<p>Can you please explain another question for me from the October 2010 QAS?</p>
<p>Section 5, question 30. </p>
<p>I really hate these. Even though I usually get questions 1-29 all correct, I tend to miss 1 or 2 of the improving passage questions... </p>
<p>Okay, so for 30, why is it D? When it says "This explains why...," I don't get it. What is it explaining? The previous sentence says that "This figure is rather surprising when you consider that organic food is often much more expensive than conventionally grown food."</p>
<p>I don't see how sentence 4 can explain sentence 3. To me, sentence 4 just states the idea of sentence 3 again... That organic food is more expensive than the conventional version. </p>
<p>I choose A, "by comparison...," because I thought that that would make sense as the sentenced tried to compare the prices of organic food to conventionally grown food.</p>
<p>Alright, let’s quickly reproduce the sentences below:
“In 2006, organic sales in the US reached 17 billion dollars. This figure is rather surprising when you consider that organic food is much more expensive than conventionally grown food. Organic fruits and vegetables can cost up to 40% more than conventionally grown produce.”</p>
<p>For starters, you looked at the answer sheet wrong or your answer sheet is dirty. The answer is not D, it is C, which would make the modification of adding “indeed” to the beginning of the sentence. The reason to this is that the sentence immediately before it stated a thought. It stated that organic food reached a huge figure which was surprising since organic food is more expensive than normal food. Followed by this sentence, is yet another one, stating that this organic food is 40% more costly than normal food. These two sentences obviously communicate the same thought: organic food is expensive. What would be the most logical connection between the two? An “indeed”, to emphasize the reiterated thought.</p>
<p>“By comparison” is wrong, because you are not comparing the organic food to anything here. In sentence 3, you stated that organic food’s 17 billion figure is surprising. Then in sentence 4, you stated yet again that organic food is 40% more expensive than normal food. The same thought has been communicated. You are told to connect sentences 3 and 4. How do you logically connect two sentences with the same idea, by inserting “by comparison”? The only case in which this would be justifiable is if the sentence went something like this “Organic food and conventionally grown foods are popular in the United States. By comparison, organic food is much more healthy than is conventionally grown food.”</p>
<p>Wow, okay. I understand how. I need to learn how to properly view a sentence in context. </p>
<p>One last one! Sorry. >___< </p>
<p>Okay, section 7, question 22. </p>
<p>I thought it would obviously be A since that’s what the entire article was about: that there is no real, believable evidence. But, it ended up being wrong. Then when reviewing my wrong answer, I saw that D was right. Was D right only because of the last two sentences of the passage? “The lack of anything beyond the words of the points and ‘general tradition’ is noteworthy, but nothing in this interpretation has been rebutted by modern archaeology or criticism. It remains a plausible model, incapable of proof.” </p>
<p>If these last two sentences would have been left would, would the answer have been A then? </p>
<p>Thanks again, Fat_Nerd. You’ve been really helpful.</p>
<p>The answer is not D, it is E which states that the Trojan war probably happened, because there is no evidence to prove that it didn’t happen. If you had been concentrating throughout the passage, you would have realized that the author stated this thought several times. However, an author usually states his thesis or opinion in the opening and closing sentences of each paragraph, especially the introduction and conclusion. Therefore, indeed, by reviewing his final statement in the passage, we come to the correct answer which is E: probably, because there is no contrary evidence stating otherwise. In regard to your other question “if the two sentences weren’t there”, that’s not possible. The author always states his opinion or stand on the issue somewhere in the passage, usually in the beginning of the introductory paragraph, or the first sentence of the second paragraph, or the final sentence of the last paragraph.</p>
<p>I’d also add that many students sloppily think “plausible” means “possible,” but it really means “likely” or “believable.”</p>