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 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 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 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
14 Mar 2024, 07:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
74% (02:01) correct
26%
(02:09)
wrong
based on 1470
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
There are several known versions of the thirteenth-century book describing a journey Marco Polo of Venice supposedly made to China, yet none contains any description of the Great Wall of China. Since Marco Polo would have had to cross the Great Wall to travel the route described and since the book reports in detail on other, less notable, structures, the omission of the Great Wall strongly suggests that Marco Polo never did actually travel to China.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) The original manuscript of the book describing Marco Polo's supposed journey is no longer in existence.
(B) In his travels, Marco Polo certainly visited his family's trading posts on the Black Sea, where he would have had contact with people who had traveled to the various parts of China that the book describes.
(C) Many notable structures in China that are described in the book were hundreds of years old at the time Marco Polo supposedly traveled to China.
(D) At some places along the Great Wall, a traveler crossing the Wall could do so without realizing that it was an enormous structure.
(E) Certain pieces of accurate information about thirteenth-century China are contained in some of the known versions of the book but not in all known versions.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) The original manuscript of the book describing Marco Polo's supposed journey is no longer in existence.
(B) In his travels, Marco Polo certainly visited his family's trading posts on the Black Sea, where he would have had contact with people who had traveled to the various parts of China that the book describes.
(C) Many notable structures in China that are described in the book were hundreds of years old at the time Marco Polo supposedly traveled to China.
(D) At some places along the Great Wall, a traveler crossing the Wall could do so without realizing that it was an enormous structure.
(E) Certain pieces of accurate information about thirteenth-century China are contained in some of the known versions of the book but not in all known versions.
Focus Exam 5.
Trying to understand why the right answer is right?
GMAT Club Tests explanations walk through concepts, shortcuts, and common traps on many questions.
See how →
19 Aug 2024, 09:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
There are several known versions of the thirteenth-century book describing a journey Marco Polo of Venice supposedly made to China, yet none contains any description of the Great Wall of China. Since Marco Polo would have had to cross the Great Wall to travel the route described and since the book reports in detail on other, less notable, structures, the omission of the Great Wall strongly suggests that Marco Polo never did actually travel to China.
The conclusion of the argument is the following:
the omission of the Great Wall strongly suggests that Marco Polo never did actually travel to China
The support for the conclusion is provided by the following statenents:
Marco Polo would have had to cross the Great Wall to travel the route described
the book reports in detail on other, less notable, structures
We see that the reasoning of the argument is pretty straightforward. Marco Polo would have had to cross the Great Wall if he made the journey described in the book. So, the fact that the Great Wall was not mentioned indicates that he didn't actually travel to China.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
This is a Strengthen question, and the correct answer will somehow strengthen the support for the conclusion.
(A) The original manuscript of the book describing Marco Polo's supposed journey is no longer in existence.
This choice doesn't have much effect on the argument.
If it has any effect, it weakens the argument.
After all, if the original manuscript is no longer in existence, then it could be that the original manuscript did mention the Great Wall, in which case the case for the conclusion would fall apart.
In any case, the fact that the original manuscript no longer exists doesn't make the argument more convincing.
Eliminate.
(B) In his travels, Marco Polo certainly visited his family's trading posts on the Black Sea, where he would have had contact with people who had traveled to the various parts of China that the book describes.
This choice is not a conventional strengthener in that it doesn't directly support the conclusion that Marco Polo didn't travel to China. At the same time, we can choose this choice since none of the other choices work and since it does provide some confirmation that the conclusion is correct.
After all, if this choice is true, then we have a reasonable explanation for how a book about Marco Polo could describe sights in China even if he didn't go there: he heard about them from people who did go there.
While that information doesn't mean that he didn't go to China, it does make the conclusion that he didn't go there easier to believe.
So, this choice strengthens the argument.
Keep.
(C) Many notable structures in China that are described in the book were hundreds of years old at the time Marco Polo supposedly traveled to China.
This choice has no effect on the argument.
After all, structures are "notable" or not regardless of their age. So, the fact that some notable structures were hundreds of years old doesn't really change what we know about them that's relevant to the argument.
Also, notice that this choice says that "many," rather than all, of the structures described in the book were hundreds of years old. So, we can't make the case that this choice strengthens the argument by indicating that the book mentions only old structures that even people who had not traveled to China would have known about. After all, given what this choice says, the book could have mentioned new structures as well.
Eliminate.
(D) At some places along the Great Wall, a traveler crossing the Wall could do so without realizing that it was an enormous structure.
This choice weakens, rather than strengthens, the argument.
After all, if this choice is true, then it's possible that Marco Polo crossed the Wall without noticing it. In that case, the fact that the Wall is not mentioned in the book would not mean that Marco Polo didn't go to China. Instead, what could have happened is that he went to China, but the book didn't mention the Wall because it didn't seem notable.
Eliminate.
(E) Certain pieces of accurate information about thirteenth-century China are contained in some of the known versions of the book but not in all known versions.
This choice does not have any clear effect on the argument, but if anything, it weakens it.
After all, if some information appears in some versions but not others, then it could be that information about the Great Wall was contained in lost versions but left out of the known versions, or perhaps the book is simply incomplete in general.
In any case, the fact that information was left out of some versions certainly doesn't make us more convinced that the reason the Great Wall isn't mentioned is that Marco Polo didn't see it because he didn't travel to China.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: B
The conclusion of the argument is the following:
the omission of the Great Wall strongly suggests that Marco Polo never did actually travel to China
The support for the conclusion is provided by the following statenents:
Marco Polo would have had to cross the Great Wall to travel the route described
the book reports in detail on other, less notable, structures
We see that the reasoning of the argument is pretty straightforward. Marco Polo would have had to cross the Great Wall if he made the journey described in the book. So, the fact that the Great Wall was not mentioned indicates that he didn't actually travel to China.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
This is a Strengthen question, and the correct answer will somehow strengthen the support for the conclusion.
(A) The original manuscript of the book describing Marco Polo's supposed journey is no longer in existence.
This choice doesn't have much effect on the argument.
If it has any effect, it weakens the argument.
After all, if the original manuscript is no longer in existence, then it could be that the original manuscript did mention the Great Wall, in which case the case for the conclusion would fall apart.
In any case, the fact that the original manuscript no longer exists doesn't make the argument more convincing.
Eliminate.
(B) In his travels, Marco Polo certainly visited his family's trading posts on the Black Sea, where he would have had contact with people who had traveled to the various parts of China that the book describes.
This choice is not a conventional strengthener in that it doesn't directly support the conclusion that Marco Polo didn't travel to China. At the same time, we can choose this choice since none of the other choices work and since it does provide some confirmation that the conclusion is correct.
After all, if this choice is true, then we have a reasonable explanation for how a book about Marco Polo could describe sights in China even if he didn't go there: he heard about them from people who did go there.
While that information doesn't mean that he didn't go to China, it does make the conclusion that he didn't go there easier to believe.
So, this choice strengthens the argument.
Keep.
(C) Many notable structures in China that are described in the book were hundreds of years old at the time Marco Polo supposedly traveled to China.
This choice has no effect on the argument.
After all, structures are "notable" or not regardless of their age. So, the fact that some notable structures were hundreds of years old doesn't really change what we know about them that's relevant to the argument.
Also, notice that this choice says that "many," rather than all, of the structures described in the book were hundreds of years old. So, we can't make the case that this choice strengthens the argument by indicating that the book mentions only old structures that even people who had not traveled to China would have known about. After all, given what this choice says, the book could have mentioned new structures as well.
Eliminate.
(D) At some places along the Great Wall, a traveler crossing the Wall could do so without realizing that it was an enormous structure.
This choice weakens, rather than strengthens, the argument.
After all, if this choice is true, then it's possible that Marco Polo crossed the Wall without noticing it. In that case, the fact that the Wall is not mentioned in the book would not mean that Marco Polo didn't go to China. Instead, what could have happened is that he went to China, but the book didn't mention the Wall because it didn't seem notable.
Eliminate.
(E) Certain pieces of accurate information about thirteenth-century China are contained in some of the known versions of the book but not in all known versions.
This choice does not have any clear effect on the argument, but if anything, it weakens it.
After all, if some information appears in some versions but not others, then it could be that information about the Great Wall was contained in lost versions but left out of the known versions, or perhaps the book is simply incomplete in general.
In any case, the fact that information was left out of some versions certainly doesn't make us more convinced that the reason the Great Wall isn't mentioned is that Marco Polo didn't see it because he didn't travel to China.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: B
General Discussion
06 May 2024, 13:01
Kudos
Bookmarks
In the conclusion, the author emphasises on "the omission of the Great Wall strongly suggests that Marco Polo never did actually travel to China" - while, the correct option doesn't address that. Because, the relativse of MarcoPolo - those who travelled to China could have talked about the Great Wall - Infact would most probably have talked about it, as it was one of the greatest structures of those times. So, if his realtives visisted china, they would have seen it and talked about it.
Hence, the Option B doesn't sound correct.
(Altough, that's the option I picked as none of the other options synched with the question.)
Hence, the Option B doesn't sound correct.
(Altough, that's the option I picked as none of the other options synched with the question.)
