Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the view that poetry cannot be accurately paraphrased is false. This is based on the fact that certain critics who hold that view also hold another view that their own paraphrases of some poems are accurate.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author points out that the critics who believe a poem cannot be accurately paraphrased hold a contradictory view — that some of their own paraphrases of poems are accurate. But we don’t know which of these views is true, if any. The author assumes that the critics’ own paraphrases of poems are accurate. But it’s possible that the paraphrases are not accurate and that the critics’ view that poems can’t be accurately paraphrased is true. We don’t know which of the critics’ beliefs is true.
A
presupposes the falsity of the view that it sets out to refute
The author does not presuppose, on the way to reaching her conclusion, that the view poems can’t be accurately paraphrased is false. Rather, the author assumes that the critics have accurately paraphrased poems, which, if true, would show that poems can be accurately paraphrased.
B
takes for granted that the main purpose of poems is to convey information rather than express feelings
The author’s reasoning doesn’t relate to the purpose of poems. The issue is whether poems can accurately be paraphrased. Why poems are written or why they are read has no bearing on the argument.
C
takes for granted that a paraphrase of a poem cannot be useful to its readers unless it accurately expresses a poem’s meaning
The author’s reasoning doesn’t relate to the usefulness of a paraphrase. The issue is whether poems can be accurately paraphrased. Whether this paraphrasing is ever useful to a reader has no bearing on the argument.
D
provides no justification for favoring one of the literary critics’ beliefs over the other
The author gave no reason for favoring the view that the critics’ paraphrases are accurate. The author simply assumes that this view is true. This overlooks that the contradictory view could be the one that is true; perhaps poems can’t be paraphrased accurately.
E
provides no justification for following one particular definition of “paraphrase”
It’s not clear that the author is using any definition of “paraphrase” other than the dictionary definition. And it’s not flawed to use the dictionary definition of a word, unless we have some reason to use a different definition.
In a scene in an ancient Greek play, Knights, the character Demosthenes opens a writing tablet on which an oracle had written a prophecy, and while looking at the tablet, he continuously expresses his amazement at its contents. His companion presses him for information, whereupon Demosthenes explains what the oracle had written.
Summary
In a scene in one ancient Greek play, a character (Demosthenes) opens a tablet and expresses amazement at what was written on it.
Demosthenes’s companion requests information in response to his reaction.
Demosthenes explains to his companion what was written on the tablet.
Notable Valid Inferences
In this scene, Demosthenes did not read the prophecy out loud.
A
In ancient Greek plays, characters are presumed to know how to read unless their illiteracy is specifically mentioned.
This could be true. We only know what happened in one specific scene in one play. Further, neither character’s illiteracy is specifically mentioned, so according to (A), both characters would be presumed to know how to read. This presumption isn’t rejected by the stimulus.
B
The character of Demosthenes in Knights is not based on a historical figure.
This could be true. We have no information to support or reject this claim.
C
In ancient Greek plays, the reading aloud of written texts commonly occurred as part of the on-stage action.
This could be true. We only have information about one scene in one play where something was read silently; we don’t know whether or not reading out loud occurred commonly.
D
In ancient Greece, people did not read silently to themselves.
The stimulus provides evidence against this. We can reject the claim in (D) because the stimulus provides an indication that someone read silently. (D) says that reading silently never happened, and the stimulus provides an example of it happening, so the stimulus rejects (D).
E
Only rarely in ancient Greece were prophecies written down on writing tablets.
This could be true. We only know what happened in this scene in this one play; we don’t know how commonly prophecies were written down in ancient Greece. We don’t have the information to reject this claim.
Summary
Tiktaalik is a prehistoric fish. Tiktaalik is the earliest known animal with fingers. Tiktaalik would not have stood out as unusual since variations were great among prehistoric fish. Tiktaalik is likely an ancestor to the land animals that have fingers.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Land animals with fingers today likely trace their ancestry back to a prehistoric fish. Comparing Tiktaalik to other fish at its time would not reveal its evolutionary importance.
A
Tiktaalik likely used its fingers to move on land.
This is unsupported because we don’t know where Tiktaalik lived, and its life may have been confined to the sea.
B
Tiktaalik’s fingers were its only feature to play a significant role in the development of modern land animals.
This is unsupported because the author never reveals if Tiktaalik also had other features that were unique or significant. The discussion is confined to its fingers.
C
Tiktaalik is not the ancestor of any currently surviving fish species.
This is unsupported because Tiktaalik may have had several descendants of fish, either with or without fingers.
D
No fish without fingers would ever be able to move on land.
This is unsupported because there may be other appendages besides fingers that could enable a fish to move on land.
E
The evolutionary significance of Tiktaalik could not be determined just through comparison to fish species of its time.
This is strongly supported because comparing Tiktaalik to other fish wouldn’t yield significant results since many different fish had unique characteristics. The evolutionary significance of Tiktaalik comes from its later land ancestors with fingers.
Summary
Songwriters get much of the money they earn from their songs from radio airplay. A songwriter is paid for each play, and hit songs are played thousands of times. Only some songwriters actually achieve a hit, however, and even fewer songwriters manage to write several hits. Writers of hit songs are often asked to write songs for movie soundtracks, but they sometimes decline. This is because, although such songs frequently become hits, their writers receive one up-front payment instead of continued revenues from radio airplay.
Notable Valid Inferences
Some songs written for movie soundtracks become hits and are played on the radio thousands of times.
A
Any songwriter who receives revenue from radio airplay has written a hit song.
Could be false. To claim this is true for any songwriter is too extreme. It is possible for a song that is not a hit to be played on the radio, and those songwriters would still receive some revenue.
B
All songwriters who write songs for movie sound tracks have had their songs played on the radio thousands of times.
Could be false. To claim this is true for all songwriters is too extreme. It is possible for an unknown songwriter to get asked to write songs for movie sound tracks. We only know that sometimes writers of hit songs are asked to write songs for movie sound tracks.
C
Some songs written for movie sound tracks are played on the radio thousands of times.
Must be true. The stimulus tells us that songs written for movie sound tracks frequently become hits. Since hit songs are played thousands of times, it must follow that some songs written for movie sound tracks are played thousands of times.
D
Most songwriters prefer the possibility of continued income to single up-front payments for their songs.
Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information about what most songwriters prefer. It is possible that there are other options songwriters prefer.
E
Some songwriters earn money solely from the radio airplay of their songs.
Could be false. We don’t have enough information in the stimulus about sources of income for songwriters to make this claim. It is possible that there are no songwriters solely earning money from radio airplay.