#20 - Global Reference, Parallel

[bebeg3168]

Hello,
Can someone help me with this question. I see in Passage A the authors speaks about lack of definitions in international law to be inclusive of the Roma people. Also gives a description of the sort of life (not an easy one it seems) they live, not having a minority status, or a citizen.
Passage B brings about definitions and explains how the Roma do fit these definitions. The authors in both passages seem to be very pro solution in regard to the Roma people.
I had like answer choice C because of the use of "definition" but that is wrong. How can I figure this out?

[bebeg3168]

Nevermind! I understand the errors of my ways..... A is the answer

Hello,
Can someone help me with this question. I see in Passage A the authors speaks about lack of definitions in international law to be inclusive of the Roma people. Also gives a description of the sort of life (not an easy one it seems) they live, not having a minority status, or a citizen.
Passage B brings about definitions and explains how the Roma do fit these definitions. The authors in both passages seem to be very pro solution in regard to the Roma people.
I had like answer choice C because of the use of "definition" but that is wrong. How can I figure this out?

[smzinnen@gmail.com]

I eventually landed on the right answer here, but can you give some good advice on how to approach a question like this when we are stuck. How would you dismantle answers A-E? Thanks!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi smzinnen!

One thing you can remember to do on reading comprehension passages in general is apply PowerScore's VIEWSTAMP analysis. That can help you get better traction with any given passage. Here, the A/MP (argument/main point) seems especially helpful for tackling this question. In addition, be marking up the passage as you go--and in this case, since there are two passages, it's important to note similarities and differences between the passages.

Another thing you can do is pause after reading a passage to try to abstract from what you've read (pausing to complete the VIEWSTAMP analysis may be sufficient). So in this set of passages, Passage A discusses a lack of clear criteria in the first paragraph, and then the second paragraph unpacks why this lack of criteria is problematic for the Roma in particular. Passage B is a bit different. It starts with a specific definition and also applies it to the Roma.

Finally, you can try replacing words in a given answer choice with words that might fit from the stimulus. Answer choice (A) could be something like "The Lack of Clear-Cut Criteria for Classifying [People] as [Minorities] Causes Problems for [the Roma]" and "A Point-by-Point Argument That [the Roma] Fulfill[ Capotorti's] Criteria for Classification of [People] as [Minorities]." That rephrase seems to fit both passages and captures their relation to one another.

[jmulder615]

My only gripe here, even though A is clearly the best answer, is that I don't think the author of Passage B necessarily goes about his argument by showing that the Roma "fulfill" all criteria, but rather arguing that one of the criteria be disregarded in their specific case since their situation is unique.

[Jeff Wren]

Hi jmulder,

You're right that the author of Passage B doesn't argue that the Roma fulfill ALL of the criteria (including the legal criterion) and basically does argue that the legal criterion should be disregarded as inapplicable in the case of the Roma.

However, the author does separate the criteria into the 4 empirical criteria and the one legal criterion. The author then makes a point-by-point argument that the Roma fulfill each of the 4 empirical/objective criteria in the second paragraph.

Since we are looking for the most parallel/analogous answer, you can compare the "Union's criteria for classification" in Answer A to these 4 empirical criteria. As you point out, Answer A is not perfect or identical to Passage B since it ignore the legal criterion, but this turns out to be our best answer. I'd prefer if Answer A had mentioned discarding an irrelevant criteria that would parallel the legal criterion in Passage B, but that might have been too much of a giveaway.

It sounds like you approached this question the right way. It's worth noting these differences and if another answer had been a better match than Answer A by having the discarded criterion, that would be the key to differentiating it. Answer A is a solid "contender" to hold onto until/unless you find a better answer later, which didn't happen here.