Jeremy Press wrote: ↑Mon May 11, 2020 12:21 pm
Hi PV!
It's true that "regular" maintenance (maintenance recurring at uniform intervals) and "continuous" maintenance (maintenance occurring continuously) are not identical. But the real question is whether the factual information in answer choice E about "regular" maintenance has the power to explain the stimulus information about "continuous" maintenance (that it almost never happens). And the answer there is yes, because, whatever the implied interval is in the notion of regular maintenance, such maintenance will lack urgency for long periods and provide a motivation not to pursue continuous maintenance. Don't get too thrown off by the conceptual change! Just make sure the answer does what the question stem calls for, explaining why continuous maintenance is almost never adopted.
I hope this helps!
Jeremy
Thank you so much for all your help on this forum.
Why is C rejected for the same reason that is irrelevant in deciding AC E? The "inadequacy" concept here in C and the "regular" concept in E both are different than in the stimulus, so why is it a problem in AC C but not in AC E?
I noticed that even in the prior question 19, "SOME" in AC D is frowned upon like "inadequate" here in AC C/. I understand that these Weaken and Strengthen Q's allow certain AC's to work because the stimulus is "workable", i.e. it has a hole that a word like SOME in the AC choice may exploit in a Weaken or close up in the Strengthen types, or may disaualify the AC because a word like SOME is irrelevant like in AC D of Q19.
Please may you help me delineate this better and have some sort of method to feed tricky AC's like this out, in the midst of AC C here and also AC D in Q19?
Thank you so much
