GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

It is currently 28 Jan 2020, 16:16

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Can somebody help me with my problem to this passage???

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Aug 2019
Posts: 46
Can somebody help me with my problem to this passage???  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2019, 01:52
GWD3-Q12 to Q15:
In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United States Supreme Court rejected the efforts of three Native American tribes to prevent the opening of tribal lands to non-Indian settlement without tribal consent. In his study of the Lone Wolf case, Blue Clark properly emphasizes the Court’s assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) over Native American affairs. But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact: shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when—following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes. But in reality the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress. The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation and finally did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent.





----------------------------------------------------------------------

Q12: The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
A. identifying similarities in two different theories
B. evaluating a work of scholarship
C. analyzing the significance of a historical event
D. debunking a revisionist (supporter to certain policy)interpretation
E. exploring the relationship between law and social reality

Q12:
The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

The author is concerned about the far reaching impact of the Supreme Court decision during the Lone Wolf case. A decision which led to abolishing treaties... something the scholar missed to tackle...

A. there were no theories in the passage OUT!
B. he evaluated the scholar's work for a moment BUT that was primarily to get to his point about the effect of the Lone Wolf case later... OUT!
C. BINGO! Analyzing the far reaching impact of an event
D. he pointed out what a scholar was missing but that was ONLY in support to his primary purpose... OUT!
E. law and social reality? too generic.. OUT!

Q12: C
(front)…In his study of the Lone Wolf case…he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact ….(end) The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation


In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United States Supreme Court rejected the Line efforts of three Native American tribes to prevent the opening of tribal lands to non-Indian settlement without tribal consent. In his study of the Lone Wolf case, Blue Clark properly emphasizes the Court’s assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) over Native American affairs.

But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact: shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes. But in reality, the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these
documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress. The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation and finally did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent.

Passage summary
P1:- About decision in the case of Lone Walk and Blue Clark' study.
P2 :- About decision's far reaching impact. (Note by reading 1st line of P2 we may think that author will explain about Blue Clark’s study in this paragraph, but in last line it is clear that author is still talking about decision.)

By passage summary we can pre-think that author is discussing about decision.
The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

A. identifying similarities in two different theories (not theories)
B. evaluating a work of scholarship ---( Yes author put some light on a Work of Blue Clarke but this not the primary purpose.)
C. analyzing the significance of a historical event ---- Correct align with pre-think.
D. debunking a revisionist interpretation
E. exploring the relationship between law and social reality

my question here is that does “to analyze the significance” has any relationship with “to emphasize the author's negligence for decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock's far-reaching impact.....”….I just think this correct option still have flaws in some way--for paragraph 2,I think the author seems to emphasize something in paragraph 1 hasn’t mentioned…(But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact: shortly after Lone Wolf,) ,so I think the author’s point is just want to revise/expand some of the scholar’s (in paragraph 1) argument or point






----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q13: According to the passage, which of the following was true of relations between the federal government and Native American tribes?
A. Some Native American tribes approved of the congressional action of 1871 because it simplified their dealings with the federal government.
B. Some Native American tribes were more eager to negotiate treaties with the United States after the Lone Wolf decision.
C. Prior to the Lone Wolf decision, the Supreme Court was reluctant to hear cases involving agreements negotiated between Congress and Native American tribes.
D. Prior to 1871, the federal government sometimes negotiated treaties with Native American tribes.
E. Following 1871, the House exercised more power than did the Senate in the government’s dealings with Native American tribes.
Q13:
According to the passage, which of the following was true of relations between the federal government and Native American tribes?

A and B. we don't know about what the Native American tribes really thought of the issue and where they stand... OUT!
C. We know one case but we cannot generalize that they were reluctant on some other cases. We dont know. OUT!
D. BINGO! It was mentioned that abolishing the treaties happened in 1871. Then prior to that, there were treaties.
E. Which had greater power, not discussed in the passage. All we know that the Senate do the ratification and both houses pass this as legislation... Who has more power.. Don't know!!


According to the passage, which of the following was true of relations between the federal government and Native American tribes?
D. Prior to 1871, the federal government sometimes negotiated treaties with Native American tribes.
E. Following 1871, the House exercised more power than did the Senate in the government’s dealings with Native American tribes.

>>Though arg support both , I selected D over E because E is more strong. any thoughts?

Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes.
But in reality the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress.

From this sentence in the paragraph, isn’t that we can infer option E is correct???
House exercise more power than Senate….????






OUT!----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q14: As an element in the argument presented by the author of the passage, the reference to Blue Clark’s study of the Lone Wolf case serves primarily to(in another word, paragraph 1 serves primarily to….???)
A. point out that this episode in Native American history has received inadequate attention from scholars
B. support the contention of the author of the passage that the Lone Wolf decision had a greater long-term impact (para2)than did the congressional action of 1871here we do not compare Long Wolf decision with congressional action of 1871

also, para1 does not ‘support’para2…..
C. challenge the validity of the Supreme Court’s decision confirming the unlimited unilateral power of Congress in Native American affairs
D. refute the argument of commentators who regard the congressional action of 1871 as the end of the era of formal negotiation between the federal government and Native American tribes
E. introduce a view about the Lone Wolf decision that the author will expand upon

In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United States Supreme Court rejected the Line efforts of three Native American tribes to prevent the opening of tribal lands to non-Indian settlement without tribal consent. In his study of the Lone Wolf case, Blue Clark properly emphasizes the Court’s assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) over Native American affairs.


But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact(to expand upon ): shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes. But in reality, the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress. The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation and finally did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent.
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 60727
Re: Can somebody help me with my problem to this passage???  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2019, 01:56
mimishyu wrote:
GWD3-Q12 to Q15:
In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United States Supreme Court rejected the efforts of three Native American tribes to prevent the opening of tribal lands to non-Indian settlement without tribal consent. In his study of the Lone Wolf case, Blue Clark properly emphasizes the Court’s assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) over Native American affairs. But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact: shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when—following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes. But in reality the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress. The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation and finally did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Q12: The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
A. identifying similarities in two different theories
B. evaluating a work of scholarship
C. analyzing the significance of a historical event
D. debunking a revisionist (supporter to certain policy)interpretation
E. exploring the relationship between law and social reality

Q12:
The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

The author is concerned about the far reaching impact of the Supreme Court decision during the Lone Wolf case. A decision which led to abolishing treaties... something the scholar missed to tackle...

A. there were no theories in the passage OUT!
B. he evaluated the scholar's work for a moment BUT that was primarily to get to his point about the effect of the Lone Wolf case later... OUT!
C. BINGO! Analyzing the far reaching impact of an event
D. he pointed out what a scholar was missing but that was ONLY in support to his primary purpose... OUT!
E. law and social reality? too generic.. OUT!

Q12: C
(front)…In his study of the Lone Wolf case…he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact ….(end) The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation


In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United States Supreme Court rejected the Line efforts of three Native American tribes to prevent the opening of tribal lands to non-Indian settlement without tribal consent. In his study of the Lone Wolf case, Blue Clark properly emphasizes the Court’s assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) over Native American affairs.

But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact: shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes. But in reality, the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these
documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress. The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation and finally did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent.

Passage summary
P1:- About decision in the case of Lone Walk and Blue Clark' study.
P2 :- About decision's far reaching impact. (Note by reading 1st line of P2 we may think that author will explain about Blue Clark’s study in this paragraph, but in last line it is clear that author is still talking about decision.)

By passage summary we can pre-think that author is discussing about decision.
The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

A. identifying similarities in two different theories (not theories)
B. evaluating a work of scholarship ---( Yes author put some light on a Work of Blue Clarke but this not the primary purpose.)
C. analyzing the significance of a historical event ---- Correct align with pre-think.
D. debunking a revisionist interpretation
E. exploring the relationship between law and social reality

my question here is that does “to analyze the significance” has any relationship with “to emphasize the author's negligence for decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock's far-reaching impact.....”….I just think this correct option still have flaws in some way--for paragraph 2,I think the author seems to emphasize something in paragraph 1 hasn’t mentioned…(But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact: shortly after Lone Wolf,) ,so I think the author’s point is just want to revise/expand some of the scholar’s (in paragraph 1) argument or point






----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q13: According to the passage, which of the following was true of relations between the federal government and Native American tribes?
A. Some Native American tribes approved of the congressional action of 1871 because it simplified their dealings with the federal government.
B. Some Native American tribes were more eager to negotiate treaties with the United States after the Lone Wolf decision.
C. Prior to the Lone Wolf decision, the Supreme Court was reluctant to hear cases involving agreements negotiated between Congress and Native American tribes.
D. Prior to 1871, the federal government sometimes negotiated treaties with Native American tribes.
E. Following 1871, the House exercised more power than did the Senate in the government’s dealings with Native American tribes.
Q13:
According to the passage, which of the following was true of relations between the federal government and Native American tribes?

A and B. we don't know about what the Native American tribes really thought of the issue and where they stand... OUT!
C. We know one case but we cannot generalize that they were reluctant on some other cases. We dont know. OUT!
D. BINGO! It was mentioned that abolishing the treaties happened in 1871. Then prior to that, there were treaties.
E. Which had greater power, not discussed in the passage. All we know that the Senate do the ratification and both houses pass this as legislation... Who has more power.. Don't know!!


According to the passage, which of the following was true of relations between the federal government and Native American tribes?
D. Prior to 1871, the federal government sometimes negotiated treaties with Native American tribes.
E. Following 1871, the House exercised more power than did the Senate in the government’s dealings with Native American tribes.

>>Though arg support both , I selected D over E because E is more strong. any thoughts?

Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes.
But in reality the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress.

From this sentence in the paragraph, isn’t that we can infer option E is correct???
House exercise more power than Senate….????






OUT!----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q14: As an element in the argument presented by the author of the passage, the reference to Blue Clark’s study of the Lone Wolf case serves primarily to(in another word, paragraph 1 serves primarily to….???)
A. point out that this episode in Native American history has received inadequate attention from scholars
B. support the contention of the author of the passage that the Lone Wolf decision had a greater long-term impact (para2)than did the congressional action of 1871here we do not compare Long Wolf decision with congressional action of 1871

also, para1 does not ‘support’para2…..
C. challenge the validity of the Supreme Court’s decision confirming the unlimited unilateral power of Congress in Native American affairs
D. refute the argument of commentators who regard the congressional action of 1871 as the end of the era of formal negotiation between the federal government and Native American tribes
E. introduce a view about the Lone Wolf decision that the author will expand upon

In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United States Supreme Court rejected the Line efforts of three Native American tribes to prevent the opening of tribal lands to non-Indian settlement without tribal consent. In his study of the Lone Wolf case, Blue Clark properly emphasizes the Court’s assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) over Native American affairs.


But he fails to note the decision’s more far-reaching impact(to expand upon ): shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871 when following a dispute between the House and the Senate over which chamber should enjoy primacy in Indian affairs—Congress abolished the making of treaties with Native American tribes. But in reality, the federal government continued to negotiate formal tribal agreements past the turn of the century, treating these documents not as treaties with sovereign nations requiring ratification by the Senate but simply as legislation to be passed by both houses of Congress. The Lone Wolf decision ended this era of formal negotiation and finally did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent.


This question is discussed here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-its-1903- ... 91506.html Hope it helps.

Kindly follow our posting rules: https://gmatclub.com/forum/rc-forum-rul ... 55874.html Thank you.

THIS TOPIC IS LOCKED AND ARCHIVED.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Can somebody help me with my problem to this passage???   [#permalink] 06 Dec 2019, 01:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Can somebody help me with my problem to this passage???

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne