QUESTION TEXT: Lyle: Admittedly, modernizing the language of premodern…
QUESTION TYPE: Point at Issue
ARGUMENTS: Lyle thinks we should modernize the language in old plays. This makes them uglier, but it allows more students to enjoy the plays. That therefore helps us teach history.
Carl thinks that if language is modernized, then students can’t fully understand what the plays communicated. So modernization doesn’t help teaching history, because students can’t get deep historical knowledge from them.
ANALYSIS: Modernizing the language of plays means changing words such as “forsooth” to their modern equivalents (e.g. “indeed”). Ever read Chaucer or Shakespeare? They can be quite difficult to follow, and student editions frequently translate words that are now uncommon.
In a point at issue question, you’re looking for something where:
- Both authors have an opinion.
- The opinion is different.
Here, the difference is whether modernizing plays is useful for the teaching of history. Lyle thinks modernization helps history, Carl thinks it hurts.
Whereas trap answers will generally bring up something that one author has no opinion about. Three of the answers mention aesthetics. But Carl has no opinion on aesthetics, so these answers are automatically wrong.
___________
- Both authors agree that the pedagogical value will be different! Lyle thinks the pedagogical value will be different (and better). Carl thinks the pedagogical value will be different (and worse).
- A trap answer. Carl doesn’t mention aesthetics, so we have no idea what he thinks.
- Carl doesn’t mention aesthetics, so we have no idea what he thinks.
- CORRECT. Lyle says yes. Carl says no.
- Carl doesn’t mention aesthetics, so we have no idea what he thinks.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Zack says
I’m a bit confused about this question. The explanations for most of the wrong choices state that Carl do not mention aesthetics, but Carl makes no mention of accessibility either.
So why is it more proper to infer one aspect of the argument is carried over from Lyle but not another part?