Tough RC from Kaplan

I took 8 mins to go thru & answer..

Its becox of the attachment where the words are not properly aligned...

Answers here I go..

1.D
2.A
3.A

gmatmachoman, for this one, you are in the same boat as i am. i took around 7 minutes and 10 secs to answer this.
Let's c what others say.

But waTABT THE oa??

i DONT THINK I WULD HAVE ANSWERED THEM RITE...

I picked
A,
A,
A

OA's are
C D B

wow, None of them are rite for both of us...

Pathetic bro!!

P. 1: The Kaplan method for reading comprehension begins with the passage. Ideally, you should have a good idea of the answer to Global questions before you even get to them.

In this case, the author's first paragraph describes a phenomenon--the low death rate despite the brutal penal code. The second paragraph and the third paragraph both provide partial explanations for that phenomenon. The author's purpose, therefore, can be summarized roughly as "explain why the death rate went down despite so many crimes being capital offenses."

C matches that prediction perfectly. Remember that on Global questions, you can begin with a vertical scan; A, D, and E can be eliminated by their first words, "Outline," "Evaluate," and "Define," respectively.

That leaves us with B and C. B is tempting, but too narrow; the King only shows up in the second half of the passage, and the author's earlier discussion of the "simple decency" of the population is unrelated to the Royal Mercy. B, therefore, cannot be the purpose of the whole passage. It can be eliminated. C is correct.

p. 2: Petty theft and "Posing as a Gypsy" are immediately preceded by the word "but." This indicates contrast; we should take a peek at the lines before them.

What we find is a "not only...but [also]" construction (looks like we made a typo--Not Only will ALWAYS be followed by But Also on the GMAT). So we are contrasting "murder" with "posing as a gypsy." Why would the author do that? Well, D covers that one pretty well.

A is a distortion; petty crimes were punishABLE by death, but according to the author, the courts seldom followed through. B is out of scope; we have no reason to believe posing as a gypsy was common. C out of scope as well, since the passage makes no mention of modern laws. Finally, E distorts facts the same way A does; the author's point is that the sentence was seldom carried out.

3. This is an NOT question. 4 of these will be true based on the info in the passage; the correct answer will directly contradict what we know. B contradicts line 15-17: judges can commute death sentences, so aren't bound to the letter.

A is stated in lines 18-19: "the law demanded...."

C is stated in 20-22, describing juries' decisions to convict for lesser thefts.

D and E are both stated in lines 29-30

thanks Eli, for the explanation

I got all the answers correct but i am still confused for Question 2 I choose D because i think it makes more sense but i could not understand the reasoning given to rule out C

Also why cannot we rule out D for the reason menioned to rule out C

navdeepbajwa wrote:I got all the answers correct but i am still confused for Question 2 I choose D because i think it makes more sense but i could not understand the reasoning given to rule out C

Also why cannot we rule out D for the reason menioned to rule out C

Question 2 is a logic function question. These questions can be rephrased to "why did the author write xx?" So, for these questions, we need to determine the rhetorical function of the referred to text. For these questions, always use keywords, and look at the sentences before and after the referred to portion.

The "gypsy" occurs in the second sentence of paragraph 1. Why did the author write about this? Let's look at the sentence that came right before, ie, the first sentence of the passage. That sentence tells us that capital punishment was applicable to "what to modern eyes is an anostonishing range of crimes". The second sentence is there to illustrate this. Hence, the answer to the question "why did the author write about posing as a gypsy" is "to illustrate examples of crimes that were punishable by capital punishment in Georgian England--crimes which certainly would not be punishable by capital punishment today". Clearly, choice D matches this prediction perfectly (and notice that the prediction basically came from the preceding sentence).

For choice C: very likely the author would agree with that. However, that wasn't why in this passage he brought it up.

This was the exactly same reasoning i used to choose D over C, the preceding phrase

If we do not have a option D given in the answer can we choose C then or is it still wrong

Choice C is still wrong regardless of choice D's presence/absence. Verbal, and especially CR/RC is not about selecting the best answer. It is about selecting the correct answer. The correct answer will always be categorically distinct from the four wrong answers. In other words, there is always one correct answer, and it is correct because it is correct, and not because the other four are less correct.

For that reason, you shouldn't necessarily be looking to "rule out" four answer choices. If you narrow it down to 2 choices, you should try to figure out why one of them is right (instead of trying to "rule out" one).

You get rewarded for announcing the logically correct answer; not for figuring out why four wrong answers are wrong.

Now, choice C could possibly have been correct had this been an inference question.