As I mentioned in my prior post, this question is asking you to strengthen the conclusion that the discovery of leavend bread was causally related to the introduction of the non-toasted wheat. Your answer needs to make a definitive connection between those two events.

A - Makes no connection between non-toasted wheat and leaven.
B - We are trying to connect non-toasting and leavening...the baking process after the fact is not relevant.
C - This answer perfectly connects the non-toasting with the leavening. Before, when wheat was toasted, the gluten was destroyed, preventing the bread from leavining. With the new, non-toasted wheat, the gluten is present and the leavening process can take place.
D - This answer does not connect non-toasting with leaven.
E - Again, no connection made between non-toasting and leaven.

[Sorry for the delayed response here, we have a brand new baby at home and he's keeping me away from the computer ]

KW

Yeasts capable of leavening bread are widespread, and in the many centuries
during which the ancient Egyptians made only unleavened bread, such yeasts must
frequently have been mixed into bread doughs accidentally. The Egyptians,
however, did not discover leavened bread until about 3000 B. C. That discovery
roughly coincided with the introduction of a wheat variety that was preferable to
previous varieties because its edible kernel could be removed from the husk
without first toasting the grain.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest evidence that the two
developments were causally related?
A. Even after the ancient Egyptians discovered leavened bread and the techniques
for reliably producing it were well known, unleavened bread continued to be
widely consumed.
B. Only when the Egyptians stopped the practice grain were their stonelined
grain-toasting pits available for baking bread.
C. Heating a wheat kernel destroys its gluten, a protein that must be present in order
for yeast to leaven bread dough.
D. The new variety of wheat, which had a more delicate flavor because it was not
toasted, was reserved for the consumption of high officials when it first began
to be grown.
E. Because the husk of the new variety of wheat was more easily removed, flour
Made from it required less effort to produce.
_________________

as a non native I have no chance to understand the passage. No one knows all the important words like yeast, kernel, husk leavened dough and so on. How is it important to a MBA application test, how good my vocabulary in the field of baking is? I could not use my analytical skills because I just coudnt understand a word of that passage!? Usually I get 80% or more right in CR, but as a non native there is no chance to get this CR correct. Except you work in a multinational bakery I guess haha. Sorry for my comment but it just frustrates me.

Y C is correct ? Can someone explain with proper convincing points plz ?

What's the difficulty level for this question? I couldn't figure out what question stem it was?

Tough to peg a difficulty level on questions. This one is tricky but manageable when you understand the question.

Understanding the question type is tricky because the question includes logical words (causal) that don't tie to a question type. The type is actually 'strengthen the conclusion' but the conclusion can be hard to find because its hidden in the question. The conclusion is that there is a causal relationship between the introduction of the non-toasted wheat and bread leavening.

I'll review the options when I get back to a computer.

KW

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Yeasts capable of leavening bread are widespread, and in the many centuries
during which the ancient Egyptians made only unleavened bread, such yeasts must
frequently have been mixed into bread doughs accidentally. The Egyptians,
however, did not discover leavened bread until about 3000 B. C. That discovery
roughly coincided with the introduction of a wheat variety that was preferable to
previous varieties because its edible kernel could be removed from the husk
without first toasting the grain.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest evidence that the two
developments were causally related?
A. Even after the ancient Egyptians discovered leavened bread and the techniques
for reliably producing it were well known, unleavened bread continued to be
widely consumed.
it weakens the argument


B. Only when the Egyptians stopped the practice grain were their stonelined
grain-toasting pits available for baking bread.
not relevant

C. Heating a wheat kernel destroys its gluten, a protein that must be present in order
for yeast to leaven bread dough.
correct

D. The new variety of wheat, which had a more delicate flavor because it was not
toasted, was reserved for the consumption of high officials when it first began
to be grown.
it does not help to provide the causal relation between the two developments

E. Because the husk of the new variety of wheat was more easily removed, flour
Made from it required less effort to produce.
not relevant

I am confused about the statement, "in the many centuries during which the ancient Egyptians made only unleavened bread, such yeasts must frequently have been mixed into bread doughs accidentally, such yeasts must frequently have been mixed into bread doughs accidentally".

Does it mean that the ancient Egyptians made unleavened bread but got leavened bread by accident?

Hey, its not necessary to know such words..
just try to understand the logic of the sentence.
Some people, tried making something, but accidentally they made something else.. they didn't know about that, until and unless some other thing came up, which had specific characteristics, one of them is "without first toasting the grain." = heating

C) says, Heating (a wheat kernel) destroys its gluten, (a protein that must be present in order for yeast to leaven bread dough.)

Other choices aren't that closely talking about "heating"

Also, the expert from Manhattan has told us a lot, which can help us eliminate most of the other choices, and understand this question very well

I have broken down the argument, in the simplest form I could, hope that helps you too.
and yes you are right, it means they did something, but by accident, they didn't know it was happening, until something else ( a new discovery) came up.

Only C Option provides relation between wheat and Yeast
One process leads to other for final completion

seofah option B is incompletely quoted here. Below is the complete version:
"Only when the Egyptians stopped the practice of toasting grain were their stone-lined grain-toasting pits available for baking bread."

I would love to hear the explanation of the meaning of option B.


_________________

here is the dictionary explanation of the some of the words:

(noun) (countable or uncountable) yeast: a type of fungus that is used in making alcoholic drinks such as beer and wine, and for making bread swell and become light

to leaven: to add a substance to bread or other food made with flour to make it increase in size when it is cooked

(noun) (countable or uncountable) dough: flour mixed with water and often yeast, fat, or sugar, so that it is ready for baking

(noun) (uncountable) wheat: a plant whose yellowish-brown grain is used for making flour, or the grain itself

(noun) (countable) kernel: the part of a nut that is inside the shell and can be eaten

(noun) (countable) husk: the dry outer covering of some seeds

(noun) (countable or uncountable) grain: a seed or seeds from a plant, especially a plant like a grass such as rice or wheat

as a non-native, I did not know the meaning of the words "a yeast" and "to leaven". but I survived. Good luck to non-natives. And do not worry about the prompt involving that much vocabulary, such a case is very rare.
_________________

Being a non-native speaker & not knowing anything about baking/leavening/unleavening, I couldnt understand much of this argument.
Though, the question stem was about strengthening the causality of both events, so in my mind, I was 99% sure that the correct answer choice must have a connection between the two things that are asked to be causally related.
Luckily, only option C, to me, seemed as the choice which had both the things mentioned and I went for this choice ultimately.

I would also like to point out that, to me, all other option choices seemed out of scope

So yeah, maybe I was lucky with this one

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________