The key to finding the main conclusion in passages such as these is to ask yourself which statement is supported by the other statements.
The statement that is supported by the other sentences in the passage will be the author’s main conclusion. One way is to continually ask yourself, while reading the stimulus, why is this author telling me this?
Is the purpose of the argument to tell you that Johnson has good reason to question other people’s interpretations of Dickinson’s writing? (I.e., sentence 1)
If this is the author’s main conclusion, then there should be some supporting evidence in favor of this statement.
However, the next sentences go on to discuss how Johnson, himself, has distorted Dickinson’s intention. We are then told why using a hyphen may distort Dickinson’s original intent.
After reading the stimulus, you can see that the the other sentences really do not support the 1st sentence. Thus, the first sentence can not be the main conclusion.
The actual conclusion made by the author is that Johnson has himself distorted Dickinson’s intent by inserting the use of a certain type of punctuation: a hyphen. The use of this hyphen changes and wrongly interprets the original intent of Dickinson’s writing.
The second half of the stimulus discusses reasons WHY the hyphen distorts her original intent, and these sentences are used by the author to make the conclusion about Johnson.
-A- the answer seems to start okay, but veers off in the wrong direction at the end. We can not say that the author’s main point is to argue that Johnson has made “equally serious distortions.” We know the author believes Johnson has distorted Dickinson’s intent, but the author’s main reason for writing the argument is not to compare which distortion is more serious. Although it is mentioned briefly that Johnson’s interpretation may be more “faithful”, the author’s main focus is not on a comparison.
-B- perfectly sums up the author’s main reason for writing this argument. The author believes Johnson’s use of this specific punctuation (the hyphen) conveys a meaning that Dickinson herself would never have intended.
-C- the author’s focus is on Johnson’s distortion of Dickinson’s writing. The author does not mention that any attempt to interpret Dickinson’s writing is doomed to failure.
-D- the author does not discuss Johnson’s “study of Dickinson’s material” and the extent of its thoroughness. The author is instead focused on the author’s use of the hyphen and it how distorts Dickinson’s original intent. The author is focused on the use of a punctuation mark and how it distorts Dickinson’s original intent. Whether Johnson’s study is thorough is not up for discussion.
(B) best summarizes the main point of the argument.
Posted from my mobile device