Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 22:23 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 22:23
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
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,289
Own Kudos:
49,293
 [1]
Given Kudos: 6,179
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 17,289
Kudos: 49,293
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
gupta.vinit
Joined: 09 Sep 2023
Last visit: 23 Apr 2024
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 89
Posts: 6
Kudos: 1
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Deepak1784
Joined: 22 May 2022
Last visit: 30 Dec 2023
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
2
 [2]
Posts: 1
Kudos: 2
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,289
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6,179
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 17,289
Kudos: 49,293
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Official Explanation

1. Which of the following is NOT stated as a component of Portugal and Angola’s historical relationship?

Explanation

You are asked for the choice NOT in the passage. You are told that Portugal once mined Angola for slaves and raw material, so (A) and (B) are out. The beginning of the passage concerns Portugal taking over Angola over a period beginning in the 16th century and culminating in the 1920’s, so kill (D). The passage refers to Angolan independence in 1975 — since that date is during the 20th century (1900’s = 20th century, 2000’s = 21st century, etc.), kill (E). You are told that a civil war in Angola lasted until 2002, not a war against the Portuguese, so (C) is the answer.

Answer: C
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,289
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6,179
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 17,289
Kudos: 49,293
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Official Explanation

2. The “grand stroke of irony” (Highlighted) is best described as:

The grand stroke of irony the author refers to is Angola helping Portugal. Why is this ironic? You are told that the country that once mined Angola for slaves and raw material is now virtually helpless… (B) is the best match. (A) and (E) are not at all ironic. While (C) and (D) at least present some kind of contrast, they are not the stroke of irony to which the author refers.

Answer: B
User avatar
glagad
Joined: 03 Jun 2022
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 134
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 100
Products:
Posts: 134
Kudos: 20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sajjad1994
Official Explanation

1. Which of the following is NOT stated as a component of Portugal and Angola’s historical relationship?

Explanation

You are asked for the choice NOT in the passage. You are told that Portugal once mined Angola for slaves and raw material, so (A) and (B) are out. The beginning of the passage concerns Portugal taking over Angola over a period beginning in the 16th century and culminating in the 1920’s, so kill (D). The passage refers to Angolan independence in 1975 — since that date is during the 20th century (1900’s = 20th century, 2000’s = 21st century, etc.), kill (E). You are told that a civil war in Angola lasted until 2002, not a war against the Portuguese, so (C) is the answer.

Answer: C
Sajjad1994 - The passage only mentions that Angola was mined for slaves.

Nowhere in the passage does the author clearly mention that a) they were mined by Portugal traders b) they were further sold by the Portugal authorities.

Knowing that GMAT plays with modifiers and nuances like these, how can we accept option A as a clear inference from the passage?


Additionally, Option C seems more logical - For 3 centuries, Portugal tried to enter Angola, and bw 1920 - 1975 the colonization was reversed, how can we then say that we can't infer that the 2 countries were at war?
User avatar
samarpan.g28
Joined: 08 Dec 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 324
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,236
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Human Resources
GPA: 8.88
WE:Engineering (Technology)
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi glagad, I believe option C is valid. See, two countries might have been at war, or not - we do not know. So we cannot infer this from the passage.
Coming to option A, when Portugal took complete ownership of Angola, it was only them who could do the trading (buy or sell) of minerals and slaves. So, option A can be inferred. Hope this helps.
glagad
Sajjad1994
Official Explanation

1. Which of the following is NOT stated as a component of Portugal and Angola’s historical relationship?

Explanation

You are asked for the choice NOT in the passage. You are told that Portugal once mined Angola for slaves and raw material, so (A) and (B) are out. The beginning of the passage concerns Portugal taking over Angola over a period beginning in the 16th century and culminating in the 1920’s, so kill (D). The passage refers to Angolan independence in 1975 — since that date is during the 20th century (1900’s = 20th century, 2000’s = 21st century, etc.), kill (E). You are told that a civil war in Angola lasted until 2002, not a war against the Portuguese, so (C) is the answer.

Answer: C
Sajjad1994 - The passage only mentions that Angola was mined for slaves.

Nowhere in the passage does the author clearly mention that a) they were mined by Portugal traders b) they were further sold by the Portugal authorities.

Knowing that GMAT plays with modifiers and nuances like these, how can we accept option A as a clear inference from the passage?


Additionally, Option C seems more logical - For 3 centuries, Portugal tried to enter Angola, and bw 1920 - 1975 the colonization was reversed, how can we then say that we can't infer that the 2 countries were at war?
User avatar
bo12345
Joined: 21 Feb 2025
Last visit: 29 Jul 2025
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 10
Posts: 8
Kudos: 3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi samarpan.g28, In the question they ask for stated facts, not inferences. Although E is a more solid answer, so IMO glagad has a valid point.
samarpan.g28
Hi glagad, I believe option C is valid. See, two countries might have been at war, or not - we do not know. So we cannot infer this from the passage.
Coming to option A, when Portugal took complete ownership of Angola, it was only them who could do the trading (buy or sell) of minerals and slaves. So, option A can be inferred. Hope this helps.
glagad
Sajjad1994
Official Explanation

1. Which of the following is NOT stated as a component of Portugal and Angola’s historical relationship?

Explanation

You are asked for the choice NOT in the passage. You are told that Portugal once mined Angola for slaves and raw material, so (A) and (B) are out. The beginning of the passage concerns Portugal taking over Angola over a period beginning in the 16th century and culminating in the 1920’s, so kill (D). The passage refers to Angolan independence in 1975 — since that date is during the 20th century (1900’s = 20th century, 2000’s = 21st century, etc.), kill (E). You are told that a civil war in Angola lasted until 2002, not a war against the Portuguese, so (C) is the answer.

Answer: C
Sajjad1994 - The passage only mentions that Angola was mined for slaves.

Nowhere in the passage does the author clearly mention that a) they were mined by Portugal traders b) they were further sold by the Portugal authorities.

Knowing that GMAT plays with modifiers and nuances like these, how can we accept option A as a clear inference from the passage?


Additionally, Option C seems more logical - For 3 centuries, Portugal tried to enter Angola, and bw 1920 - 1975 the colonization was reversed, how can we then say that we can't infer that the 2 countries were at war?
User avatar
manish8242
Joined: 07 Jul 2025
Last visit: 06 Nov 2025
Posts: 48
Posts: 48
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I think both Option A and B are equally right

It is nowhere mentioned that Portuguese 'SOLD' the slaves. It is just said that Portuguese 'MINED' Slaves which means used people for slaves. But whether they sold them or not is not mentioned even a bit nor can be inferred. So it is definitely correct

Also nothing about having war is mentioned so it is equally right
Sajjad1994
Official Explanation

1. Which of the following is NOT stated as a component of Portugal and Angola’s historical relationship?

Explanation

You are asked for the choice NOT in the passage. You are told that Portugal once mined Angola for slaves and raw material, so (A) and (B) are out. The beginning of the passage concerns Portugal taking over Angola over a period beginning in the 16th century and culminating in the 1920’s, so kill (D). The passage refers to Angolan independence in 1975 — since that date is during the 20th century (1900’s = 20th century, 2000’s = 21st century, etc.), kill (E). You are told that a civil war in Angola lasted until 2002, not a war against the Portuguese, so (C) is the answer.

Answer: C
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
17289 posts
188 posts