Question Type:
Match the Flaw
Stimulus Breakdown:
Eloquent + Impress -some- Vivid/clear
Obscenity → Not Eloquent
Conclusion: Obscenity → Don't Impress
Answer Anticipation:
There's a lot wrong with how the conditional logic pieces fit together, and, luckily, the quantifiers is one of them (you can't combine a "some" and an "all" statement to get an "all" statement). My first pass will be to eliminate anything that doesn't have a Some/All premise and an All conclusion; let's hope that gets us an answer.
Correct answer:
(E)
Answer choice analysis:
(A) Quantifier mismatch. The conclusion is about this ("some") culture.
(B) Quantifier mismatch. The conclusion is about "some" authors.
(C) Quantifier mismatch. The conclusion is about "some" centers of commerce.
(D) Quantifier mismatch. There is a "most" premise (and a "probably" conclusion, for that matter).
(E) Bingo. "Some" premise, "all" premise, "all" conclusion. We didn't even have to analyze the relationship between the statements/terms.
Takeaway/Pattern: For Match the Flaw questions, if the quantifiers are a part of the flaw, they have to show up in the answer choices. It can sometimes be a quick way to get to your answer (as in here), or at least narrow it down a bit.
#officialexplanation