Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 2110:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 2208:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
For many Indian MBA applicants, the default dream has long been a top US MBA. But as career goals, visa considerations, timelines, and global mobility priorities evolve, more candidates are seriously considering MBA programs in Europe.
May 2211:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Take 30% off all study plans with code PICNIC - Expires on Monday, May 25th- Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
Mantrix
Joined: 13 May 2023
Last visit: 20 May 2026
Posts: 253
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 44
Location: India
Schools: MiM '26 HEC MiM '26 ESSEC MiM '26 (A) Imperial (A) IESE
GMAT Focus 1: 595 Q87 V75 DI77 
GMAT Focus 2: 635 Q82 V82 DI80
GPA: 9
Schools: MiM '26 HEC MiM '26 ESSEC MiM '26 (A) Imperial (A) IESE
GMAT Focus 2: 635 Q82 V82 DI80
Posts: 253
Kudos:
133
08 Jan 2025, 00:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
P1: Most scholars agree that KA personally translated a number of Latin texts into Old English.
P2: One historian contends that Alfred also personally penned his own law code, as there are more similarities.
P2: Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region.
p4: Apart from Alfred's surviving translation and law code, there are only two other extant works from the same dialect and milieu,
C: so it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.
The passage above proceeds by
Initially Passage presents some assumption by 1 Scholar, and another assumption by another Scholar, and then question the assumption that because they seems similar doesn't means that the both write by same author
(A) Providing examples that underscore another argument's conclusion.
(not providing any example, plus author is not supporting the argument), Rejected
(B) questioning the plausibility of an assumption on which another argument depends.
(yes he is questioning the validation of the assumption made by both the scholars), Answer
(c) showing that a principle if generally applied would have anomalous consequences.
(not talking about any general principle), Rejected
(D) showing that the premises of another argument are mutually inconsistent.
(it is not contradicting the arguments), Rejected
(E) using argument by analogy to undermine a principle implicit in another argument.
(not taking any analogy) Rejected
P2: One historian contends that Alfred also personally penned his own law code, as there are more similarities.
P2: Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region.
p4: Apart from Alfred's surviving translation and law code, there are only two other extant works from the same dialect and milieu,
C: so it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.
The passage above proceeds by
Initially Passage presents some assumption by 1 Scholar, and another assumption by another Scholar, and then question the assumption that because they seems similar doesn't means that the both write by same author
(A) Providing examples that underscore another argument's conclusion.
(not providing any example, plus author is not supporting the argument), Rejected
(B) questioning the plausibility of an assumption on which another argument depends.
(yes he is questioning the validation of the assumption made by both the scholars), Answer
(c) showing that a principle if generally applied would have anomalous consequences.
(not talking about any general principle), Rejected
(D) showing that the premises of another argument are mutually inconsistent.
(it is not contradicting the arguments), Rejected
(E) using argument by analogy to undermine a principle implicit in another argument.
(not taking any analogy) Rejected
10 Jan 2025, 02:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
It is crucial that you don't forget to underscore some important words that might help in selecting the right choice
Argument 1
Conclusion - One historian contends that Alfred also personally penned his own law code
Premise 1 - Most scholars agree that King Alfred (A.D 849 - 899) personally translated a number of Latin texts into Old English.
Premise 2 - Numerous differences between the language of the law code and Alfred's translation of Latin texts are outweighed by the even more numerous similarities
Argument 2
Conclusion - So it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.
(These three words are very helpful to avoid unnecessary options -
a)Risky - sort of warning hey it is risky. But no consequences are pointed that If you attribute linguistic similarities to common authorship then x,y,z will happen. Just a warning that hey maybe there are other possibilities present.
b) Assume - That means there is unstated premise/assumption in previous argument. What is it ? It is that IF similarities outweigh differences then there maybe common authorship.
c)Here - we are speaking of the this case nothing in general)
Premise 1 - Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region.
Premise 2 - Apart from Alfred's surviving translation and law code, there are only two other extant works from the same dialect and milieu
Pls see option analysis
Argument 1
Conclusion - One historian contends that Alfred also personally penned his own law code
Premise 1 - Most scholars agree that King Alfred (A.D 849 - 899) personally translated a number of Latin texts into Old English.
Premise 2 - Numerous differences between the language of the law code and Alfred's translation of Latin texts are outweighed by the even more numerous similarities
Argument 2
Conclusion - So it is risky to assume here that linguistic similarities point to common authorship.
(These three words are very helpful to avoid unnecessary options -
a)Risky - sort of warning hey it is risky. But no consequences are pointed that If you attribute linguistic similarities to common authorship then x,y,z will happen. Just a warning that hey maybe there are other possibilities present.
b) Assume - That means there is unstated premise/assumption in previous argument. What is it ? It is that IF similarities outweigh differences then there maybe common authorship.
c)Here - we are speaking of the this case nothing in general)
Premise 1 - Linguistic similarities, however, are what one expects in texts from the same language, the same time, and the same region.
Premise 2 - Apart from Alfred's surviving translation and law code, there are only two other extant works from the same dialect and milieu
Pls see option analysis
AJ1012
arushi118
Joined: 21 Jul 2024
Last visit: 19 May 2026
Posts: 266
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 894
Location: India
Concentration: Leadership, General Management
Schools: INSEAD Aug '26 LBS '26 Kellogg '26
GPA: 8.2/10
Products:
21 Jan 2026, 10:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
The assumption of the passage is that King Alfred wrote his own law code. And then the argument proceeds by giving reasons to say that "Maybe King Alfred did not write his own law code"
So the argument proceeds by questioning the assumption.
So the argument proceeds by questioning the assumption.
