It is currently 23 Jun 2017, 00:42

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

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 583
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Nov 2012, 16:49
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

71% (02:19) correct 29% (01:12) wrong based on 52 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
_________________

KUDOS me if you feel my contribution has helped you.

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 294
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Nov 2012, 20:44
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.

Is it E?

We need to strengthen the idea that "the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations, ie after 1900"
Support for this is "historians have found text in 1990 that names only 10"
What if more existed that named the remaing constellations and historians just didn't find any? I think this is take care by E....
What does the source say? and What is the source?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
Weakens

B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
We are only interested in things that in 1900 not in between

C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
Oppostie of what we want

D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
again before 1900, not interested.

E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
OK.

Cheers
VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1082
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Nov 2012, 01:28
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.

@gmatbull good dat you post many questions, but pls post OA's also. there are many answer to the questions which i have answered but still waiting for OA. PLs dont take it seriously.
VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1082
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Nov 2012, 01:38
Jp27 wrote:
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.

Is it E?

We need to strengthen the idea that "the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations, ie after 1900"
Support for this is "historians have found text in 1990 that names only 10"
What if more existed that named the remaing constellations and historians just didn't find any? I think this is take care by E....
What does the source say? and What is the source?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
Weakens

B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
We are only interested in things that in 1900 not in between

C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
Oppostie of what we want

D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
again before 1900, not interested.

E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
OK.

Cheers

I guess the answer is A

We need to strengthen the fact that "Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations. "

The statement means that constellations were known but the naming was not done.
A states the same thing.
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 583
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Nov 2012, 02:10
Jp27 wrote:
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.

Is it E?

We need to strengthen the idea that "the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations, ie after 1900"
Support for this is "historians have found text in 1990 that names only 10"
What if more existed that named the remaing constellations and historians just didn't find any? I think this is take care by E....
What does the source say? and What is the source?

E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
OK.

Cheers

OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
E
...
If indeed 1900BC text acknowledged that the text is a COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL constellations, how does it support
historians' position that the same 1900BC list is NOT complete.
_________________

KUDOS me if you feel my contribution has helped you.

Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 641
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Nov 2012, 02:43
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.

The argument is that Egyptians knew about 40 but had not named most of the constellations. Only C supports this. Basically if none of the text claims to be comprehensive list it shows that text had listed only some of those.
C it is.

Posted from GMAT ToolKit
_________________

Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 294
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Nov 2012, 03:01
gmatbull wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.

Is it E?

We need to strengthen the idea that "the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations, ie after 1900"
Support for this is "historians have found text in 1990 that names only 10"
What if more existed that named the remaing constellations and historians just didn't find any? I think this is take care by E....
What does the source say? and What is the source?

E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
OK.

Cheers

OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
E
...
If indeed 1900BC text acknowledged that the text is a COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL constellations, how does it support
historians' position that the same 1900BC list is NOT complete.

to put in a simpler terms

absence of proof or something doesn't mean the things itself does not exist. so ans choice E close this gap saying what ever text we have found in the complete text there is, confirming the assertion that these 10 constellations are only 10 Egyptians had named.

HTH
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 583
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 06:58
Jp27 u just on spot.

prem1: In 1300BC: text lists > 40 constns
Prem2: In 1900BC: text mentions only 10 constns

Concl: Historians assert that most of the constns in 1900BC are yet to be named.

What additional premise, info, or evidence will make us believe more in the historians?

Supposing it is TRUE that 1900BC text is COMPLETE.. Does it make us believe more that there are still
more constellations to be named?

Consider:
prem1: In 1300BC: > 40 constns
Prem2: In 1900BC only 10 constns; Also, says this text is a complete list of all constns
ok, if the list is TRULY COMPLETE, then we expect more listings since we are aware there are >40
_________________

KUDOS me if you feel my contribution has helped you.

Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 641
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 08:25
gmatbull wrote:
Jp27 u just on spot.

prem1: In 1300BC: text lists > 40 constns
Prem2: In 1900BC: text mentions only 10 constns

Concl: Historians assert that most of the constns in 1900BC are yet to be named.

What additional premise, info, or evidence will make us believe more in the historians?

Supposing it is TRUE that 1900BC text is COMPLETE.. Does it make us believe more that there are still
more constellations to be named?

Consider:
prem1: In 1300BC: > 40 constns
Prem2: In 1900BC only 10 constns; Also, says this text is a complete list of all constns
ok, if the list is TRULY COMPLETE, then we expect more listings since we are aware there are >40

What is the source of this question? if the OA is E then it is not correct.

Question says, text in 1300 BC lists more than 40 constellations but in 1900BC lists only 10. The reason is given that egyptian had not named other constellations. That is - they knew about other constellations but had not named them. Ans C correctly idenfiies a case in which none of the text claimed to be a comprehensive lists, because they knew there are more constellations just that names are not ready and so can not be put in texts.
_________________

Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 294
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C [#permalink]

Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 11:30
Vips0000 wrote:
What is the source of this question? if the OA is E then it is not correct.

Question says, text in 1300 BC lists more than 40 constellations but in 1900BC lists only 10. The reason is given that egyptian had not named other constellations. That is - they knew about other constellations but had not named them. Ans C correctly idenfiies a case in which none of the text claimed to be a comprehensive lists, because they knew there are more constellations just that names are not ready and so can not be put in texts.

conclusion is "Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations"
historians have inferred this based on the text from 1900 B.C.
Option C - Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.

if Historians know that these texts are not complete then they cant infer / conclude anything based on incomplete texts/evidence.
Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1998
Concentration: Finance
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Mar 2014, 09:06
I went with A on this one and still I am pretty sure that that is the correct answer
Could someone please clarify is OA is in fact A?

Cheers!
J
Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2013
Posts: 64
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Mar 2014, 12:00
Just have a look at this sentence..
"Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations."

Notice the word "later" and its importance as explained below:

A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
Correct: This option actually strengthens the historians reasoning. Refer the conclusion "the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations" The conclusion clearly states that most of "later" constellations were not named. The word "later" indicates that there are some constellations after 10 constellations, which means that these 10 constellation must have been named in 1300 BC. So this supports the argument that most of "later" constellations were not named.

B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
Incorrect. even if this lists more than 10 constellations, this doesn't support whether "later" that 10 were not named.

C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
Incorrect. this doesn't support whether "later" that 10 were not named

D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text from 1900 B.C.
Incorrect. this doesn't support whether "later" that 10 were not named

E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
Incorrect. this doesn't support whether "later" that 10 were not named

Hope this clarifies.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10166
Re: Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than [#permalink]

Show Tags

13 Aug 2015, 16:09
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.
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 354
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than [#permalink]

Show Tags

13 Aug 2015, 20:29
Jp27 wrote:
gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?
A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C. HOW DO WE KNOW THESE WERE NOT COMPREHENSIVE ? INCORRECT..
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.HOW DO WE KNOW THESE WERE NOT COMPREHENSIVE ? INCORRECT..
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations. CORRECT.... COULD NOT BE COMPREHENSIVE.... SUPPORTS A BIT.....
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C. HOW DO WE KNOW THOSE AFTER 1900 WERE NOT COMPREHENSIVE ? INCORRECT..
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations
WEAKENS....CONFIRMS THEY WERE COMPREHENSIVE ? INCORRECT..........
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than   [#permalink] 13 Aug 2015, 20:29
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
44 In the United States, vacationers account for more than half 28 12 Oct 2016, 18:06
57 A recent survey found that more computers than copies of 45 22 Apr 2017, 00:22
2 Company Spokesperson: This year, more than 70% of the guests 11 14 Mar 2015, 05:13
1 Advertising Executive: More than 10 million American 9 08 Mar 2017, 07:40
15 For the first time in history, more televisions than people 17 16 May 2017, 22:33
Display posts from previous: Sort by