Vorskl
What kinds of property rights apply to Algonquian family hunting territories, and how did they come to [highlight]be? The dominant view[/highlight] in recent decades has been that family hunting territories, like other forms of private landownership, were not found among Algonquians (a group of North American Indian tribes) before contact with Europeans but are the result of changes in Algonquian society brought about by the European-Algonquian fur trade, in combination with other factors such as ecological changes and consequent shifts in wildlife harvesting patterns. Another view claims that Algonquian family hunting territories predate contact with Europeans and are forms of private landownership by individuals and families. More recent fieldwork, however, has shown that individual and family rights to hunting territories form part of a larger land-use system of muitifamilial hunting groups, that rights to hunting territories at this larger community level take precedence over those at the individual or family level, and that this system reflects a concept of spiritual and social reciprocity that conflicts with European concepts of private property. In short, there are now strong reasons to think that it was erroneous to claim that Algonquian family hunting territories ever were, or were becoming, a kind of private property system.
1. It can be inferred from the passage that proponents of the view mentioned in highlighted text believe which of the following about the origin of Algonquian family hunting territories?
(A) They evolved from multifamilial hunting territories.
(B) They are an outgrowth of reciprocal land-use practices.
(C) They are based on certain spiritual beliefs.
(D) They developed as a result of contact with Europeans.
(E) They developed as a result of trade with non-Algonquian Indian tribes.
2. The primary purpose of the passage is to
(A) provide an explanation for an unexpected phenomenon
(B) suggest that a particular question has yet to be answered
(C) present a new perspective on an issue
(D)defend a traditional view from attack
(E)reconcile opposing sides of an argument
3. According to the passage, recent fieldwork has revealed which of the following about rights to hunting territories in Algonquian societies?
(A) Rights at the individual level take precedence over those at the family level.
(B) Rights at the multifamilial level take precedence over those at the family level.
(C) These rights developed as a result of changes in Algonquian society brought about by contact with Europeans.
(D) These rights developed in response to European challenges to Algonquian private land ownership.
(E)These rights developed in response to recent ecological changes that have negatively affected the availability of game.
OA:
Hats off to GMATPrep for creating such nice passages and thanks to the authors for posting them.
Issue: What kinds of property rights apply to Algonquian family hunting territories.
Discuss:
How the hunting territories came into existence and presents two opposing views about its creation, however both the views agree that these properties are to be considered private property.
Author presents an information about recent studies regarding these properties. Those studies suggest that rights of these properties are dictated at a social level rather than a private level and needs some considerations before conforming them as private property.
1.
family hunting territories are the result of changes in Algonquian society brought about by the European-Algonquian fur trade.
D.
2.
(C) present a new perspective on an issue.
there are
now strong reasons to think that it was erroneous to claim that Algonquian family hunting territories ever were, or were becoming, a kind of private property system.
The tone of the author suggests that she/he wants a revaluation before categorization of the property.
3.
rights to hunting territories at this larger community level take precedence over those at the individual or family level,
B.