Verbal problems from the *free* official practice tests and
problems from mba.com
snjanashrma
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:56 pm
 

Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by snjanashrma Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:16 am

Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five communities in seventeenth-century Massachusetts is a model of meticulous scholarship on the detailed microcosmic level, and is convincing up to a point. Allen suggests that much more coherence and direct continuity existed between English and colonial agricultural practices and administrative organization than other historians have suggested. However, he overstates his case with the declaration that he has proved "the remarkable extent to which diversity in New England local institutions was directly imitative of regional differences in the mother country."

Such an assertion ignores critical differences between seventeenth-century England and New England. First, England was overcrowded and land-hungry; New England was sparsely populated and labor-hungry. Second, England suffered the normal European rate of mortality; New England, especially in the first generation of English colonists, was virtually free from infectious diseases. Third, England had an all-embracing state church; in New England membership in a church was restricted to the elect. Fourth, a high proportion of English villagers lived under paternalistic resident squires; no such class existed in New England. By narrowing his focus to village institutions and ignoring these critical differences, which studies by Greven, Demos, and Lockridge have shown to be so important, Allen has created a somewhat distorted picture of reality.

Allen's work is a rather extreme example of the "country community" school of seventeenth-century English history whose intemperate excesses in removing all national issues from the history of that period have been exposed by Professor Clive Holmes. What conclusion can be drawn, for example, from Allen's discovery that Puritan clergy who had come to the colonies from East Anglia were one-third to one-half as likely to return to England by 1660 as were Puritan ministers from western and northern England? We are not told in what way, if at all, this discovery illuminates historical understanding. Studies of local history have enormously expanded our horizons, but it is a mistake for their authors to conclude that village institutions are all that mattered, simply because their functions are all that the records of village institutions reveal.

It can be inferred from the passage that the author of the passage considers Allen's "discovery" (see highlighted text) to be

(A) already known to earlier historians
(B) based on a logical fallacy
(C) improbable but nevertheless convincing
(D) an unexplained, isolated fact
(E) a new, insightful observation

I marked B ( based on a logical fallacy). Dont understand how Allen's discovery is an unexplained and isolated fact?
Please help!
jnelson0612
ManhattanGMAT Staff
 
Posts: 2664
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:57 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by jnelson0612 Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:56 pm

snjanashrma Wrote:It can be inferred from the passage that the author of the passage considers Allen's "discovery" (see highlighted text) to be

(A) already known to earlier historians
(B) based on a logical fallacy
(C) improbable but nevertheless convincing
(D) an unexplained, isolated fact
(E) a new, insightful observation

I marked B ( based on a logical fallacy). Dont understand how Allen's discovery is an unexplained and isolated fact?
Please help!


Sure!
The relevant part of the passage is in paragraph 3 (the bolding is mine):

"What conclusion can be drawn, for example, from Allen's discovery that Puritan clergy who had come to the colonies from East Anglia were one-third to one-half as likely to return to England by 1660 as were Puritan ministers from western and northern England? We are not told in what way, if at all, this discovery illuminates historical understanding."

I think the bold says it all . . . we know this to be a fact but are not told how it is relevant to historical understanding and it is not connected to anything else. Thus, it is an "unexplained, isolated" fact.

Answer B) based on " a logical fallacy" is not supported by the passage. A "fallacy" is an error in reasoning that is frequently due to some misperception. There are no reasoning errors mentioned here.

I hope that this helps!
Jamie Nelson
ManhattanGMAT Instructor
rte.sushil
Students
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:31 pm
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by rte.sushil Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:11 pm

In the question:
According to the passage, which of the following was true of most villages in seventeenth-century England?

(A) The resident squire had significant authority.
(B) Church members were selected on the basis of their social status within the community.
(C) Low population density restricted agricultural and economic growth.
(D) There was little diversity in local institutions from one region to another.
(E) National events had little impact on local customs and administrative organization

Why the answer can't be D because of following lines:
Allen suggests that much more coherence and direct continuity existed between English and colonial agricultural practices and administrative organization than other historians have suggested.
in old England(17th century England, there were mainly colonies as inferred from the passage)
RonPurewal
Students
 
Posts: 19744
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by RonPurewal Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:22 am

rte.sushil Wrote:In the question:
According to the passage, which of the following was true of most villages in seventeenth-century England?

(A) The resident squire had significant authority.
(B) Church members were selected on the basis of their social status within the community.
(C) Low population density restricted agricultural and economic growth.
(D) There was little diversity in local institutions from one region to another.
(E) National events had little impact on local customs and administrative organization

Why the answer can't be D because of following lines:
Allen suggests that much more coherence and direct continuity existed between English and colonial agricultural practices and administrative organization than other historians have suggested.
in old England(17th century England, there were mainly colonies as inferred from the passage)


there are at least four things about this reasoning that don't work.

1/
there were no "colonies" IN England -- England is a country that started colonies in North America.
the english colonies mentioned in the passage were in New England, which is not a place in England. (New England is in the northeastern part of the current-day United States.)

2/
there are no such statements about "local institutions" in general.

3/
the historian quoted in the passage doesn't say that there was little diversity; he says that there was diversity, but that the same kind of diversity existed in New England (= colonies) as in England itself.

4/
the passage doesn't even agree with what Allen says, anyway -- it says that Allen "suggests" certain things, but then goes on to say that Allen "overstates his case" in making those suggestions.
praachiee
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 2:41 pm
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by praachiee Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:12 pm

Can a member of the staff please explain how to approach this passage, the inferences in each paragraph,etc.
Also, could you explain how to approach the following questions and evaluate the answer choices?

1. According to the passage, which of the following
was true of most villages in seventeenth-century
England?
(A) The resident squire had significant authority.
(B) Church members were selected on the basis of
their social status within the community.
(C) Low population density restricted agricultural and
economic growth.
(D) There was little diversity in local institutions from
one region to another.
(E) National events had little impact on local customs
and administrative organization.

2. The passage suggests that Professor Clive Holmes
would most likely agree with which of the
following statements?
(A) An understanding of seventeenth-century English
local institutions requires a consideration of
national issues.
(B) The "country community" school of seventeenth century
English history distorts historical evidence
in order to establish continuity between old and
new institutions.
(C) Most historians distort reality by focusing on
national concerns to the exclusion of local
concerns.
(D) National issues are best understood from the
perspective of those at the local level.
(E) Local histories of seventeenth-century English
villages have contributed little to the
understanding of village life.
tim
Course Students
 
Posts: 5665
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:08 am
Location: Southwest Airlines, seat 21C
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by tim Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:03 am

We are generally more interested in answering specific questions students bring, mainly because we like to see what approaches the students have taken and how we can build on that to come up with a an appropriate approach to the solution. Why don't you try your own analysis of the passage and the questions and let us know how it goes for you? The more specific your questions are regarding what went wrong for you either in the reading or on the questions themselves, the more specifically we'll be able to help you..
Tim Sanders
Manhattan GMAT Instructor

Follow this link for some important tips to get the most out of your forum experience:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/a-few-tips-t31405.html
praachiee
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 2:41 pm
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by praachiee Fri Mar 22, 2013 4:27 am

Hi Tim
Such passages involving a lot of history and long & complex sentences are always tough for me. I try taking a lot of notes to understand each line before proceeding to the questions.
On a general RC of this length, I take around 4-4.5 mins to read and make notes. But this one took a lot of time just to read and understand(7-8 mins to read).
I was particularly stuck on 1st and 2nd questions for long and took a lot of time. 3rd and 4th were correct.
By the time I finished answering all questions, it had been 13 mins :(

Here are my notes of the passage
Para 1:
DA suggests more coherence b/w agri and admin than other historians
BUT overstated
Para 2:
ignores diff b/w new & old england
(5 reasons given)
ditorted reality
Para 3:
xtreme eg of 'CC'(Prof CH) Please explain this line in RC- did not understand the meaning
No conclusion frm clergy discovery

Q1:
I selected E
"Allen suggests that much more coherence and direct continuity existed between English and colonial agricultural practices and administrative organization than other historians have suggested"
Since Allen overestimates the coherence, it can be inferred that the impact English events had little impact on administrative organization and ustoms(I inferred custom to be similar to agri. practices)

Although, after looking at the correct answer I understood that A made more sense and was more direct, but I failed to infer "significant authority"
from "a high proportion of English villagers lived under paternalistic resident squires", while attempting the question(a lot of time had passed and I knew I needed to get to the next question soon).

But what can we do to avoid marking an incorrect answer in the time constraint??

Q2:
I selected B
I just made a guess here as I could not understand the line "Allen's work is a rather extreme example of the "country community" school of seventeenth-century
English history whose intemperate excesses in removing all national issues from the history of that period have been exposed by Professor Clive Holmes.
"

A:eliminated as the above line does not mention institutions. The last line mentions importance of village institutions, but i did not feel that this would be linked to Holmes (as I thought
the authors intention was only to state that Allen's work was an extreme example of something already exposed by Holmes).

B:The previous line talks about distorted reality, and I felt the line mentioned in this paragraph might just be an extension of the same.

Please explain what can we do in such a situation when the line stated by the author is not easily understood, and we have to make the best guess out of the given options??

Also, when the passage looks too complex, and half way after reading it I realize that I am going too slow, can I change my strategy somehow to avoid time constraints
and too many incorrect answers??
jlucero
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:33 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by jlucero Sat Mar 23, 2013 3:18 pm

praachiee-

A few points to consider. First off, I'd say that changing your approach in the middle of a RC passage isn't going to be as helpful as developing a consistent approach that you take for all RC passages. You don't want to try something that works sometimes, but then when it gets to these long, historical passages (which a lot of people struggle with, not just you), your method no longer seems to work. I'd say one of the most important points about RC is that all of the explanations given thus far deal on a specific sentence that the instructors are referring back to. You're not supposed to memorize this passage. You're supposed to have a basic understanding of how the passage is structured and then refer back to the sentence(s) that relate to the question at hand. You do need a basic understanding of what the passage is about, but when in doubt, stick to the language from the sentence that the question refers to.

With that in mind, I personally like your notes for this passage. DA suggests something. Author thinks it is overstated. Author gives reasons. What I would add for the third paragraph is this: Author makes this an example of a larger trend- many historians of 17th century England study only the individual communities and ignore the role of the larger society.

Q1- You have a good understanding of why A is the better answer choice, but again, let me point out that these high-level questions have trap answer choices that still refer to a sentence in the passage. Looking back on that sentence you quoted, this was a comparison between villages in England and New England. Not villages in England and other communities in England. Classic trap.

Q2- This is a good example of choosing a non-extreme answer choice. Beyond the fact that A connects national issues to an understanding of 17th century England, it's wording is far less extreme that that of B. X requires a consideration of Y. vs. X distorts evidence in order to Y. Clive never merely suggests that there's a problem with the country community school of thinking. Not giving it an agenda.

By no means is this easy. But the process to more quickly see the big picture and spend more time on the sentences when they are directly pertinent to the answer should help you with the timing aspect of these lengthy passages.
Joe Lucero
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
tosattam
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 1:35 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by tosattam Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:53 am

Hi,
Thanks for the above explanation. Regarding the second question,
I selected B, and I have one doubt even after considering your detailed feedback due to the following reason.
When you say Clive never merely suggests that there's a problem with the country community school of thinking. Not giving it an agenda., I could not agree due to the use of the phrases intemperate excesses and exposed by Professor Clive Holmes in the sentence 'Allen's work is a rather extreme example of the "country community" school of seventeenth-century English history whose intemperate excesses in removing all national issues from the history of that period have been exposed by Professor Clive Holmes.' I feel when it is being said 'exposed' that certainly goes beyond merely suggesting and defines the agenda or main objective and observation of the of the study. Hence, I went for the extreme choice quite knowingly based on the above sentence or phrase.
Will highly appreciate your feedback on this.
RonPurewal
Students
 
Posts: 19744
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by RonPurewal Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:38 pm

tosattam Wrote:Hi,
Thanks for the above explanation. Regarding the second question,
I selected B, and I have one doubt even after considering your detailed feedback due to the following reason.
When you say Clive never merely suggests that there's a problem with the country community school of thinking. Not giving it an agenda., I could not agree due to the use of the phrases intemperate excesses and exposed by Professor Clive Holmes in the sentence 'Allen's work is a rather extreme example of the "country community" school of seventeenth-century English history whose intemperate excesses in removing all national issues from the history of that period have been exposed by Professor Clive Holmes.' I feel when it is being said 'exposed' that certainly goes beyond merely suggesting and defines the agenda or main objective and observation of the of the study. Hence, I went for the extreme choice quite knowingly based on the above sentence or phrase.
Will highly appreciate your feedback on this.


you're not totally off-base here, but you're not paying sufficient attention to the other half of that answer choices.
check it out:
The "country community" school of seventeenth century
English history distorts historical evidence
in order to establish continuity between old and
new institutions


you can make a decent case for the "distorts historical evidence" part of this choice -- but not for the "in order to" part.
"in order to" implies that Allen ignored national issues with the specific goal of making New England and old England look artificially similar. in other words, he was on a mission -- "i'm going to make those two places look the same, no matter what facts i have to twist to do so".
there's no evidence in the passage for this view; the passage basically just says, "Allen made this error; the result was X." there's no indication that Allen wanted "X", or was trying for "X".
jcorqian
Students
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:15 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by jcorqian Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:51 pm

Hi guys, sorry to revive an old thread, but I just did this problem and wanted to clarify something on the question with the answer of "the resident squire had significant authority."

I thought that it was probably the right answer given the text, but then I noticed the question stated "which of the following was true of MOST English villages." However, the passage only says "a high proportion of villages." Because high proportion is ambiguous (e.g., 30% is a high proportion, no?) and I didn't think it meant "most", I ruled out the answer because I thought we were supposed to take meanings/definitions literally in RC. I have been duped by this in the past when mistaking things like "a high proportion" for "majority."

Would love to get some instructor insight on this. The truth was I didn't feel like another answer was necessarily compelling, but I just thought this answer had to be wrong since to me a "high proportion" does not have to mean "most."

Thank you.
RonPurewal
Students
 
Posts: 19744
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by RonPurewal Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:39 am

How would you define a "high proportion", then?

It seems to be pretty much common sense that, in general, "a high proportion" means more than half. E.g., a 30% chance of rain is not "a high chance of rain".

The only exception that comes to mind would be if you're dealing with some very specific case in which the normal values are well known to be very low.
E.g., in any given year, at most a few percent of the people in any given area will die. So, if 30% of the people in a certain area die within a year, then, yes, that's "a high proportion". But, if you don't have that kind of special context, then, no.
RonPurewal
Students
 
Posts: 19744
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by RonPurewal Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:39 am

MOST IMPORTANTLY
As you stated yourself, you didn't find any of the other choices appealing.
Let's step back and look at the situation:
* Four of the choices are clearly not right.
* For the last choice, you're quibbling over nit-picking statistical terms.

I think it's pretty clear who wins this one. CR is about the big ideas, not the nit-picks.
liu1993918
Students
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 8:52 pm
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by liu1993918 Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:38 am

The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

(A) substantiating a claim about a historical event
(B) reconciling two opposing ideas about a historical era
(C) disputing evidence a scholar uses to substantiate a claim about a historical event
(D) analyzing two approaches to scholarly research and evaluating their methodologies
(E) criticizing a particular study and the approach to historical scholarship it represents
OA is E
I choose C instead. In my views, C only talks about evidence, but the passage talks aproach and evidence, so E is better.
Am I right?
RonPurewal
Students
 
Posts: 19744
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
 

Re: Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five

by RonPurewal Fri Feb 06, 2015 3:37 am

liu1993918 Wrote:In my views, C only talks about evidence

don't ignore the actions in these answer choices.

choice (c) says "disputing evidence..."
for this to be the correct answer, the author would actually have to argue against the evidence itself--i.e., to state that that evidence is factually incorrect, or at least questionable.

the author never says that the facts themselves might be in doubt; the author just doesn't like how someone else has used those facts to come to certain conclusions.