#21 - Specific Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[mokkyukkyu]

Why is A correct?
Is E wrong because of the part "political life"?

Thank you

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi mokkyukkyu,

Thanks for your question!

To help you figure out where you went wrong here, please provide a detailed breakdown of how you understood the question you’re asking about. Since you’re asking about a Reading Comprehension question, we expect to see evidence that you were able to do the following:

• Correctly identify the type of question in the stem.
• If the stem refers to a specific concept in the passage, identify where in the passage this concept was discussed.
• If the stem allows for a paraphrasable answer, tell us what it was. (Don't be afraid if your prephrase was off).
• Assuming this is a Must Be True question, as most RC questions are, what textual evidence do you have supporting your choice of (incorrect) answer.
• Why do you believe the correct answer choice is not supported by the passage?

The more you tell us about your method of approach, the better we can help you figure it out.

Thanks!

[ChicaRosa]

Why is A correct and not B?

From my understanding of this question it's a specific reference type question that relates to meaning in context. I read the first paragraph to get a better idea but instead I got even more confused as I tried relating each answer choice to the 1st paragraph.

I easily eliminated C,D, and E since the topics in these answer choices weren't related in the 1st paragraph. My contenders were A and B and ended choosing B as a quick guess because it had the words metal and abstract in it. But I think it's wrong because there is no different radical meaning of the sheep sign from the metal sign. All we know is that both of these forms are puzzling to research because they are abstract.

Though I'm struggling to see how A relates to the sheep sign in ln 6 and the first paragraph?

Thanks!

[David Boyle]

Why is A correct and not B?

From my understanding of this question it's a specific reference type question that relates to meaning in context. I read the first paragraph to get a better idea but instead I got even more confused as I tried relating each answer choice to the 1st paragraph.

I easily eliminated C,D, and E since the topics in these answer choices weren't related in the 1st paragraph. My contenders were A and B and ended choosing B as a quick guess because it had the words metal and abstract in it. But I think it's wrong because there is no different radical meaning of the sheep sign from the metal sign. All we know is that both of these forms are puzzling to research because they are abstract.

Though I'm struggling to see how A relates to the sheep sign in ln 6 and the first paragraph?

Thanks!

Hello ChicaRosa,

The passage says, "The sign for “sheep,” for example, is not an image of a sheep, but rather a circled cross, while the sign for “metal” is a crescent with five lines." The symbols are very abstract and maybe even interchangeable; why not use the circled cross for "metal" instead? Or why not use three diagonal squiggles? Or whatever. So, A, "It could have been replaced without loss of significance by any other sign that was not already being used for something else", is the right answer.

Hope this helps,
David

[sherrilynm]

I understand that A is best by choice of elimination, but I am baffled as to how we can infer that the author would agree with the statement. Just because something is abstract doesn't mean it is interchangeable. It just seems like too much of a reach to me.

[Malila Robinson]

Hi sherrylynn,
The word abstract is used to show that the symbol is not linked in a concrete way to the word it represents. The author is juxtaposing pictographs (which do look like what they represent) with abstract symbols (which do not look like what the represent).
"...the writing on them uses (5) relatively few pictographs; instead, numerous abstract symbols are used. The sign for “sheep,” for example, is not an image of a sheep, but rather a circled cross, while the sign for “metal” is a crescent with five lines."

Answer A is saying that since the abstract symbols don't look like what they represent, the sign for sheep didn't really need to be a circled cross, it could have been anything that wasn't already being used, and as long as they knew that symbol was the sign for sheep it would not have affected the interpretation of the symbol.
Hope that helps!
-Malila

[jmacer]

I understand that A is best by choice of elimination, but I am baffled as to how we can infer that the author would agree with the statement. Just because something is abstract doesn't mean it is interchangeable. It just seems like too much of a reach to me.

For what it's worth, I am similarly baffled that this question made it onto an actual exam. The logic they are looking for is straightforward -- the symbols are abstract, therefore we don't expect them to resemble the objects they describe in form. But if one steps back for even a moment: does that mean the relationship between the object and the form of the character is irrelevant? Moreover, would we expect the author, who has demonstrated a depth of knowledge on the topic, to believe such relationship is entirely arbitrary, rather than one contingent on a whole host of complex historical factors? Of course not.

Narrowing one's thinking to the extent needed to succeed on this questions seems to me an unhelpful habit for succeeding on the test as a whole. Of course, that's just one person's opinion.

[James Finch]

Hi J. Macer,

The author of the passage is trying to indicate in the sentence mentioning sheep and metal is that being abstract and also completely unintuitive as to what we would see sheep or metal as visually, the signs were in fact arbitrary, just as the word "sheep," as opposed to the French word "mouton" is arbitrary. Those words aren't descriptive of qualities or action of a sheep, and are thus abstractions arbitrarily assigned to a real thing in order to create a single standard and facilitate communication between people, just as the rudimentary forms on the clay tablets were.

So this is a difficult question, and certainly designed to make test takers stumble, but not illogical. A question like this pops up on every few tests and despite the difficulty, is a fair question.

Hope this helps!

[marioncarroll]

"It could have been replaced without loss of significance by any other sign that was not already being used for something else."

I don't understand how we are expected to assume this. How are we to know that the symbols that appear to the viewer as 'arbitrary' are not part of a complex system of symbols that aren't obvious to the viewer based on appearance alone, but nonetheless represent a deeper meaning behind the symbols that would prevent them from accurately being called 'arbitrary' and certainly prevent them from being swapped out for another without loss of significance? It seems like in the scenario of this answer being correct, anything other than a system of symbols based on pure memorization with no connection to one another is ruled out, leaving us with a system of pure randomness, which seems the most unlikely of all.