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.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
dcummins
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Last visit: 16 Mar 2026
Posts: 1,021
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 368
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: INSEAD Sept'21 Intake (WA$$$) Melbourne (A$$$$) AGSM (A$$$$) Kellogg '23 (WL) Said '22 (A$$$$) CBS '23 (D) Booth '23 (WA) Anderson '23 (WA) Cambridge '22 (WL) LBS '23 (D) Stern '24 (WA)
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36
GMAT 5: 600 Q38 V35
GMAT 6: 710 Q47 V41
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
Schools: INSEAD Sept'21 Intake (WA$$$) Melbourne (A$$$$) AGSM (A$$$$) Kellogg '23 (WL) Said '22 (A$$$$) CBS '23 (D) Booth '23 (WA) Anderson '23 (WA) Cambridge '22 (WL) LBS '23 (D) Stern '24 (WA)
GMAT 6: 710 Q47 V41
Posts: 1,021
Kudos:
2,379
21 Jun 2019, 15:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
1. Read the argument
The author argues that a newly discovered painting is most likely the work of Drechen (D from herein)
Why does he conclude this? (Evidence)
- because analysis of the picture frame, the original frame, reveals that the frame is made of wood that was found in Germany, where D was from, but rare in France where B was from.
2. Know that since this is an assumption question there needs to be some evidence missing
There is a lack of information on how the source of wood itself leads the author to conclude the origin of the painting.
3. Try to predict the missing piece of evidence
- Painters used wood that was local to their region
- Painters did not import wood from other countries
- Painters did not outsource their paintings to framers in other countries
4. Eliminate 2-3 options that definitely look incorrect. Possible wrong choices are: out of scope answers, answers that repeat what is stated in the argument, or that can be inferred from the argument
B - Knowing that D never visited France is of no consequence to the argument
C - This is of no consequence to the argument as the author concludes where the painting was most likely painted based on evidence of the wood used
D - This doesn't support the argument. What if either painter chose a foreign source of wood?
E - This is the opposite of what we want. But given how close the wording is to A, see below.
5. Negate/Deny answer choice contenders (only):
A - The frame was not made from wood local to the region where the picture was painted.
This weakens the argument as we are now open to a whole range of possibilities of the source of the wood. E.g. If the frame was not made from local wood then perhaps the wood was imported, perhaps the painting was sent to another country to get framed (see above).
E - The carving style of the picture frame is typical of a specific region of Europe
This proves that E is the opposite of what we need. Negated, E strengthens the answer.
P.s. For anyone reading I'm breaking down my approach to this question as it serves to reinforce a weaker topic for me - assumption questions.
The author argues that a newly discovered painting is most likely the work of Drechen (D from herein)
Why does he conclude this? (Evidence)
- because analysis of the picture frame, the original frame, reveals that the frame is made of wood that was found in Germany, where D was from, but rare in France where B was from.
2. Know that since this is an assumption question there needs to be some evidence missing
There is a lack of information on how the source of wood itself leads the author to conclude the origin of the painting.
3. Try to predict the missing piece of evidence
- Painters used wood that was local to their region
- Painters did not import wood from other countries
- Painters did not outsource their paintings to framers in other countries
4. Eliminate 2-3 options that definitely look incorrect. Possible wrong choices are: out of scope answers, answers that repeat what is stated in the argument, or that can be inferred from the argument
B - Knowing that D never visited France is of no consequence to the argument
C - This is of no consequence to the argument as the author concludes where the painting was most likely painted based on evidence of the wood used
D - This doesn't support the argument. What if either painter chose a foreign source of wood?
E - This is the opposite of what we want. But given how close the wording is to A, see below.
5. Negate/Deny answer choice contenders (only):
A - The frame was not made from wood local to the region where the picture was painted.
This weakens the argument as we are now open to a whole range of possibilities of the source of the wood. E.g. If the frame was not made from local wood then perhaps the wood was imported, perhaps the painting was sent to another country to get framed (see above).
E - The carving style of the picture frame is typical of a specific region of Europe
This proves that E is the opposite of what we need. Negated, E strengthens the answer.
The Negated answer choice must weaken the conclusion:
From powerscore's website:
This is why the Assumption Negation Technique works 100% of the time: the correct answer choice to an Assumption question, when negated, must weaken the argument contained in the stimulus. In other words, when the assumption is not true, the conclusion is not true: Assumption NOT True → Conclusion NOT Valid
Source: https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid-28 ... edfellows/
From powerscore's website:
This is why the Assumption Negation Technique works 100% of the time: the correct answer choice to an Assumption question, when negated, must weaken the argument contained in the stimulus. In other words, when the assumption is not true, the conclusion is not true: Assumption NOT True → Conclusion NOT Valid
Source: https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid-28 ... edfellows/
P.s. For anyone reading I'm breaking down my approach to this question as it serves to reinforce a weaker topic for me - assumption questions.
04 Apr 2020, 06:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
Passage Analysis
• A newly discovered painting seems to be the work of one of two seventeenth-century artists,
- o A painting is newly discovered.
o One of two seventeenth century artists is thought to have painted this.
• either the northern German Johannes Drechen
- o It might have been Johannes Drechen who is from northern Germany.
• Or the Frenchman Louis Birelle, who sometimes painted in the same style as Drechen.
- o The other possible artist behind the work is Louis Birelle from France.
o Birelle occasionally (not always) followed the painting style Drechen used.
• Analysis of the carved picture frame, which has been identified as the painting’s original seventeenth-century frame,
- o The carved picture frame was analyzed.
o It is found out that this frame is indeed the original frame used for the painting when it was completed in the seventeenth century.
• showed that it is made of wood found widely in northern Germany at the time,
- o The frame is wooden.
o This type of wood was available in plenty in Northern Germany when the painting was made.
• but rare in the part of France where Birelle lived.
- o The wood used for the painting’s frame is seldom found in the region of France that was Birelle’s home.
• This shows that the painting is most likely the work of Drechen.
- o The author makes a conclusion that the painting probably was made by Drechen rather than Birelle because the material of the original frame was much more readily available at Drechen’s country, unlike Birelle’s.
Question Stem Analysis
This is a direct question that asks for the assumption necessary for the conclusion to hold from the given choices.
Pre-thinking
Falsification Question
In what scenario is it possible that Birelle made the painting, not Drechen
Given that
- o Birelle occasionally followed Drechen’s style of painting
o The wooden frame of the picture was the same original frame it had in the 17th century.
o This frame was made of wood which was plentily available at Drechen’s region then, but not in the region where Birelle is from.
Thought Process
The author is not sure about the workmanship of the painting. The confusion exists because both Drechen and Birelle lived during the seventeenth century when the painting was made and both of them are known to have used the style in which the painting is made, though Birelle followed it only sometimes. The only other clue regarding the origin of the piece of art we know of is its frame, which may be able to help us since it is the original frame given to it when it was made. This wooden frame is found to have made of a type of wood available abundantly at Northern Germany where Drechen lived, but rarely found in France where Birelle lived. So the author concludes the type of wood of the frame indicates that the painting is probably Drechen’s work.
Falsification condition#1
What if the frame or the wood for it was brought from Germany to Birelle?
In that case the facts hold but the conclusion breaks down.
Assumption#1
The frame or the wood used to make the frame was not brought to the artist from elsewhere.
Falsification condition#2
What if Birelle completed the painting and got it framed when he was visiting a place where this kind of wood was normally available (like Northern Germany)?
Here also the facts remain intact, but the conclusion cannot hold.
Assumption#2
Birelle did not get his painting framed when he was traveling through regions where this type of wood was available.
Answer Choice Analysis
(A) The frame was made from wood local to the region where the picture was painted.
CORRECT
This is in-line with our pre-thinking and assumption#1, hence it is the correct answer.
(B) Drechen is unlikely to have ever visited the home region of Birelle in France.
INCORRECT
Drechen visiting Birelle’s home region at some point of time does not affect the conclusion in anyway. For all we know, he could have visited the region before he made the painting or long after making it, this cannot bring anything that must affect the conclusion. Hence, it is not the right choice.
(C) Sometimes a painting so resembles others of its era that no expert is able to confidently decide who painted it.
INCORRECT
The content of this statement is implicit in the passage and can be inferred from the same. Hence, this is not the correct answer.
(D) The painter of the picture chose the frame for the picture.
INCORRECT
This statement, if negated, i.e. if the painter did not choose the frame, is it a must that the conclusion is negated? Not necessarily. Hence, it is not the correct choice.
(E) The carving style of the picture frame is not typical of any specific region of Europe.
INCORRECT
The carving style is a matter out of the context of this passage. We are given no detail about the carving style of the frame hence this additional information is of no use in reaching the conclusion. Hence, this is not the right answer.
12 Apr 2020, 18:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
sayantanc2k
I disagree. Premise :"The wood is abundant in German, but rare in France". Rare does not imply that that it does not exist.
So the conclusion is that: "This shows that the painting is most likely the work of Drechen". Is there anyway that we can break the conclusion? What if we can prove that the painting is most likely not the work of Drechen?
Let's consider this: Berille finished the painting, Drechen paid a visit to Berille. He also brought the frame, which is made out of wood in German, with him as a gift to Berille.
Negate (A): The frame was NOT made from wood local to the region where the picture was painted.
Does this break the conclusion? Yes and No. If it was the case that D brought the frame over to B, then the argument breaks apart. However, If Berill was, in fact, the one who brought the frame to D, then the frame was NOT made from wood local to D's region; however, the painting is still the work of Drechen. In this case, ,the argument holds true.
Even though I chose A as well. But I get confused just as zoezhuyan did. GMATNinja , would you mind to help us to explain this please? Thanks.
