One reason why European music has had such a strong influence througho

First off, the question asks for the only incompatible statement (not an answer that is not supported by the passage, but one that goes against it).

A) No mention is made to the relative popularity of European and African music. African music could be extremely popular and the reasons for European music popularity would stand unchallenged. Wrong answer.

B) It suggests the existence of another factor that contributed to the popularity of European music. The passage says that ONE of the reasons is blah blah blah, not THE ONLY reason, therefore B is compatible with the passage. Wrong answer.

C) It describes the changes in Chinese music without mentioning the effect of such changes, therefore it does not contraddict the passage. Wrong answer.

D) It says that music that becomes unintelligible when separated from its original function is the most sophisticated type, but the passage says that European music, which is highly sophisticated, is internally coherent, hence intelligible, even when detached from its original function. This statement contraddicts the passage. Right answer.

E) It contraddicts the idea exposed in the statement but with no direct reference to music. The statement could hold true for all forms of art except music and the passage would still be valid. Wrong answer.


My money on D

As far as I can tell, A and C are boobie trap answers. They both mention music from cultures that aren't mentioned in the original text. However, the question asks which of the choices are incompatible with the claims of the text. And neither one is: Just bc Euro music had a strong impact on the world doesn't mean that Afro music didn't have a greater one and changes in Chinese music is not mentioned so C is possible. B is also possible since the function becoming only an aspect of the music was called only "One reason" for the influence of Euro music on the world. D I'm not sure if I fully understand what the writer's saying. E says that works lose their appeal when they are used for a different function than the original. If it lost it's appeal then how could it gain stronger influence? My first bet would have been E but noboru says it's wrong so then I'll go with D bc the music waxed more sophisticated as it moved to have it's original purpose as an aspect of it rather than more than that. D is the opposite extreme with the use of "unintelligible" and the text doesn't appear to warrant that.

My answer is DD Nutz!!
_________________

One reason why European music has had such a strong influence throughout the world, and why it is a sophisticated achievement, is that over time the original function of the music—whether ritual, dance, or worship—gradually became an aspect of its style, not its defining force. Dance music could stand independent of dance, for example, and sacred music independent of religious worship, because each composition has so much internal coherence that the music ultimately depends on nothing but itself.
The claims made above are compatible with each of the following EXCEPT:
(A) African music has had a more powerful impact on the world than European music has had...Could be possible as the argument does not state that the European Music had the most powerful impact.
(B) European military and economic expansionism partially explains the global influence of European music...The argument gives 1 of the reasons and hence this clearly can also be one of the reasons
(C) The original functions of many types of Chinese music are no longer their defining forces...quite similar to European Music, where the original function is not the defining force.
(D) Music that is unintelligible when it is presented independently of its original function tends to be the most sophisticated music...SPOT ON...The argument states that European music's achievement is sophisticated and not that it is sophisticated due to the fact that it is presented independent of its function..Also no mention of European music being Unintelligible is given anywhere.
(E) Some works of art lose their appeal when they are presented to serve a function other than their original one.
Clearly not the case as the European music deviated from its function yet had an impact all over.


IMO its D

Yes, this one is definitely D, though it isn't at all like any real GMAT CR questions, so people shouldn't worry about it much. The question asks which answer choices are 'compatible with' the information given in the stem - that is, it's asking which answer choices could, in theory be true if you accept the information given.

The point of the passage is that "sophisticated" European music "has so much internal coherence that the music ultimately depends on nothing but itself." Even when this music is divorced from its function, it is still *coherent*. That contradicts D completely, which says that sophisticated music is *unintelligible*.

One reason why European music has had such a strong influence throughout the world, and why it is a sophisticated achievement, is that over time the original function of the music—whether ritual, dance, or worship—gradually became an aspect of its style, not its defining force. Dance music could stand independent of dance, for example, and sacred music independent of religious worship, because each composition has so much internal coherence that the music ultimately depends on nothing but itself.
The claims made above are compatible with each of the following EXCEPT:

Rephrase it: Which of the following is not contrary to the passage.
POE method is particularly effective on 700-level questions b/c the right choice would be so confusing on the verbal part.

A. European music has had such a strong influence throughout the world, but not the strongest
Means that some other continents' music migh have had more powerful effect on the world, and African music might be one of them. How is this answer incompatible with the argument. No how. Eliminate A.

(B) It does not contradict the passage at all. It just partially explains why European music has been so influential.

C. This answer is consitent with the following statement: the original function of the music—whether ritual, dance, or worship—gradually became an aspect of its style, not its defining force.

(E) No problem, the argument does not state that this rule is absolute. There might be some exceptions. This might be one of them.

That leaves D.

Seems like an easy (D) to me. The key is that they're asking which choices the claims are COMPATIBLE with - not necessarily that the answers are DEFINITELY true, but that they COULD be true without contradicting the article.

(A) - The article states only that European music has had a large global influence - not that it had the LARGEST influence. African music could have had a larger influence without contradicting the article. Compatible.

(B) - The article states ONE OF the reasons why European music had a large global influence. This could certainly be ANOTHER reason, and it makes sense as one. Compatible.

(C) - The point the article makes is that the original functions of European music are no longer the defining forces - it makes no claim that ONLY European music has this quality. It could certainly be true of other music, like, say, Chinese. Compatible.

(D) - European music is globally influential because it stands alone without needing its original function - in other words, you don't have to include a ritualistic dance to appreciate the music being danced to, because the music is good enough on its own. This option states the exact opposite - the most sophisticated music is unintelligible without its original function, so it CAN'T stand alone. Complete contradiction - incompatible.

(E) - This is a direct inference from the article. If the global influence of European music can partially be attributed to the fact that it can stand alone without its original function, it would make sense that there are works of art which cannot stand alone without their original functions. Compatible.

D.

A. Unrelated but not incompatible. could be true.
B. Not incompatible. that may very well be the case.
C. Very compatible.
D. Incompatible. States that the most sophisticated music is that which is unintelligible without it's original context.
E. Close to D but is about works of art rather than music so it is not as incompatible as D which is far more specifically related to music

Wow, this one is engendered quite a lot of controversy.

There is definitely a clear answer though, which is (D). And that the wrong answers are incorrect is equally clear (at least I hope my explanation makes it seem that way .)


So let's dissect this monster by asking: What is the core of the argument?

European music is sophisticated because it can stand on its own. That is European music can be divorced from its context (rituals, social functions, etc.) and still make sense.

An answer that would be incompatible with the argument would suggest that

1) European music cannot stand on its own but must be understood in the context of its function
2) A certain kind of music can stand on it's own but is not sophisticated.
3) Music that is sophisticated cannot stand on its own - i.e., it is unintelligible.

1) is too direct and obvious (at least for a 700+ question), and doesn't touch on sophistication. A possible answer choice would be something like:

(F) Most people who are exposed to western music for the first time find it unintelligible

2) mentions sophistication and would more likely be a GMAT answer choice. However, none of the answer choices (A - E) fall into this category. A hypothetical answer that fits into this category is:

(G) African griot music, understood by those who have no idea of the social function of the music, is a simple and unadorned.

3) This is the most subtle of the three. Essentially, we are saying that A = B (sophisticated music is intelligible) and are challenging this with an answer choice that says A does not equal B (sophisticated music is unintelligible). The answer choice that clearly speak to this is answer (D):

(D) Music that is unintelligible when it is presented independently of its original function tends to be the most sophisticated music. ANSWER


(A) African music has had a more powerful impact on the world than European music has had.

The argument says that European music has had a powerful impact. That African music has had the most impact does not undermine the previous statement.

(B) European military and economic expansionism partially explains the global influence of European music.

The prompt begins with the words, [i]one reason why... Thus, it is not saying that European music's global influence has only one cause. [/i]

(C) The original functions of many types of Chinese music are no longer their defining forces.

This answer choice doesn't speak to sophistication, intelligibility or even global influence. It simply states that Chinese music is defined by something different than its original function.

(D) The Answer


(E) Some works of art lose their appeal when they are presented to serve a function other than their original one.

This answer choice would be much stronger if it replaced, Some works with Most European music. In fact, think back to 1) at the beginning of the post. Remember how I said that answer choice is the most obvious one. Well, (E) baits us into thinking that it is the same as 1). But by dropping in 'some works of art' it becomes too broad. Indeed 'some works of art' does not, by definition, include European music. So this answer choice can be said to be out of scope.

Hope that helps
_________________

 

­The correct answer is (D) Presumes, without providing justification, that total emissions for a given automobile trip are determined primarily by the amount of time the trip takes.

This option directly addresses the flawed reasoning in the argument by pointing out that the assumption that total emissions are primarily determined by the amount of time a trip takes is unjustified. 

It's possible that emissions could be affected by various factors such as speed, driving conditions, vehicle efficiency, and others. Therefore, the argument's conclusion that reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment is flawed because it relies on an unsubstantiated assumption about emissions.