POLI spokesman: Our radical new keyboard called Wave KB just attracted a funding of $120 million. The keyboard has soft rubber keys which can bend and shape a tune, the way you can bend the strings on a guitar. Therefore, it's a genuinely radical departure from normal keyboards.
Critic: You can bend notes on a regular piano as well. Just open up the top and pull on the string. So, this keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot.
Which of the following indicates the manner in which the critic responds to the statement of the POLI spokesman?
A. He praises the capabilities of the new keyboard but concludes that it doesn't go far enough.
B. He questions the utility of the new keyboard and concludes that it's not required.
C. He questions the utility of the new keyboard but agrees that it could be useful in some situations.
D. He ignores the conclusion of the spokesman and presents a conclusion of his own.
E. He refutes the conclusion of the spokesman and outlines a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced.
Our radical new keyboard called Wave KB just attracted
This topic has expert replies
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Brent@GMATPrepNow
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 16207
- Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Thanked: 5254 times
- Followed by:1268 members
- GMAT Score:770
What's the source of this question? The language seems a little clunky (e.g., "attracted a funding" and "a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced")aditya8062 wrote:POLI spokesman: Our radical new keyboard called Wave KB just attracted a funding of $120 million. The keyboard has soft rubber keys which can bend and shape a tune, the way you can bend the strings on a guitar. Therefore, it's a genuinely radical departure from normal keyboards.
Critic: You can bend notes on a regular piano as well. Just open up the top and pull on the string. So, this keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot.
Which of the following indicates the manner in which the critic responds to the statement of the POLI spokesman?
A. He praises the capabilities of the new keyboard but concludes that it doesn't go far enough.
B. He questions the utility of the new keyboard and concludes that it's not required.
C. He questions the utility of the new keyboard but agrees that it could be useful in some situations.
D. He ignores the conclusion of the spokesman and presents a conclusion of his own.
E. He refutes the conclusion of the spokesman and outlines a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced.
Okay, onto the response...
The POLI spokesman concludes that the keyboard is a radical departure.
The critic concludes that the keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot. In other words, the critic is saying that the new keyboard is NOT a radical departure.
Since the critic is saying that the spokesman's conclusion is wrong, we can narrow things down to D or E.
D seems pretty straightforward and it seems to neatly summarize the critic's position.
I'm not entirely sure what E is saying ("a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced)"
Go with simplicity and select D
Cheers,
Brent
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
but if the critic is saying :"So, this keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot"----->so effectively he is refuting the conclusion of the "POLI spokesman",after all what is the conclusion of "POLI spokesman"? the conclusion of "POLI spokesman" is "it's a genuinely radical departure from normal keyboards. "
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Brent@GMATPrepNow
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 16207
- Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Thanked: 5254 times
- Followed by:1268 members
- GMAT Score:770
I agree that the critic is refuting the POLI spokesman's conclusion. However, I'm not convinced that the second part (outlines a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced) accurately represents the critic's words.aditya8062 wrote:but if the critic is saying :"So, this keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot"----->so effectively he is refuting the conclusion of the "POLI spokesman",after all what is the conclusion of "POLI spokesman"? the conclusion of "POLI spokesman" is "it's a genuinely radical departure from normal keyboards. "
I did some research and found the question on a different GMAT forum. The question was created by a member on the site, which explains some of the wording issues.
If I were you, I'd skip this question and find some questions that are more representative of official GMAT questions.
Cheers,
Brent
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
yeah Brent that's exactly the point i wanted to confirm.I agree that the critic is refuting the POLI spokesman's conclusion
well Brent ,for this i think the critic did say : You can bend notes on a regular piano as well. Just open up the top and pull on the string---->this indeed seems a new method by which the requirement of new keyboard seems reducedHowever, I'm not convinced that the second part (outlines a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced) accurately represents the critic's words.
honestly i do believe that self made questions mostly end up as BAD questions unless made by some experts and frankly i didn't glance that question for more than 45 sec .however i was dismayed when the creator of this question rejected the notion that the Poli's conclusion is not refuted by the critic !! for that reason i wanted a more neutral opinion on this questionIf I were you, I'd skip this question and find some questions that are more representative of official GMAT questions
but anyway thanks for chiming in
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Brent@GMATPrepNow
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 16207
- Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Thanked: 5254 times
- Followed by:1268 members
- GMAT Score:770
For me, the main issue comes down to the word "requirement"
What exactly is "the requirement of the new keyboard?"
What does the new keyboard require?
Cheers,
Brent
What exactly is "the requirement of the new keyboard?"
What does the new keyboard require?
Cheers,
Brent
Hi Brent,
The critic is mentioning an already existing option which will render the new keyboard's functionality useless. So is he not outlining a method which reduces this keyboard's utility. Please clarify this point. So isn't the answer [spoiler]E ?[/spoiler]
Thanks in advance.
The critic is mentioning an already existing option which will render the new keyboard's functionality useless. So is he not outlining a method which reduces this keyboard's utility. Please clarify this point. So isn't the answer [spoiler]E ?[/spoiler]
Thanks in advance.
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:What's the source of this question? The language seems a little clunky (e.g., "attracted a funding" and "a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced")aditya8062 wrote:POLI spokesman: Our radical new keyboard called Wave KB just attracted a funding of $120 million. The keyboard has soft rubber keys which can bend and shape a tune, the way you can bend the strings on a guitar. Therefore, it's a genuinely radical departure from normal keyboards.
Critic: You can bend notes on a regular piano as well. Just open up the top and pull on the string. So, this keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot.
Which of the following indicates the manner in which the critic responds to the statement of the POLI spokesman?
A. He praises the capabilities of the new keyboard but concludes that it doesn't go far enough.
B. He questions the utility of the new keyboard and concludes that it's not required.
C. He questions the utility of the new keyboard but agrees that it could be useful in some situations.
D. He ignores the conclusion of the spokesman and presents a conclusion of his own.
E. He refutes the conclusion of the spokesman and outlines a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced.
Okay, onto the response...
The POLI spokesman concludes that the keyboard is a radical departure.
The critic concludes that the keyboard doesn't do anything which a regular keyboard cannot. In other words, the critic is saying that the new keyboard is NOT a radical departure.
Since the critic is saying that the spokesman's conclusion is wrong, we can narrow things down to D or E.
D seems pretty straightforward and it seems to neatly summarize the critic's position.
I'm not entirely sure what E is saying ("a method through which the requirement of the new keyboard is reduced)"
Go with simplicity and select D
Cheers,
Brent
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Brent@GMATPrepNow
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 16207
- Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Thanked: 5254 times
- Followed by:1268 members
- GMAT Score:770
I agree with most of what you're saying. I wouldn't say that the new keyboard's functionality is "useless." It's still a useful feature, but it's just not that special/unique.Kamal2014 wrote:Hi Brent,
The critic is mentioning an already existing option which will render the new keyboard's functionality useless. So is he not outlining a method which reduces this keyboard's utility. Please clarify this point. So isn't the answer [spoiler]E ?[/spoiler]
Thanks in advance.
All I'm saying is that the wording of answer choice E doesn't make any sense to me. What is "the requirement of the new keyboard?" What does the new keyboard require?
As I mentioned in an earlier post, this question was created by a forum user. I believe that it has some clarity issues that an official GMAT question would not have.
So, rather than discuss it any further, I suggest that GMAT prepsters ignore this question and move on to other, more GMAT-like, questions.
Cheers,
Brent