Last visit was: 07 Jun 2024, 14:02 It is currently 07 Jun 2024, 14:02
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
Unanswered
Active Topics
New posts
New comers' posts
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

CR: Elephants

User avatar
Vithal
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 406
Own Kudos [?]: 663 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Hyderabad
 Q49  V35
Send PM
CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   10 Jun 2005, 22:54
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Hide Show DIFFICULTY AND TIMER STATISTICS
IMO: There are a few mistakes in the options, but, focus more on the logic. I am posting this because I am not convinced with the OA that I have.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
User avatar
sonaketu
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 102
Own Kudos [?]: 133 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   10 Jun 2005, 23:19
I'll pick D.
Knowledge of animals does not support the argument.
User avatar
Paul
CEO
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 2708
Own Kudos [?]: 1545 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 03:17
I agree with D
A) Proves that trade existed then
B) Proves that trade started only after the 10th century
C) Change in style confirms contact b/w 2 nations
D) Out of scope. At the extreme, it could even prove the author wrong by saying that NA already had contact with EA
E) Shows that EA had contact with other countries, NA in particular, as of then. (This was slightly more difficult option to refute)
User avatar
HIMALAYA
Director
Director
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 797
Own Kudos [?]: 257 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 06:19
go with D.
documents earlier than the tenth century has nothing to do with tenhth century trade between east and north..........
User avatar
Vithal
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 406
Own Kudos [?]: 663 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Hyderabad
 Q49  V35
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 08:32
can someone refute B?
Paul: I am not clear on your explanation - how does B prove that trade existed after 10th cen.? It just says that none of the documents have any record of transactions before 10th cen.
User avatar
cloudz9
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 130
Own Kudos [?]: 50 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 13:57
Vithal wrote:
can someone refute B?
Paul: I am not clear on your explanation - how does B prove that trade existed after 10th cen.? It just says that none of the documents have any record of transactions before 10th cen.


it doesn't need to be proved though right?
the fact that the letters from before dont talk about trade with east africa gives some support for the argument that perhaps it wasn't talked about cause it didn't exist
User avatar
Vithal
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 406
Own Kudos [?]: 663 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Hyderabad
 Q49  V35
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 14:02
cloudz9 wrote:
Vithal wrote:
can someone refute B?
Paul: I am not clear on your explanation - how does B prove that trade existed after 10th cen.? It just says that none of the documents have any record of transactions before 10th cen.


it doesn't need to be proved though right?
the fact that the letters from before dont talk about trade with east africa gives some support for the argument that perhaps it wasn't talked about cause it didn't exist


Historians argument is that the trade started/existed - so, doesn't B go against Historians argument? :oops:
User avatar
cloudz9
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 130
Own Kudos [?]: 50 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 14:06
Vithal wrote:
cloudz9 wrote:
Vithal wrote:
can someone refute B?
Paul: I am not clear on your explanation - how does B prove that trade existed after 10th cen.? It just says that none of the documents have any record of transactions before 10th cen.


it doesn't need to be proved though right?
the fact that the letters from before dont talk about trade with east africa gives some support for the argument that perhaps it wasn't talked about cause it didn't exist


Historians argument is that the trade started/existed - so, doesn't B go against Historians argument? :oops:


Historians claim is that trade started around the 10th century...this could be refuted if there was proof that trade with africa was going on from before...
however, as letters by merchants from before the 10th century have no mention of it, perhaps it didn't exist back then and only started around the 10th century...
and this supports the historians' claim
User avatar
shalinikhatri
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 75
Own Kudos [?]: 4 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Atlanta , GA
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 14:12
Vithal wrote:
can someone refute B?
Paul: I am not clear on your explanation - how does B prove that trade existed after 10th cen.? It just says that none of the documents have any record of transactions before 10th cen.


Historians argue that business transactions between these nations started during "THIS PERIOD" means 10th century and since there is no mention of these transactions in pre 10th century letters , that stregnthens historians argument that business started after 10th or it never existed before 10th .


My answer is "D"
User avatar
Paul
CEO
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 2708
Own Kudos [?]: 1545 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 14:42
Vithal, all you need is the argument to provide SOME support for the author's contention. In other words, all you need is that the argument does NOT go against what the passage is saying.

Keeping that in mind, B says that no documents mentioned any trade b/w EA and NA prior to 10th century. The passage, for its part, says that trade b/w the 2 nations started around the 10th century. Hence, B is not going against the argument and does give SOME support for the author's contention.
User avatar
Vithal
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 406
Own Kudos [?]: 663 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Hyderabad
 Q49  V35
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   11 Jun 2005, 15:29
Hmmm...I get it

Thank you! OA is D
User avatar
sparky
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 321
Own Kudos [?]: 87 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Canuckland
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   12 Jun 2005, 01:04
One more for D. Animals! what animals????
User avatar
HIMALAYA
Director
Director
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 797
Own Kudos [?]: 257 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   12 Jun 2005, 22:00
Vithal wrote:
can someone refute B?
Paul: I am not clear on your explanation - how does B prove that trade existed after 10th cen.? It just says that none of the documents have any record of transactions before 10th cen.


before going through all options, i was also stuck with B, but later when i saw D, then choosed it....................
User avatar
wild_desperado
Manager
Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 76
Own Kudos [?]: 281 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink] CR: Elephants   14 Jun 2005, 03:17
D it is. All other options directly or indirectly support the historians claims.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: CR: Elephants [#permalink]
14 Jun 2005, 03:17
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6957 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts