing the assumption made by the historian might have "anomalous consequences", the author does not describe any such consequences in the passage. Thus, choice (C) does not accurately describe how the author proceeds.

Choice (B) is the correct answer.

Understand the argument clearly first.

The Scholars said King did some work X. Historian said King also did some work Y. On what basis? He said differences are fewer compared to similarities.

Author said: However: Similarities require alot of conditions but many of those conditions were not met by Mr King. He met only a few conditions.

Conclusion: "it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship."

That means Author is trying to say " Dude, don't be so sure about what you are saying. There are some other possibilities.

Let's discuss the options now:

The passage above proceeds by

(A) Providing examples that underscore another argument's conclusion. --> Author is not underscoring anything. Author is asking to expand your scope and consider other possibilities.

(B) questioning the plausibility of an assumption on which another argument depends. --> Yeah, Here we go. Author is expanding the scope by providing another possibility.

(c) showing that a principle if generally applied would have anomalous consequences. --> Nooo.. He never said so. Author is still not sure about what he said. He just said consider other possibilities

(D) showing that the premises of another argument are mutually inconsistent. --> Same as A.

(E) using argument by analogy to undermine a principle implicit in another argument. --> Again, he is not undermining anything. Notice the word "risky"

Does that make sense?

abhimahna, great explanation!

Yes, linguistic similarities alone are not enough to safely assume that two works were written by the same author. If both works were written in the same language, at the same time, and in the same region, we would expect the works to have linguistic similarities, even if they were written by different authors.

Official Answer:

Argument Evaluation

Situation A historian argues that King Alfred must have written his own law code, since there are more similarities than differences between the language in the law code and that in Alfred's translations of Latin texts. Apart from Alfred's translations and law code, there are only two other extant works in the same dialect and from the same milieu.

Reasoning How does the reasoning in the passage proceed? The first sentence presents a claim that is not disputed in the passage. The second sentence presents a historian's argument. Implicitly citing the undisputed claim in the passage's first sentence as evidence, the historian proposes an analogy between the law code and Alfred's translations, arguing on the basis of this analogy that Alfred wrote the law code. The third sentence of the passage casts doubt on this analogy, pointing out that it could plausibly apply to texts that Alfred did not write. The fourth sentence suggests that too few extant texts are available as evidence to rule out the possibility raised in the third sentence. Thus, the third and fourth sentences are intended to undermine the historian's argument.




Option B is Correct. The passage's third and fourth sentences question the plausibility of the historian's assumption that no one but Alfred would have been likely to write a text whose language has more similarities to than differences from the language in Alfred's translations.

Why are A, C, D & E incorrect:-

A - As explained above, the passage is intended to undermine the conclusion of the historian's argument, not to underscore (emphasize) it.

C - Although there might well be anomalous consequences from generalizing the assumption on which the historian's argument relies, the passage does not mention or allude to any such consequences.

D - The passage does not mention, or suggest the existence of, any inconsistencies among the premises of the historian's argument.

E - Although the historian argues by analogy, the passage does not itself argue by analogy; it does not suggest any specific counteranalogy to undermine the historian's argument.

Hi GMATGuruNY - just curious, how would you solve a problem like this ?

Here was my breakup of the role per sentence
Green: Fact
Brown: Counter premise
Grey : Premise
Blue : Premise
Purple : Conclusion.

But then I was not sure how to proceed.

Most scholars agree that King Alfred (A.D 849 - 899) personally translated a number of Latin texts into Old English. One historian contends that Alfred also personally penned his own law code, arguing that the numerous differences between the language of the law code and Alfred's translation of Latin texts are outweighed by the even more numerous similarities. Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region. Apart from Alfred's surviving translation and law code, there are only two other extant works from the same dialect and milieu, so it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.

Premise of the scholar:
The numerous differences between the language of the law code and Alfred's translation of Latin texts are outweighed by the even more numerous similarities.
Conclusion of the scholar:
Alfred penned the law code.

According to the passage, what is the flaw in the scholar's argument?
It is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.

Option B describes this flaw:
The passage proceeds by questioning an assumption (linguistic similarities point here to common authorship) on which another argument (the scholar's argument) depends.

Hi GMATGuruNY - isn't C right as well ?

If the principle {a.k.a assumption that - linguistic similarities point to common authorship)} is applied generally -- it leads to incorrect results (like the results that Alfred personally penned his own law code)

That's why I selected C.

C: The passage proceeds by showing that a principle if generally applied would have anomalous consequences.

No principle is applied GENERALLY.
The last line of the passage:
It is risky to assume HERE that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.
The usage of here constrains the dispute to A SINGLE CASE: authorship of the law code.
Further, the passage does not discuss any consequences.
Thus, C does not accurately describe how the passage proceeds.



Please note that a principle is not an assumption.
My dictionary defines a principle as follows:
a fundamental truth that serves as the foundation for a chain of reasoning
Thus:
a principle = a statement that is accepted as true
an assumption = a statement that is required by a conclusion but that might NOT be true

Hi GMATGuruNY - just curious when you read the passage - which statement is the so called principle being discussed in option C ?

Between the three contenders (per my view) - I think principle 2 makes the most sense for the principle being discussed in option C.

Contenders for Principles
Principle 1) Most scholars agree that King Alfred (A.D 849 - 899) personally translated a number of Latin texts into Old English.
Principle 2) Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region.
Principle 3) Apart from Alfred's surviving translation and law code, there are only two other extant works from the same dialect and milieu....

Thoughts ?

None of the statements in the passage constitutes a principle:
1) MOST scholars agree --> some scholars disagree --> not a principle
2) what one EXPECTS --> the expectation might not come true --> not a principle
3) only TWO other extant works --> two = number --> not a principle but a statistic

I was not able to understand the question clearly. I thought it is asking what will come next in the passage. So in these type of ques. we just analyze what exactly author wants to convey and choose ans. accordingly, right?

If it were to mean ‘what will come next?’, it would be ‘the para/argument will proceed further by

‘The para proceeds by’ would mean the layout of the argument, how the para carries itself forward. So, yes you will have to analyse the para accordingly

Hi KarishmaB

"The passage above proceeds by" Does this means what follows next after the author's last statement?

In the passage when the author says, "...so it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.", isn't the author already questioning the plausibility of an assumption on which another argument depends?

The passage proceeds by questioning the plausibility of an assumption on which another argument depends. The historian's argument depends on the assumption that linguistic similarities between the law code and Alfred's translations point to common authorship. However, the passage points out that linguistic similarities are to be expected in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region. Therefore, the historian's assumption is not necessarily true. The correct answer is (B).

The other answer choices are incorrect. Answer choice (A) is incorrect because the passage does not provide any examples that underscore the historian's conclusion. Answer choice (C) is incorrect because the passage does not show that a principle, if generally applied, would have anomalous consequences. Answer choice (D) is incorrect because the passage does not show that the premises of the historian's argument are mutually inconsistent. Answer choice (E) is incorrect because the passage does not use argument by analogy to undermine a principle implicit in the historian's argument.