So I took everyone's advice and right after I do an LR section, I correct it & then I write my own explanations as to why the 1 is right and the 4 others are wrong before reading Kaplan's explanations. It's so time consuming!
Can someone look at this & tell me if I did this 1 right? (again, some things have been changed for copyrighted purposes!)Finnish author Swadi was accused by Norwegian author Halden of plagarizing a book that she had written & that had been published 20 years before Swadi. The 2 books, although set in different periods & regions, contain enough plot similarities to make coincidental resemblance unlikely. Swadi's defense rests on his argument that plagarism was impossible in this cause because Halden's book has been published only in Norwegian, a language Swadi does not understand, & because no reviews of Halden's book have ever been published.The argument in Swadi's defense depends on the assumption that
(A) Swadi has never met Halden
(B) Halden's book did not become popular in norway
(C) Nobody related the plot of Halden's book in detail to Swadi before Swadi wrote his book
(D) There is common European myth to which both authors referred subconsciously in the books in question
(E) Swadi is not familiar w/Marshing Landic, an extinct language related to an earlier form of Norwegian.
Ok, the answer is C. But
I chose E. Supposedly (kaplan told me) that D is the most tempting answer which i think is odd.
My explanations (w/out reading kaplan's yet) are as follow:
(C) is right because because no one told swadi about the details of halden's book before Swadi wrote it. How could he plagarize it if he knew nothing about it? Also, if you negate it "Everybody related the plot of Halden's book in detail to Swadi before Swadi wrote the book" makes it fall apart.
(A) is wrong because this is irrelevant/outside the scope. Swadi doesn't have to meet halden to plagarize any of her work.
(B) is wrong because it doesn't make any sense. What does that have to do with Swadi plagarizing Halden's book? As is popularity is suppose to deter Swadi from plagarizing halden's book!!
(D) is wrong because it doesn't make sense. Actually, I really don't even understand it. Sounds way too philosophical! Lol. (Sorry, I know this explanation sucks!)
(E) is wrong because it brings in another language that's not even mentioned. The stimulus explicitly stated the book was written in Norwegian.
Gawd, what a great way to spend a nice saturday night! Anyway, am I on the right track? I remember someone here saying that my explanations should be a paragraph long for now & not 1 sentence since I get so many wrong on LR but I could not write a whole paragraph for each of these. I just didn't know what else to write.