Q9

[gregory.mortenson]

The passage is about code-switching among Puerto-Rican Americans living in the United States.

question 9 "The primary function of the third paragraph of the passage is to"

I eliminated all answer choices except A and C.

I chose A ("consider a general explanation for the phenomenon of code-switching that is different from the one discussed in the preceding paragraphs.")

The correct answer is C ("show that there are instances of code-switching that are not explained by the factors discussed in the previous paragraph.")

I understand why C is correct, but I can't discern why A is wrong. My support for answer A comes in lines 8-10 when the author says "in the vast majority of cases subtle factors, either situational or rhetorical, explain the use of code-switching."

Since the second paragraph deals with situational reasons for code-switching and the third paragraph discusses rhetorical reasons, wouldn't this make A correct?

What language am I missing in answer choice A that makes it incorrect (or less correct than C)?

[aileenann]

I think you definitely had it down to the right two final answer choices! But I do think there is a good reason why (C) is a better answer than (A).

Let's go back to the third paragraph. The third paragraph critiques the explanation for code-switching offered in the first two paragraphs. In particular, it points to the fact that the explanation of contextual factors is not a complete explanation, since people sometimes code switch when there are no contextual factors. It does not necessarily offer a new explanation for code switching, and certainly does not offer a complete new explanation for code switching.

Right about now I suspect a light bulb is going off on your end. The very difference just noted i the difference between (A) and (C). (A)'s use of a "general explanation" actually makes it wrong, though in a very subtle way. (C), on the other hand, basically restates what I wrote above.

Good luck on the LSAT if you're taking it tomorrow!

[geverett]

I'm not sure I agree that the third paragraph offers a critique of the second paragraph since lines 7 - 10 seem to offer that they both exist with the second paragraph offering support for situational and the third paragraph offering support for rhetorical. I got rid of this answer choice b/c of the use of " . . . general explanation . . . ". Rhetorical basis for code switching is actually pretty specific. Thoughts?

[wgutx08]

Can one of the experts or peers here elaborate on why A is wrong? I picked C when doing the PT, but am liking A more and more when reviewing.

I thought A is more in accordance with the structure/overall gist of the passage. As the first poster (with whom I 100% agree) said, L9-11 sort of gave the tune of the passage by announcing the main point: most of code-switching explained by either situational or rhetorical factors. And answer A emphasizes that P3 is to consider rhetorical factors, which is one of the two "general explanations" offered by the passage.

Answer C correctly says that P3 shows instances not explained by situation factors. That's right, but the purpose of showing this, in the context of the entire passage, is to state the second "general explanation" already announced in the very first paragraph.

Maybe the word "general" should be understood differently here? Is it intended to mean "all"? But that would contradict with the normal usage, no? A rule summarized from many instances should be a perfect "generalization", even when these summarized instances only compose a subgroup of all instances??

Many thanks in advance!!

[aznriceboi17]

This is getting nitpicky, but one reason why A seems bad to me is that it talks about the preceding paragraphs, which in particular includes the first paragraph. The first paragraph mentions rhetorical factors, so I think the intended understanding is any 'general explanation' must be different than the one that includes situation and rhetorical factors together.

Can one of the experts or peers here elaborate on why A is wrong? I picked C when doing the PT, but am liking A more and more when reviewing.

I thought A is more in accordance with the structure/overall gist of the passage. As the first poster (with whom I 100% agree) said, L9-11 sort of gave the tune of the passage by announcing the main point: most of code-switching explained by either situational or rhetorical factors. And answer A emphasizes that P3 is to consider rhetorical factors, which is one of the two "general explanations" offered by the passage.

Answer C correctly says that P3 shows instances not explained by situation factors. That's right, but the purpose of showing this, in the context of the entire passage, is to state the second "general explanation" already announced in the very first paragraph.

Maybe the word "general" should be understood differently here? Is it intended to mean "all"? But that would contradict with the normal usage, no? A rule summarized from many instances should be a perfect "generalization", even when these summarized instances only compose a subgroup of all instances??

Many thanks in advance!!

[ohthatpatrick]

I agree; that's what I would have primarily used to get rid of (A).

The 3rd paragraph is not DIFFERENT from the general explanation discussed in P1 and P2.

The general explanation discussed in P1 is that code-switching happens from rhetorical/situational factors.

P2 elaborates on the first half of that. P3 elaborates on the second half of that.

(A) is accusing P3 of discussing an explanation we have YET to hear brought up until P3. But as we have frequently cited in this thread, the main idea sentence at the end of P1 foreshadows P3's explanation.

On one further note, whenever I do a "primary function of the ___ paragraph" question, I normally look to find an answer that paraphrases the first sentence of that paragraph (as long as that first sentence sounds transitional in nature).

So I would be looking for an answer that paraphrases 44-46 and "situational factors do not account for ALL code-switching" seems like a good match for "there are instances that are NOT explained by the factors [situational] discussed in the previous paragraph".

[wgutx08]

Thanks to you both, aznriceboi and Patrick, that was really helpful. I get it now.

Though I have to say, just the difference of paragraph and paragraphs?? How low can you get, LSAT?

On the other hand, this is yet another GOLD advice from you, Patrick, thanks so very much for that.

On one further note, whenever I do a "primary function of the ___ paragraph" question, I normally look to find an answer that paraphrases the first sentence of that paragraph (as long as that first sentence sounds transitional in nature).

[T.J.]

Alright, let me simplify this for you. (A) says the third paragraph "consider a general explanation for the phenomenon that is different...". First, I wouldn't say the phenomenon is different, because they are all code-switching. Even though they may be accounted for by different sets of factors, they are the same phenomenon. Second, I don't like the verb "consider". It means thinking about something. Well, is our author just thinking about rhetorical factors in the paragraph. Hell no. She is offering her explanations, which is way more active than just thinking about it. Actually, as far as this passage goes, we have to presume the author comes up with all of this stuff (factors), as she never attributes it to anybody. Otherwise, she would have done so.