Approaching Assumptions Questions Like An Expert
Today’s article comes courtesy of Veritas Prep GMAT instructor and BTG expert, David Newland.
Advertising and Assumption Questions
Quick, what do the “Sham Wow!,” OxyClean, the “Snuggie,” and “pet insurance” all have in common? They are all things that you did not know you needed until somebody told you about them. Advertisements are designed first to create a sense of need in the viewer and then to satisfy that need. This is exactly what the correct answer on an assumption question does as well.
I am always looking for new ways to help students understand assumption questions. This is probably the toughest critical reasoning question type for most students. Assumption questions require students to think in a way that is unexpected. For other critical reasoning questions the test taker must analyze what happens when you ADD the answer choice to the argument. Does this one strengthen when added? Does this one weaken when added? With assumption questions the student has to find a reliable way to think about what happens when the answer choice is taken away and this is not necessarily a natural thing to do. Typically this is done by the “Assumption Negation Technique” (also called various things like “Answer negation” or “The Denial Test”).
The Assumption Negation Technique is a powerful tool and one that we certainly teach at Veritas. However, negating all five answer choices is not recommended as it takes time and can actually be quite confusing. It is better to first eliminate answer choices that cannot be the correct answer and to save the Assumption Negation Technique for its true purpose: helping you to make that crucial final choice between two difficult answer choices. A true understanding of assumption questions will allow you to start with something more efficient and save the Assumption Negation Technique for emergencies.
One of the best ways that I have found to help students truly understand assumption questions is to explain that the correct answer to an assumption question is like a commercial. Think about what a commercial is designed to do, a commercial is meant to instill a desire in the mind of the person watching and then to offer the product that fulfills that desire. Did you know that you had a need for a blanket with arms sewn into it called a “Snuggie”? Not until you saw the commercial! There are entire 30-minute long television shows called “infomercials” that are designed to make you feel like something is missing in your life and at the same time offer you the very product that can fill that gap.
The original infomercial was probably for the Ginsu knives. The ideal viewer reaction was “Wow I did not know that they even made a knife that sharp, can my set of knives cut through an aluminum can?” First the viewer starts to doubt things that he or she never even worried about before, for example, “Are my knives sharp enough?,” “Are my clothes bright enough?” and “Why do I not have medical insurance for my cat or dog?” Then, conveniently the product offers to solve the problem. This is precisely what the correct answer to an assumption question does. It brings up a potential flaw in the argument that you never even considered and then tells you not to worry, that flaw is eliminated by the answer choice.
The Infomercial Test
The argument made in the stimulus of a higher-level assumption question often seems very convincing, with no obvious flaws. By contrast, a tough strengthen or weaken question often allows you to see right from the start that additional information is needed. Maybe the argument tells you that “because something worked in Italy, it will also work in France.” Likely, you can see the gap in the logic: you need to know if Italy is like France. In fact this argument would work well for a strengthen question, but also for a weaken question, where the correct answer would let us know that Italy and France are very different.
This “spotting the gap in the logic” is what people often recommend for assumption questions as well – and it can work, especially on easier questions. But on more difficult questions it is far more likely that the GMAT will offer you a correct answer choice that is based on the “infomercial” model – the correct answer will point out a potential problem that you never expected, and then immediately tell you not to worry, the answer choice can solve that problem. Let’s look at an example to see how this works.
Here is an example, just the stimulus and question first, answer choices later:
In North America there has been an explosion of public interest in, and enjoyment of, opera over the last three decades. The evidence of this explosion is that of the 70 or so professional opera companies currently active in North America, 45 were founded over the course of the last 30 years.
The reasoning above assumes which one of the following?
Okay, so what is the gap? Not so simple right? To me this seems to be a well-constructed argument. In other words, the evidence leads to the conclusion. The conclusion is that there is an explosion of interest in opera over the last 30 years and the evidence is that 45 Opera companies have been founded over that time (out of just 70 total). That is pretty good evidence. If you told me that out of 70 football clubs in England 45 were founded in the last 30 years I would conclude that football (a.ka. soccer) is doing pretty well in England.
So what could the assumption be? Instead of trying to guess ahead of time what the assumption is, try looking for the answer choice that presents a problem that you did not anticipate and (like and good commercial) also gives you the solution.
Remember the argument is that there is an explosion of interest in opera over the last 30 years and the evidence is that 45 Opera companies have been founded over that time (out of just 70 total). Okay here are the answer choices, see what you can do.
A. All of the 70 professional opera companies are commercially viable options.
B. There were fewer than 45 professional opera companies that had been active 30 years ago and that ceased operations during the last 30 years.
C. There has been a corresponding increase in the number of professional companies devoted to other performing arts.
D. The size of the average audience at performances by professional opera companies has increased over the past three decades.
E. The 45 most recently founded opera companies were all established as a result of enthusiasm on the part of a potential audience.
What did you come up with? Remember that the correct answer to an assumption question – very much like the correct answer to an inference question – cannot provide you with completely new information. This means that choice A is eliminated right off the bat. It would certainly strengthen our argument to know that ALL if the professional opera companies are commercially viable, but this not necessary and it is new information. We are relying on the fact that 45 companies were established not that they all made money.
Choice C is also completely new information and is also not necessary. Why would an increase in interest in the other performing arts mean that there cannot be an explosion of interest in Opera? Choice D is tempting and is a very nice strengthen answer. But is also does not point out an unexpected flaw in our logic. Choice D brings new information that the average size of the audience is increasing. It would be great to know this but the argument is relying on the evidence of 45 companies being founded and that is where the unexpected flaw needs to come from. So choice D is out.
That leaves choices B and E. At this point you can certainly decide to use the Assumption Negation Technique to negate these two answers, both of which mention the 45 companies that were recently founded. The founding of those companies is our evidence so either of these answer choices might be correct.
However, before you negate these choices why not apply the “infomercial test?” Which of these answer choices points out a legitimate, if unexpected, flaw in the argument and then immediately corrects it? The answer is choice B. When reading this argument you likely did not say to yourself – “45 opera companies were founded over the last 30 years but what if more than 45 went out of business?” It is like the Sham Wow! or the Snuggie – you were not looking for choice B, but now that you have seen it you know you can’t live without it.
You see, in somewhat complicated language, choice B points out the possibility that 45 or more opera companies “ceased operations” in the last 30 years. If this were true then the evidence that 45 companies were founded in the last 30 years suddenly becomes very weak. Is there really an explosion of interest in opera if more companies went out of business than were founded? So choice B gets you very worried that you do not have a good argument here. But like any good infomercial it then reassures you. It states that “There were fewer than 45 companies…” that ceased operations. So, no need to worry. The flaw that you were not thinking of, the possibility that more than 45 companies went out of business was mentioned and then protected against. This is the way that the correct answers to assumption questions operate.
Why is choice E not correct? Simple, this argument does not rely on the 45 companies being founded for any particular reason. It simply relies on the fact that they were founded. In other words the evidence is about an increased number of opera companies not about enthusiasm on the part of the audience. This answer choice actually provides new information and not an unexpected flaw in this argument. It fails the “infomercial test.”
Official Guide Questions
If you have the 12th or 13th edition of the Official Guide here are some problems you might want to try this technique on.
- Question 77 (13th edition) 78 (12th edition)
- Question 93 (12th and 13th edition)
- Question 106 (13th edition) new to 13th.
Compare these to question 21 (13th edition)/ 20 (12th edition) which is an easier assumption and where the correct answer can be much more easily anticipated.
A Challenge
Let me leave you with this example that I sometimes use in class: Can you think of the three actual assumptions that I am relying on for my conclusion? Conclusion “My friend will pick me up at the Boston airport.” That seems straight-forward but what there are problems that you have likely never even considered. How might my conclusion go wrong? It is your job to be the infomercial, point out the possible flaws in my argument, but state them in such a way that you actually take away the flaw even as you name it. I have found three actual assumptions that the above conclusion relies on, can you name them?
Go ahead and type into the comments below ONE assumption (leave some glory for the other folks).


48 comments
David Newland (Author) on June 27th, 2012 at 2:41 am
Over the next couple of days I will be posting several assumption questions for you to try this technique on. The first question for you to is:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-assumption-question-december-2004-t114854.html#482648
Niket Doshi on June 27th, 2012 at 6:09 am
I have messaged my friend the time of arrival of my flight at the Boston Airport.
David Newland (Author) on June 27th, 2012 at 9:38 am
Do I really need to have done that? Might he already know to come get me?
kenny_kar on June 27th, 2012 at 9:55 am
Excellent article. I simply love the “infomercials” analogy. I usually use the "Negation Technique"but this new method adds a new weapon to my armor.
3 assumptions for your conclusion:
1. My friend knows exactly the airport (if there is more than 1 airport in Boston) and terminal to pick me up from.
2. Both me and my friend have a mobile phone each to resolve any confusion that may arise.
3. My flight will get there on time as expected. If not, my friend would track my flight status online.
David Newland (Author) on June 27th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
The things that you are mentioning are very helpful. However, your point number 1 is the opposite of what we are assuming. Let's say that there are multiple airports in Boston, my friend could check each one and see if I was there.
What if there is no airport in Boston though?
As to the mobile phone and checking my flight status those are conveniences but not required. Maybe my friend goes to the airport every single day as a taxi or bus driver and if I happen to be there he will pick me up. I know it sounds crazy but I am trying to show the nature of a true necessary assumption
Niket Doshi on June 27th, 2012 at 10:08 am
Indeed I had this in mind. So can I assume that he already knows the time of the arrival of the flight.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 6:30 am
We cannot even assume you are arriving on a flight!! Maybe you just wanted to meet there as a convenience and neither of you are flying in at all. Maybe you work there or your friend does or you will both take the subway or the bus to the airport.
KM on June 27th, 2012 at 11:05 pm
Assumptions: My friend is available to pick me up .
I will arrive at the Boston airport.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 6:28 am
Very nice!!
Instead of "I will arrive at the the Boston airport" let's slightly rephrase it to "I will be at the Boston airport at some point." After all if I am not there I cannot get picked up from there.
Your other assumption is also very good. It is true that my friend would need to be able at some point to get to the airport. I had not really thought of this one as one of the three.
Very nice!
KM on June 27th, 2012 at 11:17 pm
Nice article, David!
However, i am unable to understand how the ans choice E provides new information.
It is already given in the argument that "there is an explosion of public interest in enjoying operas".
Please explain.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 6:26 am
Certainly I can explain. Answer choice E is the most popular answer on this question by the way, it is chosen more often than the correct answer.
Choice E provides "new" information because it gives us something additional and does not merely "protect" our current evidence. You see the stimulus only tells us that 45 Opera companies were founded over the last 30 years it does not tell us why they were founded. Perhaps the companies were each founded by the government of a particular state or nation or by a wealthy individual. How they were founded is not something that is required by the argument.
Choice E would certainly strengthen. If we know that the companies were founded "as a result of enthusiasm on the part of a potential audience" that really adds to our argument about the explosion of interest in Opera. However, with this assumption we are not seeking to add new reasons - no matter how basic they seem - we are looking to protect the evidence we have already been given.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 6:32 am
So we have two of the three assumptions by now:
"There is a Boston airport (or will be in the future)" and
"I will at some point be at the airport"
Notice that if you take away either of these the conclusion actually fails. My friend cannot pick me up somewhere that does not exist! And for my friend to pick me up I need to be there at some point.
There is still one more assumption that if taken away makes the conclusion fail.
BB on June 28th, 2012 at 10:10 am
I have no other choice than to go with my friend as I do not know anyone in the city nor I have any hotel booked.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 11:28 am
It does not have to be that this is my only choice -- I could have my friend pick me up even though I have other options. After all it is good to see a friend.
KM on June 28th, 2012 at 8:43 am
Can another assumption be the following?
My friend and I have met before .
(i.e. My friend knows me)..(I mean to say, we are not childhood friends that he won't be able to recognize me.)
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 11:31 am
Certainly it is true that we will have end up together somehow. I am tempted to say that this is another assumption, yet I can't help but imagine a scenario where my friend still picks me up from the airport and maybe he does not know me. I know that is very unbelievable. So I would say this is an assumption in the real world although I can make up some crazy examples.
meanjonathan on June 28th, 2012 at 10:54 am
you have a friend.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 11:26 am
Yes!!!
That is the final assumption. My conclusion certainly depends on me having a friend. If I have no friend I cannot be picked up by my friend.
David Newland (Author) on June 28th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
I would like to thank Niket Doshi, kenny_kar, KM, BB, and meanjonathan.
Together you have discovered all three assumptions that I had in mind.
1) There is a Boston airport (or will be one in the future).
2) I will be at the airport at some point
3) I have at least one friend.
No doubt there are other assumptions as well that are on the level of these three. If you think of another one please let us know.
In the meantime here is another Assumption question that I have posted that you can use the "Infomercial Technique" on. http://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-assumption-question-june-1995-t114945.html#482980
KM on June 28th, 2012 at 12:49 pm
David,
Is the third assumption i made a necessary one?
Also, is Real-world thinking applicable to Assumption questions?
Could you please summarize the similarity and /or difference in between Assumption and Inference correct ans choice?(such as: you have mentioned above that correct answer to the Assumption and Conclusion questions cannot provide us with completely new information, as we stay close to the argument)
Shreeraj on June 28th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Your friend might meet with an accident but till date he hasn't been involved in any accident.
David Newland (Author) on June 29th, 2012 at 4:02 am
Shreeraj -
Now that is a good one! It is true that my friend needs to be alive to pick me up at the airport, if that is what you are getting at. So we could say that I not only need to have a friend but my friend needs remain alive and able to get to the airport somehow, at least until he picks me up from the airport.
David Newland (Author) on June 29th, 2012 at 4:11 am
KM -
Your third assumption is not fully necessary. What I mean is that outside of the world of critical reasoning with its hypothetical situations you would likely need your friend to recognize you. However, your friend could hold up a sign and you could meet him that way. The famous chef Julia Child had a friend who was a pen pal and she did not know what this dear friend looked like so the friend held up a sign when Julia arrived at the Boston airport (which is ironic given our example) - as that is where Julia Child was going. So recognition is not an absolute necessity.
The real world is NOT really applicable to critical reasoning. It is logic only. If they use evidence on the GMAT that you know is not true in the real world you still must accept it.
As to Assumption and Inference correct answers, the reason that they are similar is that both types of choices have to be within the scope of the stimulus. This is not true for strengthen and weaken answers. Also, on both inference and assumption questions you would probably not want to pick the absolute answer such as "all" or "none." It is very hard to prove such absolutes, so these answers are tough on inference questions. Absolutes are also very rarely the necessary assumption. For example to say that "I have a red pen" does not require that "All pens be red" it does require that "some pens be red."
KM on June 29th, 2012 at 1:23 pm
Thank You for the explanation ,David !
Very useful article !
Nipun on July 3rd, 2012 at 9:39 pm
Truly , an eye opener.
I have just started with CR and following Manhattan.
Different perspective helps a lot
Thanks
David Newland (Author) on July 4th, 2012 at 4:51 am
Thanks! KM and Nipun -- comments like yours make me want to keep writing more articles!
zueswoods on July 4th, 2012 at 6:49 am
Hi David,
I dont quite "see" your approach to the (original) question you posted.
The question stem states that because of evidence that shows 45 out of a total of 70 operas were founded within the last 30 years, it means there is an increase in people's interest for operas.
zueswoods on July 4th, 2012 at 7:15 am
Hi David,
I don’t quite see your approach to the original question posted (and this may because of my technique of filling to the logical gap).
The stem says that because of 35 out of 70 (total) operas were founded in the last 30 years, it means that the interest in operas in the last 30 years has increased.
The logical gap I see here is: an increase in number of operas means that there is an increase in interest for operas.
I understand answer choice B brings in problem most people didn’t even think about, i.e. “Is there really an explosion of interest in opera if more companies went out of business than were founded?” But this statement also assumes something, it assumes that if business went out of business it means that people are not interested in the business, which could not always be true. People could love to watch Operas, but a recent earthquake could have wiped out all major studios with really expensive equipment and now the owners cant pay back the loans they took to invest in the operas.
Answer choice B says “there were fewer than 45 companies that ceased to operate over the last 30 years” … so what? Even if there were 74 companies still in business, a company being in business does not mean interest is increasing. RIM, Nokia, Kodak are still running and releasing new products, but the general public’s interest is not increasing.
Answer choice E has its flaws too, however I believe (but I’m no expert :p ) that it fills in the logical gap better without creating and bringing in any more assumptions. It states that the new operas were founded because of an increase in interest, which links the evidence to the conclusion. In your explaination you mention “Why is choice E not correct? Simple, this argument does not rely on the 45 companies being founded for any particular reason. It simply relies on the fact that they were founded.” But because it relies on the fact that they were just founded, the gap in the argument is that “does founding an opera mean increasing interests in opera?’’
If we negate the answer choices, choice E breaks apart the argument: the operas were NOT founded as a result of increasing enthusiasm, which totally breaks apart the argument.
( Sorry for the long response, but from my experience experts like yourself always enjoy when students question every little bit
)
David Newland (Author) on July 4th, 2012 at 1:04 pm
You have misstated the argument!!!
You say "an increase in number of operas means that there is an increase in interest for operas." But this is not what is said above is it? Look closely. It says "45 companies were founded in the last 30 years." It does not say that there was an increase in the number of companies. That is the assumption that you are making. And answer choice B makes good on your assumption. Let me explain.
The only support that you have in the stimulus is that 45 out of 70 companies have been founded over the past 30 years. Did you read what I wrote above about this? This is pretty good evidence. If you are like me when you read this you thought - oh, so 30 years ago there were only 25 Opera companies and now there were 70. That is an explosion of interest!
Now this is were choice B comes in. If we do not have choice B then it becomes possible that many Opera companies went out of business. So maybe there were 100 companies 30 years ago and now we are down to 70. That would not be an explosion of interest. Choice B merely guarantees us that we have at least had a gain of some Opera companies since 30 years ago. This is because fewer than 45 went out of business. This is weak evidence! But it supports the argument that we already have and it is a Perfect answer for an Assumption question.
Sometimes trying to anticipate "the gap" on assumption questions can lead you into trouble. That is why I have described this infomercial technique.
You have to truly understand the nature of an assumption question. The evidence you have is all the evidence you are going to get. You cannot choose and answer that gives you new reasons to support the conclusion. You answer choice will provide new evidence, but that evidence should simply protect your conclusion and the reasons that you have been given.
Choice E has two big problems. First, the word "all" is very nearly an automatic disqualifier. When is it truly an assumption that ALL of a group do something? For you to get a 750 on the GMAT do all people need to score 750?
The other problem is that it brings new information. This is what I was talking about above. It would be nice to know that the companies were founded because of public interest but the argument does not rely on this. We do not need the companies to be founded for any particular reason. But we do need to have an increase in the number of companies.
Hope that helps!
David
zueswoods on July 5th, 2012 at 7:08 am
Hi David,
I thought that it would have been be fair to think "there was an increase in the number of operas" if the stem says "The evidence of this explosion is that of the 70 or so professional opera companies currently active in North America, 45 were founded over the course of the last 30 years" To me this meant the number of operas increased over the last 3 decades, and the passage CLAIMS that because of this increase "there has been an explosion of public interest in, and enjoyment of, opera over the last three decades".
Therefore, the author is assuming that a rapid growth of operas = a rapid growth of interest. IF the author did not assume this, then the conclusion would not hold.
Whereas in answer choice B, the issue being touched is whether the opera stayed in business....but from the passage we know nothing about the realtionship between a company staying in business and the publics interest in that company.
Have I over thought this question? :S
zueswoods on July 5th, 2012 at 7:12 am
Note: I do agree that E has it faults too, however I thought it was better than B
David Newland (Author) on July 5th, 2012 at 8:12 am
You must focus on what the stimulus actually says! This is the most important thing for you to understand. All the techniques in the world will not help if I cannot convince you of this.
Words matter in critical reasoning as much as numbers do in problem solving.
If a problem solving question said there were 47 cars in the parking lot you would not say that there are 45 cars and you would not be satisfied to say that "there are a lot of cars" in the lot. You have been given a specific number and you use it.
In critical reasoning you are given specific words and you must deal with those words and not interpret the statement to say whatever you think it should logically say.
I am quoting the argument now: "The evidence of this explosion is that of the 70 or so professional opera companies currently active in North America, 45 were founded over the course of the last 30 years."
This does NOT SAY that there are more Opera companies now than there were 70 years ago. It may seem logical to assume this but that is not what the argument says.
If I tell you that I have lost a total of 30 pounds over the last 5 years you must think that I weigh less than I did 5 years ago. But I never said that. Maybe I also gained 40 pounds over that time. So I would then not be lighter than I was 5 years ago but 10 pounds heavier!!! I told you I lost 30 pounds -- YOU ASSUMED that I weigh less now than then. In other words you assumed that I did not gain more than 30 pounds as well. THAT IS the Assumption.
Look at this argument -- it is the same. The stimulus DOES NOT say that there are more companies in operation now, it simply says 45 were founded. When you say that the evidence is that there are more companies now -- YOU have assumed that fewer than 45 went out of business. So B is correct. This is the most basic assumption.
meanjonathan on July 6th, 2012 at 6:12 am
Hi zueswoods, Here's another (real life) example that might help clarify. I just heard on the radio that 83,000 jobs were created in the United States in June; therefore, said the radio announcer, unemployment has decreased since April 30th. Is he right? Not neccessarily. Such a conclusion would require that fewer than 83,000 jobs were lost in June. (And since no information about jobs lost was given, only new jobs created, we do not have enough information to make this determination). Net change in jobs = jobs created - jobs lost. In this way, we can almost think of Assumption CR questions as Data Sufficiency questions. Do we have enough information to determine the conclusion. In this case, we do not. Hope this helps. --mj.
Rohan on July 5th, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Hey David, I found a few more. Please tell me if they are correct:
1. You will arrive on time. You won't be delayed.
2. Your friend doesn't get stuck up in traffic
David Newland (Author) on July 5th, 2012 at 5:56 pm
Thanks for keeping this one going!
Actually, those are not assumptions that are required by the argument. Remember, I did not say that my friend would pick me up ON TIME. Maybe my friend is 3 days late I have to sleep in the airport.
Maybe my flight is late and my friend waits.
Remember that it is also possible that my friend and I both work at the airport and he is just giving me a ride home from work so I need not even fly in....
tricky, eh?
Rohan on July 5th, 2012 at 6:04 pm
Absolutely. But the more I fail at these questions, the more it irks my brain and the more it motivates me to investigate why I went wrong. Thanks David !
Siying on July 5th, 2012 at 8:45 pm
Nice article! Thanks David. Here's my take.
Conclusion: My friend will pick me up at the Boston airport.
Assumption 1: At least one of us will ultimately be able to identify the other at the Boston airport.
Assumption 2: Both my friend and I will be alive at the time.
Assumption 3: There exist a time point in the future when both my friend and I are at the same location within the Boston airport.
Look forward to your comments.
David Newland (Author) on July 24th, 2012 at 10:20 am
Sorry. It looks like I did not reply! Assumptions 1 and 2 are not truly necessary! Look at number 2, not to be morbid but my friend could be picking up my remains to take to the funeral. As for 1, who said that we KNEW that we were friends? Maybe this is my Facebook friend and I have never seen a photo.
Assumption 3 looks pretty good. A certain proximity is assumed by the phrase "pick me up". Nice work!
Sathya on July 24th, 2012 at 8:37 am
Hi ..
I have a doubt regarding the original example given.
I have understood the explanation. (E) comes close, but if there had been , say, 60 companies that had closed during that period , then the argument (conclusion) gets weakened (since we do not know the total number of initial opera companies and how many ceased to function during that period).
.But isn't there a "scope shift" in the original example ? We are connecting "public interest" with "the founding of 45 new opera companies" ? So if there was an option like " The founding of opera companies indicates public interest " , would it be correct ?
David Newland (Author) on July 24th, 2012 at 10:46 am
The answer that you propose "the founding of opera companies is an indication of public interest" is an assumption. So yes, this would be just as correct as answer choice B which is certainly an assumption as well.
This is why it is often a waste to try to predict the correct answer to an assumption question. There are many possible assumptions. The one you indicated is probably a little more obvious so the question is more difficult the way it is written.
However, E does not come close to being correct. It has 2 major flaws that cannot be overlooked. The use of "all" as in "the 45 companies were ALL established as a result of enthusiasm..." All is wrong most of the time on assumption questions because when you negate it it becomes "not all" which is such a weak statement. "None" is also very poor in assumption answers.
E also brings in a completely new reason, this is not acceptable on an assumption. There is no mention in this argument as to WHY the 45 companies were founded only that they were. Look at your proposed answer is says ""the founding of opera companies is an indication of public interest" not why they were founded just that they were founded. So E has not chance of being correct since it brings in a completely new reason and is not at all like the correct answer that you proposed.
Does that help?
Sathya on July 26th, 2012 at 1:34 am
Yes...I understand now. Thanks for the reply.
hulahooporiginal on November 11th, 2012 at 4:43 am
thank you David. The infomercial technique is absolutely spot on. life saviour!
David Newland on November 11th, 2012 at 4:49 am
You are welcome! I am glad you love it!
Ankur on November 26th, 2012 at 3:58 pm
Assumption :
My friend is having car or bike or any vehicle to pick me up.
David Newland on November 26th, 2012 at 4:50 pm
It sounds good, I mean it seems like your friend needs to literally "pick you up."
I might also say "not necessarily" --- your friend could be "picking you up" by greeting you at the airport and taking the subway to his apartment or even walking...I used to walk from the airport sometimes as crazy as that must sound.
So it depends on what you mean by "pick up." The way it is commonly used it would mean that you need a vehicle. So can I say both yes and no to this one depending on what the phrase "pick up" means?
Either way, nice job. Thanks!
Sathya on November 27th, 2012 at 6:56 am
For the question : “My friend will pick me up at the Boston airport.”
Is the following assumption also valid ?
My friend knows that I am coming ...
David Newland on November 27th, 2012 at 7:13 am
No!!
You could surprise your friend...she thinks that she will have to take the bus and there you are in a rented car with driver!
So no your friend does not have to know - even you do not have to know. Perhaps you run into your friend by chance and offer take her home from the airport. Neither of you knew it would happen, only fate knew what was in store!
Sathya on November 27th, 2012 at 7:21 am
yes... I get it now... Thanks a lot ..