RC Question 9 Explanation
DISCUSSION: This is a very hard question. Most people choose B, because paragraph two says documenting grammar is the first step. But a hierarchy of grammar isn’t mentioned.
That’s why B is wrong. An example of documenting grammar is given in lines 15-17: ‘analyzing and classifying’ a language’s structure. That’s why A is right.
___________
- CORRECT. See discussion.
- See discussion. Hierarchy comes later.
- Grammar is the first step. See lines 14-18.
- Grammar is the first step. See lines 14-18.
- Grammar is the first step. See lines 14-18.
Wow this question is really borderline if you ask me. In paragraph #2 the first sentence describes what the first step “must be” — and the second sentence describes “an example.”
Yet the first sentence, what is stated as what MUST BE, is “to document the language’s grammar”. Then the second sentence, the one giving the EXAMPLE, is of a tribe “conducting a thorough analysis and classification of the language’s linguistic structures”
Then when two answers A and B contain those respective direct language nearly exactly, the answer about what MUST BE is wrong, and the the language described only as the EXAMPLE is right? This because of a supposed distinction between “documenting grammar” and “developing a hierarchy of grammar” as being qualitatively different?
Man, LSAC, they are REALLY pushing it on this one. This one really irks me.
Yes so this one rests on a very picky distinction. Just because something has a structure doesn’t mean it has a hierarchy. A hierarchy is more formalized, like an org chart etc. So for example, a rock definitely has a structure, but you can’t say it has a hierarchy.