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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
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.
01 Nov 2021, 05:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
80% (01:43) correct
20%
(01:54)
wrong
based on 494
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Writer: In the diplomat’s or lawyer’s world, a misinterpreted statement can result in an international incident or an undeserved prison term. Thus, legal and diplomatic language is stilted and utterly without literary merit, since by design it prevents misinterpretation, which in these areas can have severe consequences.
The writer’s argument requires assuming which one of the following?
(A) Language that has literary value is more likely to be misunderstood than language without literary value.
(B) Literary documents are generally less important than legal or diplomatic documents.
(C) Lawyers and diplomats are much less likely to be misunderstood than are novelists.
(D) The issues that are of interest to lawyers and diplomats are of little interest to others.
(E) People express themselves more cautiously when something important is at stake.
The writer’s argument requires assuming which one of the following?
(A) Language that has literary value is more likely to be misunderstood than language without literary value.
(B) Literary documents are generally less important than legal or diplomatic documents.
(C) Lawyers and diplomats are much less likely to be misunderstood than are novelists.
(D) The issues that are of interest to lawyers and diplomats are of little interest to others.
(E) People express themselves more cautiously when something important is at stake.
01 Jan 2022, 07:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
You’ve got to notice the strange jerks and jumps used in these Logical Reasoning arguments. Don’t ever tell yourself, “I’m not smart enough to understand it.” If you don’t understand it, that’s because it doesn’t make sense to begin with. Here, the writer brings “utterly without literary merit” into the conclusion of the argument even though “literary merit” is mentioned nowhere else in the argument. How can we possibly make a conclusion about “literary merit” if we don’t have a definition of that term, or any premise that mentions that term whatsoever? Answer: We can’t.
We’re asked to find an assumption of the argument, and I’m very confident that “literary merit” is going to have to be mentioned in there somewhere. I think the argument is missing something like, “Language designed to prevent misinterpretation is utterly without literary merit.” If that’s true, then the writer’s argument makes more sense, right?
- Premise: Legal and diplomatic language is designed to avoid misinterpretation.
- Missing premise (i.e., assumption): Language designed to avoid misinterpretation is without literary merit.
- Conclusion: Legal language is without literary merit.
It makes sense if and only if we put that assumption in there. If the assumption is true, then the argument is valid. If the assumption is untrue, then the argument makes no sense at all. So “Language designed to avoid misinterpretation is without literary merit” is both a necessary and a sufficient assumption of the argument.
A) Not what we’re looking for. Since we have such a strong prediction, let’s not waste my time with this until we go through all five answers and see if we can match our prediction.
B) Not what we’re looking for.
C) Not what we’re looking for.
D) Not what we’re looking for.
E) Not what we’re looking for.
Wow, what a bunch of **** answers! Looking back, the only one that mentions literary merit is A, when it says “literary value.” Our prediction was, “Language designed to avoid misinterpretation is without literary merit.” Answer A says, “Language with literary value is more likely to be misinterpreted than language without literary merit.” I don’t love it, but it’s really pretty close to our prediction. It has much the same effect. I really can’t make a case for B through E, since none of them mention literary merit at all, and that was such a big hole in the argument.
I’m not thrilled about it, but our answer can only be A.
General Discussion
06 Nov 2021, 04:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
EXPLANATION FROM POWER SCORE
The author argues that legal and diplomatic language lacks literary merit, because it is designed to prevent misinterpretation (i.e. to be understood). The necessary assumption behind this statement is that any language that does have literary merit would be more likely to be misunderstood:
- Understanding -->
Literary Merit -->
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. If literary value were required for proper understanding, the author's conclusion would be seriously weakened. Since the logical opposite of answer choice (A) weakens the argument, this answer is essential to the author's conclusion.
Answer choice (B): The relative importance of literary and legal documents is irrelevant to this conclusion.
Answer choice (C): If legal and diplomatic language is designed to prevent misinterpretation, then lawyers and diplomats are probably less likely to be misunderstood than are novelists. While this may be an inference that follows from the author's central premise, it is not a requirement for her conclusion, which is about literary merit. This answer choice is incorrect.
Answer choice (D): It is irrelevant whether the issues of interest to lawyers are also of interest to others. Even if such interest were shared by everyone, legal language may still be stilted and without literary merit.
Answer choice (E): While it strengthens the idea that the likelihood of a severe consequence requires linguistic expression designed to prevent misunderstanding, this answer choice falls outside the scope of the argument and is not essential to it.
