Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to

1st BF - Village census records are complete.
Premise - Villagers had reason to report declines.
Evidence - Increase in Tax
Position (historian seeks to establish) - There was no actual decline in population, because villagers had their reason to report decines evident in tax increments.
Main Conclusion - There was no actual decline in population.
2nd BF - Same as main conclusion

IMO C
_________________

This one is actually pretty easy. Its just a long passage.
A: first part ok, no the second is his or her position.
B: second is not true.
C: first is a context. second is the position. OK
D: first is not a position.
E: first is not an assumption.

Hey saravalli I really appreciate the effort that you put in typing in these questions. But perhaps you could take a little more time to space and format the text a little better ?

My answer here is C.

Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen. In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
The second is a position that is in support to the author's main conclusion. OUT!

B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
2nd position: that tax hike gives people incentive to alter reports & 1st position: that the report is complete... The first is not used to support the second position. It merely introduces the context on how the decline seems to stick out and later concluded that the reports are not accurate... CONTEXT is NOT EVIDENCE...

C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
This is the answer. The report as complete is totally accepted by the author and used to give context to his position. That its very completeness made it obvious that second position happened: altering of reports..

D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
The first is merely an introduction of context to introduce the author's argument... not the position itself..

E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question.
It is the completeness of the report that made the author assumes or argues that the report is not accurate... The report is complete is accepted and not argued against...

Answer: C

about choice E.

If the report is complete, then the census must record every single person in DE. If the census records every one in the DE, how can there be a decline? (cuz actually, people were justing concealing the size)
So i don't understand why the author can reach the conclusion that "the declines did not happen" on the premise of " the report is completed"?

Plus, i think the two BF parts are in negative relation, meaning that the first one weakens the second one.

One more question, i don't understand what "provide a context" mean. Can you plz explain it in detail? An example may be helpful

thx

Let me alleviate this confusion:

Here is a parallel example: Annual Report Cards of students submitted by teachers are absolutely correct from perspective of record maintenance. Teachers have incentives for receiving gifts at the end of term with outstanding results. Since, none of teachers like to be left out of receiving a gift and students were amazingly poor this year from academic standards. So, teachers must have reported wrong figures while calculating internal numbers/marks(per subject) within Annual Report Cards.

Documentation is a necessary evil(First Boldface) which has to be available to support your final conclusion(Second Boldface). If first boldface is not present, you can say that conclusion is wrong because teachers might not have goofed up or errored out in preparing Annual Report Cards themselves, but they didn't provide the complete documentation (Annual Report Cards for all the students. They may just submit the report cards of the students who passed with flying numbers). So first part is a supporter than a weakener or opposing contender to the conclusion.

For your second question around meaning of "provide a context", above should help.
Basically, Complete Documentation is primary basis which has to be established to reach the conclusion that teachers must have purposely reported/calculated wrong Internal Numbers/Marks in those report cards. It is like Sufficient Condition, Necessary condition relationship where 2nd Boldface is suffcient condition and 1st Boldface is necessary condition.

HTH

I have a question can someone help?

As assumptions are unstated premises,so in the bold face questions,is it possible to have an argument that will have an assumption specifically mentioned there?

Very Valid Question. I also had similar doubt. I have roughly seen 6-8 GMAC Boldface questions with assumption reference in choices and never found the choice with reference to assumption to be true. So now, as a rule, I consider the choice wrong for faster processing.

If there is a question that goes against this rationale, I would like someone to post the question. Otherwise I would suggest one should discard any choice with assumption in Boldface Answer options.
HTH

Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the
population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are
remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five
different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines.
Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian
tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government
using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an
especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded;
and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would
have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not
happen.


- Background
B1 - Census records were neat and complete
- Points out an odd situation
B2 - offers an explanation to the odd situation
- conclusion

Additional info: B2 supports the conclusion, B1 and B2 follow the same direction.



In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following
roles?

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges
a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks
to establish.
we have an issue with the second boldf, the two portions agree, this answer is inconsistent.
B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to
establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue
against that position.
Looks good hold
C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the
historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
The second clarifies the odds and supports the conclusion it is not the conclusion itself
D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption
that serves as the basis of that argument.
Completely off, the author accepts the first boldf statement
E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a
certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that
assumption into question.
The first is not an assumption, moreover the statements go in the same direction
_________________

Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen.

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A) The first presents a finding to support the position the historian seeks to establish; the second is a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
B) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is a judgment advanced to support that position.
C) The first is a position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is evidence that has been used to argue against that position.
D) The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in support of a certain position; the second is that position.
E) The first is a claim that the historian rejects; the second is a conclusion drawn to justify that rejection.

NOTE: This Question has same Q stem, but has different 2nd BF line.

OE:



Hi, can anyone confirm; the conclusion of this stem -> (Therefore) the reported decline probably did not happen?

To analyze the argument, consider each of the statements one by one:

Boldface 1: Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This is a FACT.

Boldface 2: (Therefore, it is reasonable to think that) the reported declines did not happen. This is the CONCLUSION.

Now as per the terms above, we know that “consideration” / “to acknowledge” are terms for fact. We also know that “position” is a term for the conclusion.

Check the options for this question now:

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question.

Options A, B, E say that ‘second (boldface)’ acknowledges a consideration (fact) … WRONG as per the above analysis. The second is a ‘conclusion’.

Option D says that ‘first (boldface)’ is a position (conclusion) … WRONG as per the above analysis. The first is a ‘fact’.

Option C is correct.

This question can be answered in less than a minute. The second bolded statement is clearly a conclusion. Only choice (C) mentions "the second is that position". No other choice mentions that the second bolded statement is a conclusion. On these grounds, you can pick C without even reading the first part of the answer choice, or even any answer choice.

BF1: Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. -> Evidence
BF2: Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen. -> Conclusion

(A) The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
Second Part is wrong. BF2 isn't against the position the historian seeks to establish.

(B) The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
Second Part is wrong. BF2 isn't against the position the historian seeks to establish.

(C) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
Correct, hold.

(D) The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
First Part is wrong. BF1 isn't a position for which historian argues

(E) The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question.
First Part is wrong. BF1 isn't an assumption

C prevails.
_________________

I had the same thoughts that assumptions are generally not explicitly stated unless the author is pointing to an assumption made by someone else and critiquing it or providing more information about it.

Although I am not sure of any specific patterns about this in BF questions. Maybe an expert can further chime in on that.

The two bold-faced claims don't contradict each other. A census that is "remarkably complete" may still have holes in it. (It just has fewer gaps than one would suspect.)

Boiled way down:

The first bold is just an observation. The records are more complete than one might think.
Then we get some evidence: in each of five different years, the population declined.
The second bold explains why this would be the case: villages were underreporting their populations to minimize their tax bill.
Then we get a conclusion: the population declines weren't real.

A: Nah. The fact that the records are surprisingly complete doesn't support the position that the population declines didn't happen.
B: Looks okay. The first surely provides context. The second is a judgment to support the ultimate conclusion that the population declines didn't actually happen.
C: Nope. The first bold is not a position. It's an observation/context
D: Nope: The first bold is not an assumption
E: Nope: the author doesn't reject the claim that the records are remarkably complete. We get this line: This very completeness makes one point stand out In other words, the author is saying that the completeness of the records makes the population declines stand out. She's never saying that the records are not, in fact, remarkably complete.

The correct answer is Option C.

Solving Boldface questions well is all about understanding the roles and relationships in the argument - which are facts (unquestionable), claims (can be questioned - including the main conclusion), and how each statement relates to the Main Conclusion and each other (supports, opposes, merely provides context, etc.). Let us do that for this question -

In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. FACT
Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. FACT
This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. FACT (an observation given)
Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. FACT
This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. FACT
Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. CLAIM (Made by the author - this is not a fact but the author's hypothesis or theory)
Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen. CLAIM (Main Conclusion - this is supported by the hypothesis above)

So,

Boldface 2: is the Main Conclusion of the argument
Boldface 1: is a FACT that provides context for the argument (we cannot say it supports or opposes the Main Conclusion - it merely provides context)

With this understanding, lets look at option choices -

(A) The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.

BF1 is correct. BF2 is incorrect - it is the main conclusion/position the author seeks to establish, not a consideration against the position

(B) The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.

BF1 - Incorrect. it is not used to support the position, merely provides some context. BF2 - incorrect. It is actually the Main Conclusion

(C) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.

BF1 - Correct. BF2 - Correct (Position the historian seeks to establish = Main Conclusion.


(D) The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.

BF1 - Incorrect. First is factual information given for context. it is not a position for which the historian argues. BF2 - Incorrect. It is not an assumption, it is the Main Conclusion.


(E) The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question.

BF1 - It is a given fact, not an assumption. BF2 - Incorrect. BF1 is a fact, does not get called into question


Hope this helps!
Regards
_________________

In this modified question, BF2 is different. Here is the basic analysis of the modified argument -

In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. FACT
Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. FACT
This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. FACT (an observation given)
Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. FACT
This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. FACT
Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. CLAIM (Made by the author - this is not a fact but the author's hypothesis or theory)
Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen. CLAIM (Main Conclusion - this is supported by the hypothesis above)

So,

Boldface 2: is a CLAIM. it is the historian's hypothesis/theory to support the claim made in the next line (which is the Main Conclusion of the argument).
Boldface 1: is a FACT that provides context for the argument (we cannot say it supports or opposes the Main Conclusion - it merely provides context)

With this understanding, it is clear that the correct answer is option B.

B) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is a judgment advanced to support that position.

BF1 - Correct.
BF2 - Correct. BF2 is the claim/opinion/judgement used by the historian to support the main position/Main Conclusion.

Hope this helps!
Regards
_________________

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________