V03-16, V03-17, V03-18, V03-19

Question

Before the early eighteenth century, forms of communication among the deaf were often not regarded as authentic language.  Accepted wisdom held either that the deaf were making simple gestures to communicate basic needs and ideas, or, in a more generous view, that sign language was a physical method of expressing the words and syntax of spoken language.  Once it was recognized, however, that forms of signing constituted valid, though non-oral, systems of language, sign systems were standardized and disseminated in educational programs for the deaf.
 
American Sign Language was one of the first standardized sets of signs to develop in response to this new understanding of communication among the deaf. ASL had its beginnings in 1817 when Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet, an American minister, recruited Frenchman Laurent Clerc to co-found what is now the American School for the Deaf in Hartford, Connecticut. Clerc had been an instructor at the premiere educational institution for the deaf in France, where a standardized system of signs had been in use in for nearly a century. The language Clerc developed for the school was based heavily on the French Sign Language with which he, being deaf, routinely communicated. At the school, French Sign Language mingled with various and idiosyncratic “home signs” brought into the classroom by students from Martha’s Vineyard, an island off Massachusetts where there were an unusually large number of deaf children. Within only a few years, the mixture of French Sign Language with Home Sign had reached equilibrium and was taught in other institutions for the deaf as American Sign Language. Today, though it continues to be spontaneously adjusted to suit local needs, ASL is the third most common language in the United States, the dominant sign language of North America, and a popular form of inter-dialect communication in parts of Africa.  1. The author likely relates the history of American Sign Language in order to

(a) Entertain the reader with historical facts.
(b) Advocate greater flexibility in the development of sign languages.
(c) Compare two perspectives on types of communication used by the deaf.
(d) Provide a historical example of a sign language that was first standardized then disseminated.
(e) Explore cooperation among nations in the development of languages for the deaf.
 D

2. It can be inferred from the passage that American Sign Language borrowed liberally from French Sign Language for which of the following reasons?

(a) Many students at the school could read and write French, making the transition to French Sign Language simple.
(b) French Sign Language was held by educators of the deaf in France to be almost flawless.
(c) French Sign Language was a standardized system of signs already familiar to one of the founders of the school.
(d) French Sign Language was equally as expressive as the “home sign” languages that students from Martha’s Vineyard brought to the school.
(e) The founders of the school believed French Sign Language to be superior to British Sign Language.
 C

3. In the bolded lines the author most likely says that the second traditional understanding of sign language as  a physical method of expressing the words and syntax of spoken language  was a  more generous view  because

(a) It considers deaf people incapable of using words and syntax in ways that imitate spoken language.
(b) It was the more commonly held view among people who gave the most money to the deaf.
(c) This position, though not indisputable, is a paraphrase of the point the author is making in the rest of the passage.
(d) This perspective, though not completely accurate, was nearer the understanding that sign language is a valid system of language.
(e) This viewpoint is the same as that eventually espoused by Gallaudet and Clerc.
 D

4. Based on information in the passage, the author of the passage would most likely agree with which of the following?

(a) Gallaudet would have been unable to found a school for the deaf without Clerc’s assistance.
(b) French Sign Language and Home Sign were equally important contributions to the development of American Sign Language.
(c) American Sign Language eventually surpassed the usefulness and flexibility of French Sign Language.
(d) Centuries of misunderstood methods of communication among the deaf made the development of standardized sign languages inevitable.
(e) The deaf living on Martha’s Vineyard would not have formed their own standardized system of signs if they had not been introduced to French Sign Language.
 B

darthvad3r · Accepted Answer

I don't think this passage suggests that Home signing and French signing were equally important. It was maybe 70-30 (French-Home). Clerc based the whole thing on French signing. Sure the passage says that it took several years to reach equilibrium between the local Home signing and Clerc's French signing, but that isn't the same thing as being equally important.

Bunuel · Answer

To answer a question about logical structure, consider the role the section plays in the passage as a whole. The first paragraph introduces a historical development, beginning with the idea that methods of communication among the deaf were not always considered  authentic language . According to the passage, however,  accepted wisdom  changed: once communication among the deaf was accepted as  language , systems of signs were  standardized  and  disseminated . The history of American Sign Language is a historical example of this shift in thought.   The passage is not meant to entertain. 
 The passage does not discuss, much less advocate,  flexibility in the development of sign languages . 
 Two perspectives are not compared. 
 The section on American Sign Language provides a historical example of the pattern of sign language development discussed in the passage. 
 Though  individuals from  various nations cooperated in the development of American Sign Language, the focus was not on the nations themselves.     An inference is drawn from information stated in the passage. To answer this question, review what the passage says about French Sign Language and the ways it came to form the base of American Sign Language. French Sign Language appeared at the school contained in the knowledge of Laurent Clerc, who, like his students, was deaf. According to the passage, Clerc used French Sign Language to communicate. Based on this information, it is reasonable to infer that Clerc based American Sign Language on French Sign Language because it was the system of signs with which he was most familiar.   The passage does not discuss whether students at the school could read and write French. 
 Although French Sign Language was used by educators in France, the passage does not discuss whether or not they considered it to be flawless. 
 The passage implies that Clerc based American Sign Language on French Sign Language simply because that is the system of signs with which he was most familiar. 
 The expressiveness of French Sign Language and “home sign” is not compared in the passage. 
 British Sign Language is not mentioned in the passage.     This question references specific lines, indicating the question can be answered by reviewing information in that section of the passage. The lines are contained in a sentence contrasting two ways  conventional wisdom  understood methods of communication used by the deaf; the phrase  a more generous view  makes it clear that the author prefers the second. The following sentence further clarifies the author’s position, as it becomes apparent that the author is concerned with establishing sign languages  as valid, though non-oral, systems of language .   This is the opposite of the author’s position in the passage. 
 The word  generous  is misconstrued in this option to mean  giving money  rather than  having understanding . 
 Sign language as  a physical method of expressing...spoken language  is not discussed in the passage. In fact, the author argues that sign language is quite distinct from spoken language. 
 This option correctly identifies the author’s overall concern in the passage: to establish sign languages as valid language systems, even though they are distinct from spoken language. 
 Galloudet and Clerc’s position on this opinion is not discussed in the passage.     The question’s use of the phrase would most likely agree indicates that the answer depends on making an inference. To answer the question, look for support for each answer choice in the passage. These lines state that French Sign Language and Home Sign were a mixture that had reached equilibrium before American Sign Language could be taught in other institutions. It is reasonable to assume, then, that the author would view both French Sign Language and Home Sign as important components of American Sign Language.   Gallaudet is mentioned only as a founder of the school; the passage does not speculate about his ability to found a school without assistance. 
 Correct. These lines discuss French Sign Language and Home Sign as components of a mixture that eventually reached equilibrium, suggesting that the author sees the two traditions as equally important contributors to American Sign Language. 
 The passage does not compare the usefulness or flexibility of French and American Sign Language. 
 No evidence is provided to support the assertion that the development of standardized sign languages was inevitable. 
 The potential of Martha’s Vineyard residents to form as standardized sign language is not mentioned.

AkaNiau · Answer

I think this is a  high-quality  question and I agree with explanation. This passage has a section in bold when the question does not refer to bold lines.

bpdulog · Answer

How does a more generous view imply that the author agrees with it more? It simply means that the view is more liberal

GMATCoachBen · Answer

darthvad3r  Good attention to detail. Kudos! Comparisons that aren't fully justified from the passage are a common "Extreme" trap on official questions.

D4kshGargas · Answer

I had the same doubt.
So... is this question "broken"?

bhaweshb96 · Answer

But in the last paragraph...the passage says "...the mixture of French Sign Language with Home Sign had reached equilibrium and was taught in other institutions...". I think the word equilibrium does suggest that became equally important. That is how I answered the question.

nataliabadger · Answer

I think this is a  poor-quality  question and I don't agree with the explanation. equilibrium and being equally important aren't the same thing. Equilibrium doesn't have to be in the middle--its just in a stasis

siddhantvarma · Answer

I got this question in my GMAT Club practice test and got it wrong. During review, I discovered why C is a better option choice than D.

The passage states that:
 
This tells us the following things:
1. French sign language was already standardized long before Clerc had actually developed the American sign language
2. The language Clerc developed (the American sign language) was based  heavily  on the French Sign Language

Option C states that because Clerc, one of the co-founders, was already familiar with French Sign Language which was already standardized. This is exactly what the passage states. Now let's address the confusion. The passage in the next few lines states:
 
What does this tell us? It tells us that the French Sign Language was made using the "Home sign language". However, it doesn't tell us to what extent, so assuming that Home Sign language contributed 50% to the American Sign Language would not be accurate. The last line about attaining equilibrium between the two only tells us how their combination was taught in institutes as American Sign Language was balanced. "Balanced" means equilibrium, and it doesn't necessarily mean 50-50. We can say that for American Sign Language to be standardized, elements from Home Sign Language as well as French Sign Language need to be added. We don't know if that needs to be 50-50. Maybe you need fewer elements from one and more from another.

Also, the passage indicates that French Sign Language and the "home signs" from Martha's Vineyard were different systems that merged, not that they were  equally expressive.

Hence,   C is the correct   answer and   D is incorrect  .

RJ_Joker · Answer

I don’t quite agree with the solution. Option D says that American sign language was first standardized sign language which is way too extreme. It is one of the first standradized language (not first).  bb  please respond to my query.

bb · Answer

Hi. I don’t think that it’s the first language that was standardized, it says it was a language that was first standardized and then disseminated. It’s a subtle but important difference

yasbenje · Answer

I don’t quite agree with the solution. nothing indicates that the languages are equally important, quite the opposite. Sure they mingle and reach equilibrium, but it does not mean that they are of equal importance. It just means that it stops evolving. However, the fact that the language was BASED off French Sign Language, and that some home signs were added to it, suggest that FSL was actually more important to ASL than Home Sign was

miag · Answer

Hi,

(a)  Too strong - nothing says Gallaudet could not have founded a school without Clerc.
  (c)  Unsupported comparison - no claim that ASL surpassed French Sign Language.
  (d)  "Inevitable" is far too strong and unsupported.
  (e)  Contradicted - Home Sign already existed before French Sign Language entered the classroom.

(B) is correct because: The passage says ASL developed from a mixture of French Sign Language and Home Sign. It also states that this mixture "reached equilibrium "  and became ASL. Further, the author never ranks one as more important than the other.
 Hope this helps!

parthk24 · Answer

Bunuel  Can you explain why the answer to Q4 is not A?

(a) Gallaudet would have been unable to found a school for the deaf without Clerc’s assistance.

I picked this because it's evident that Clerc was an essential factor for the standardization and dissemination of ASL. Gallaudet is mentioned only in that he  " recruited Frenchman Laurent Clerc to  co-found  what is now the American School for the Deaf in Hartford, Connecticut." . The mention of co-founding and Clerc' experience and further role seemed sufficient to consider that the school could not be founded without his assistance. 
I understand the argument that Gallaudet could have found someone else perhaps with Clerc's expertise to found the school and hence Clerc himself isn't necessary but the points above show that he was integral to the process.

What am I missing?

AbhishekP220108 · Answer

parthk24  let me try to help. The problem with option A is that it cannot be supported from the passage; nothing can be said with certainty about whether he would have been able to find it or not. Also, the question stem is considered to be the inference type; hence, A can't be correct because of the non-availability of sufficient data.

Hope this helps

V03-16, V03-17, V03-18, V03-19

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards