Interpretation questions

[WaltGrace1983]

I am drilling PT1-38 now and I am seeing these questions come up that read "X's response suggests that he interpreted Y's remarks to mean..."

These questions can be pretty tough but I have never seen these in a recent test (50 on or so). Then again, my exposure to recent tests is limited. Are these questions still relevant?

If so, is there any thought process that makes these easier to attack? Are they all just equivocation errors?

[tommywallach]

Hey Walt,

Be careful! That's not "equivocation" means!

I assume you mean that the person is assuming that one thing is the same as another thing, when they are actually two separate things. I'm not sure that's true. It's just the word "misinterpreted."

I've noticed sometimes you really want to put every type of question into some kind of mini-category. This is a nice idea, but don't get too overly attached to it. Sure, there are multiple questions over the history of the LSAT that use similar language, but at this point, that's true for ANY language. It doesn't make this some kind of distinct category, if that makes sense.

-t

[WaltGrace1983]

So then how do you attack these? I think I may be confused on the most efficient thought process.

[tommywallach]

Hey Walt,

Traditionally these are just "Identify the Flaw" questions. But in general, you just categorize it as normal and solve as normal (by way of the relevant process for that category). I just want to point out that questions that use the word "misinterpret" are not different than other questions of that same overall type.

-t