Flawed Official Guide RC

[eschmidley]

After reviewing this question several times, I don't see how it is not flawed. Passage and question directly below, and my thoughts on why the Q is flawed below them.


Whether the languages of the ancient American peoples were used for expressing
abstract universal concepts can be clearly answered in the case of Nahuatl. Nahuatl,
like Greek and German, is a language that allows the formation of extensive compounds. By the combination of radicals or semantic elements, single compound words
can express complex conceptual relations, often of an abstract universal character.
The tlamatinime (those who know) were able to use this rich stock of abstract terms
to express the nuances of their thought. They also availed themselves of other forms of
expression with metaphorical meaning, some probably original, some derived from
Toltec coinages. Of these forms, the most characteristic in Nahuatl is the juxtaposition
of two words that, because they are synonyms, associated terms, or even contraries,
complement each other to evoke one single idea. Used metaphorically, the juxtaposed
terms connote specific or essential traits of the being they refer to, introducing a mode
of poetry as an almost habitual form of expression.
For the following question, consider each of the choices separately and select all that
apply.
1. Which of the following can be inferred from the passage regarding present-day
research relating to Nahuatl?
A Some record or evidence of the thought of the tlamatinime is available.
B For at least some Nahuatl expressions, researchers are able to trace their
derivation from another ancient American language.
C Researchers believe that in Nahuatl

--------------------------------
The "correct" answers are A and B, but shouldn't it only be A? B does not work, because although the Toltecs were indeed an ancient american civilization, the passage itself, which is the only source of information we should be using, does not say so; it only says that certain commonly used metaphorical expressions in Nahuatl culture were "original", meaning indigenous to the Nahuatal, or "derived from Toltec coinages". Since we are only supposed to use the information given in the passage to make an inference, we would not be correct to infer, even if we may actually know, that the Toltecs were an ancient american and not an ancient chinese, european, etc culture.

Or if I'm wrong, what on earth am I missing? It does strike me as very odd that the official guide would contain an error like that...

[eschmidley]

I just realized the OG has explanations, and so I looked at the book's explanation. I find it unsatisfactory. It doesn't address whether or not the Toltecs were an ancient american civilization; it just says that it is reasonable to infer that Nahuatl expressions are derived from "...another language besides Nahuatl,...", without addressing the geographical location of the Toltecs. I think given the context of the mention of the Toltecs in the passage, it seems almost certainly true that they are an AA civ, but in order for "B" to be correct, doesn't this have to be incontrovertible? There is no qualifier such as "probably" before inferred in the question.

Choice B is correct: according to the next sentence, Nahuatl speakers used “forms
of expression with metaphorical meaning,” some of which were probably “original”
and others “derived from Toltec coinages.” That researchers know certain Nahuatl
expressions are derived from Toltec suggests that they are able to trace the derivation
of some Nahuatl expressions from another language besides Nahuatl, and therefore
Choice B may be inferred

[jen]

Hi there,

I think the question is legit. While you shouldn't "read outside the passage" in answering inference questions, basic knowledge that an educated person would know is sometimes fair game.

For instance, if you are told, "Suffragettes in the U.S. in the early part of the 1900's pressed for the vote for women in both statewide and national campaigns, first achieving victory in Wisconsin," you CANNOT infer:

- What the suffragettes were thinking or feeling when they did this (other than that they supported the vote for women)
- Who else might have helped the suffragettes
- That other states followed or that a national law/amendment followed
etc.

But you certainly CAN use your knowledge that Wisconsin is a state in the U.S., that the U.S. is a democracy in which people vote, and other elementary-school level facts.

In a passage about World War II, I would NOT use the "outside information" that the U.S. was spurred into entry by Pearl Harbor (because there were other causes, that's debatable, etc.), but it's fine, of course, to "assume" that Japan is in Asia, that Pearl Harbor was part of the U.S., etc.

I'm also reminded of science passages that require you to draw on the knowledge that evaporation causes rain, for instance. Or that thermal energy is heat.

I wouldn't call "Toltec is an American language" exactly elementary school level knowledge, but in this case, the GRE thinks it's fair game.

As a general guideline, if it's something that you could find in a dictionary, it might be fair game. (Look up Toltec in a dictionary, you will definitely find that it is an American language. Look up thermal energy, you'll find that it's heat.) Switching up synonyms is definitely fair game in an inference question.

Jen