Last visit was: 08 Jul 2025, 11:26 It is currently 08 Jul 2025, 11:26
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
carcass
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Last visit: 08 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,720
Own Kudos:
36,121
 [13]
Given Kudos: 4,812
Posts: 4,720
Kudos: 36,121
 [13]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
11
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
SJ5
Joined: 11 Feb 2021
Last visit: 06 May 2022
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
2
 [2]
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 6
Kudos: 2
 [2]
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
carcass
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Last visit: 08 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,720
Own Kudos:
36,121
 [3]
Given Kudos: 4,812
Posts: 4,720
Kudos: 36,121
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
punith0894
Joined: 25 Aug 2020
Last visit: 14 Nov 2023
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
15
 [1]
Given Kudos: 16
Products:
Posts: 21
Kudos: 15
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
carcass
OE

Quote:
As always, you must be careful with what you infer from a passage. Looking at answer (A), you would need to find something in the text that would suggest that the shorter the word, the less likely it may be derived from Latin—which you can find in the final two sentences. There is no mention of the indigenous language before the arrival of the Germanic peoples, so you can dismiss (B). (C) might seem tempting because the author notes that the words used for complex ideas today are primarily those used by the ruling class. However, while it might seem more likely to be the habit of those with leisure time and education, the passage does not specify anything that would allow us to draw this conclusion, and (C) must be rejected.

Shouldn't the answer be choice C (A only) in that case?
User avatar
punith0894
Joined: 25 Aug 2020
Last visit: 14 Nov 2023
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Products:
Posts: 21
Kudos: 15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For question 4, shouldn't the answer choice be C?
Could someone please post the OA for all questions?
User avatar
jaindevaditya
Joined: 21 Aug 2022
Last visit: 06 Oct 2024
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 15
Posts: 9
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
If anyone can help me in question 4

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: -
Posts: 15,817
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6,082
GPA: 3.62
Posts: 15,817
Kudos: 46,290
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jaindevaditya
If anyone can help me in question 4

Posted from my mobile device

Explanation

4. Which of the following can we infer from the passage?

Explanation

I. Searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word is less likely to be useful in shorter words.
The passage mentions that a correlation exists between the length of a word and its origin, with shorter words being derived from the Germanic languages and longer words having a Latin background. This suggests that searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word may be less useful in shorter words. Therefore, Inference I can be inferred from the passage.

II. The language spoken by the Saxon and Germanic settlers entirely supplanted the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.
The passage states that the English language's origins can be traced back to the Saxon and other Germanic settlers who arrived in Britain in the 5th century. It also mentions that the diverse linguistic origins of the groups contributed to the development of the English language. While it doesn't explicitly mention that the language spoken by the settlers entirely replaced the indigenous tongue, the information provided implies that the influence of the Saxon and Germanic settlers had a significant impact on the development of the English language. Therefore, it can be inferred that the language spoken by the settlers had a substantial role in supplanting the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.

I and II can be inferred:

Answer: A
User avatar
SejalT
Joined: 16 May 2023
Last visit: 12 Feb 2024
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
5
 [3]
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 13
Kudos: 5
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sajjad1994
jaindevaditya
If anyone can help me in question 4

Posted from my mobile device

Explanation

4. Which of the following can we infer from the passage?

Explanation

I. Searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word is less likely to be useful in shorter words.
The passage mentions that a correlation exists between the length of a word and its origin, with shorter words being derived from the Germanic languages and longer words having a Latin background. This suggests that searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word may be less useful in shorter words. Therefore, Inference I can be inferred from the passage.

II. The language spoken by the Saxon and Germanic settlers entirely supplanted the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.
The passage states that the English language's origins can be traced back to the Saxon and other Germanic settlers who arrived in Britain in the 5th century. It also mentions that the diverse linguistic origins of the groups contributed to the development of the English language. While it doesn't explicitly mention that the language spoken by the settlers entirely replaced the indigenous tongue, the information provided implies that the influence of the Saxon and Germanic settlers had a significant impact on the development of the English language. Therefore, it can be inferred that the language spoken by the settlers had a substantial role in supplanting the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.

I and II can be inferred:

Answer: A



Wouldn't statement II means entirely while the explanation you provide explains that there was a significant effect? I believe there is a difference between entirely and significant effect.
User avatar
anish0953
Joined: 20 May 2024
Last visit: 13 Mar 2025
Posts: 88
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 103
Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Leadership, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 9.2
WE:Business Development (Finance)
Products:
Posts: 88
Kudos: 49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SejalT
Sajjad1994
jaindevaditya
If anyone can help me in question 4

Posted from my mobile device
Explanation

4. Which of the following can we infer from the passage?

Explanation

I. Searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word is less likely to be useful in shorter words.
The passage mentions that a correlation exists between the length of a word and its origin, with shorter words being derived from the Germanic languages and longer words having a Latin background. This suggests that searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word may be less useful in shorter words. Therefore, Inference I can be inferred from the passage.

II. The language spoken by the Saxon and Germanic settlers entirely supplanted the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.
The passage states that the English language's origins can be traced back to the Saxon and other Germanic settlers who arrived in Britain in the 5th century. It also mentions that the diverse linguistic origins of the groups contributed to the development of the English language. While it doesn't explicitly mention that the language spoken by the settlers entirely replaced the indigenous tongue, the information provided implies that the influence of the Saxon and Germanic settlers had a significant impact on the development of the English language. Therefore, it can be inferred that the language spoken by the settlers had a substantial role in supplanting the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.

I and II can be inferred:

Answer: A


Wouldn't statement II means entirely while the explanation you provide explains that there was a significant effect? I believe there is a difference between entirely and significant effect.
­can anyone help with this explainaton
User avatar
Daksh20
Joined: 12 May 2020
Last visit: 01 Mar 2025
Posts: 2
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 2
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SejalT
Sajjad1994
jaindevaditya
If anyone can help me in question 4

Posted from my mobile device
Explanation

4. Which of the following can we infer from the passage?

Explanation

I. Searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word is less likely to be useful in shorter words.
The passage mentions that a correlation exists between the length of a word and its origin, with shorter words being derived from the Germanic languages and longer words having a Latin background. This suggests that searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word may be less useful in shorter words. Therefore, Inference I can be inferred from the passage.

II. The language spoken by the Saxon and Germanic settlers entirely supplanted the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.
The passage states that the English language's origins can be traced back to the Saxon and other Germanic settlers who arrived in Britain in the 5th century. It also mentions that the diverse linguistic origins of the groups contributed to the development of the English language. While it doesn't explicitly mention that the language spoken by the settlers entirely replaced the indigenous tongue, the information provided implies that the influence of the Saxon and Germanic settlers had a significant impact on the development of the English language. Therefore, it can be inferred that the language spoken by the settlers had a substantial role in supplanting the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.

I and II can be inferred:

Answer: A


Wouldn't statement II means entirely while the explanation you provide explains that there was a significant effect? I believe there is a difference between entirely and significant effect.
­I would like to second this. Entirely means it was replaced wholly which is not mentioned in the passage and hence i rejected this choice.
Would like more insights on why option 2 in this question is correct
User avatar
NoeticImbecile
Joined: 17 Feb 2024
Last visit: 08 Jul 2025
Posts: 57
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 265
Posts: 57
Kudos: 14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
can someone explain question 1
User avatar
abhishektyga
Joined: 10 Jun 2021
Last visit: 07 Jul 2025
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 39
Kudos: 14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Kindly provide explanation for Q1. Thanks!
User avatar
MrinmoyNegel
Joined: 18 May 2016
Last visit: 08 Jul 2025
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 7
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
It took me 5.50 mins to solve the questions. I too don't agree with the 4th question's answer. Use of the word " Entirely" cannot be inferred from the passage. Hence (II) is incorrect according to me.
SJ5
It took me 7 minutes, 35 seconds to answer all the 4 questions but I do not get how option A is the right choice for question 4.

Shouldn't it be E?
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: -
Posts: 15,817
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6,082
GPA: 3.62
Posts: 15,817
Kudos: 46,290
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
OE

1. Which of the following best describes the relationship between the highlighted phrases?

Explanation

The phrase "Its unusual nature can be attributed to the diverse linguistic origins of the groups that contributed to its development and their role in English society" introduces the topic of the passage, discussing the unique characteristics of the English language resulting from its diverse linguistic origins.

The phrase "It is also interesting to note the correlation between the length of a word and its origin" provides an example within the passage. It highlights a specific aspect related to the linguistic origins of English, specifically the correlation between word length and their respective origins.

Option (A) The argument and its counterargument is incorrect because the passage does not present an argument and counterargument structure. It provides information about the origins and characteristics of the English language without opposing viewpoints.

Option (B) Two examples of the scope of the passage is incorrect because the second phrase does not represent an example of the passage's scope. It introduces a specific observation but does not exemplify the overall scope of the passage.

Option (C) The topic and scope of the passage is incorrect because the second phrase does not provide an example of the passage's scope. While it introduces a specific aspect related to the topic, it does not exemplify the overall scope of the passage.

Option (E) The topic of the passage and an example is incorrect because it suggests that the second phrase provides an example of the topic itself. However, the second phrase provides an example related to the scope of the passage rather than the topic itself.

Therefore, the correct answer is (D) The scope of the passage and an example, as the second phrase offers a specific example within the broader scope of the passage's discussion on the linguistic origins of the English language.

Answer: D
User avatar
Vibhatu
Joined: 18 May 2021
Last visit: 07 Jul 2025
Posts: 175
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 185
Posts: 175
Kudos: 45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SejalT
Sajjad1994
jaindevaditya
If anyone can help me in question 4

Posted from my mobile device

Explanation

4. Which of the following can we infer from the passage?

Explanation

I. Searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word is less likely to be useful in shorter words.
The passage mentions that a correlation exists between the length of a word and its origin, with shorter words being derived from the Germanic languages and longer words having a Latin background. This suggests that searching for meaning based on the Latin root of a word may be less useful in shorter words. Therefore, Inference I can be inferred from the passage.

II. The language spoken by the Saxon and Germanic settlers entirely supplanted the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.
The passage states that the English language's origins can be traced back to the Saxon and other Germanic settlers who arrived in Britain in the 5th century. It also mentions that the diverse linguistic origins of the groups contributed to the development of the English language. While it doesn't explicitly mention that the language spoken by the settlers entirely replaced the indigenous tongue, the information provided implies that the influence of the Saxon and Germanic settlers had a significant impact on the development of the English language. Therefore, it can be inferred that the language spoken by the settlers had a substantial role in supplanting the indigenous tongue of 5th-century Britain.

I and II can be inferred:

Answer: A



Wouldn't statement II means entirely while the explanation you provide explains that there was a significant effect? I believe there is a difference between entirely and significant effect.
can you please explain why III is incorrect ? thanks in advance.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7349 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
15816 posts