Question 4
Foi2Evei2 wrote:
Hi experts
GMATNinja egmat and others

I have question about this question
Quote:
Which of the following best describes the primary function of lines 11–16?
B. It reveals how archaeologists arrived at an interpretation of the evidence mentioned in the preceding sentence.
C. It shows how scholars misinterpreted the significance of certain evidence mentioned in the preceding sentence.
From what I understand in the passage, should be option (C) rather than (B)?
Quote:
Preceding clause
Archaeologists had noticed that sixteenth-century Native American sites were strewn with iron bolts and metal.
Line 11-16
Only later, upon reading Nicolas Denys’s 1672 account of seventeenth-century European settlements in North America, did archaeologists realize that sixteenth-century European fishing crews had dismantled and exchanged parts of their ships for furs.
I think it should be (C) because the word
"realize that .... = misinterpret sth and then just know that it is what they think" meaning that what Archaeologist had noticed previously is the significant evidence.
The word "realized" doesn't necessarily mean that something was misinterpreted.
For example, I could discover that food is disappearing from my fridge. Later, I could
realize that a stranger had been living in my attic for years and sneaking out at night to eat some of my beloved snacks.
There is no misinterpretation in the above example -- there's just a baffling situation, and then a realization about why that situation is happening. For the "realization" to correct a previous misinterpretation,
there would need to be a previous interpretation. That previous interpretation just isn't there.
Similarly, the passage just tells us about a certain fact: "sixteenth-century Native American sites were strewn with iron bolts and metal pins." There is no interpretation offered to explain this situation.
Then, in lines 11-16, the author tells us about the archeologists' interpretation of the situation: "Only later, upon reading Nicolas Denys’s 1672 account of seventeenth-century European settlements in North America, did archaeologists realize that sixteenth-century European fishing crews had dismantled and exchanged parts of their ships for furs."
Because there's no
misinterpretation of the significance of the iron bolts/metal pins, (C) is out for question 4.
(B) is a much better fit:
how did archeologists find out that Europeans fishing crews had dismantled and exchanged parts of their ships? By reading Nicolas Denys’s 1672 account of seventeenth-century European settlements in North America.
Lines 11-16 reveal how archeologists arrived at their interpretation of the iron bolts/metal pins, so (B) is the answer to question 4.
I hope that helps!
_________________