Reading comp PrepTest 127 · Section 4 · Question 20

Topic: Legal Studies

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • Undefined terms in international law
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • List of terms without universal definitions - “national minority,” “people,” “nation”
  • List of 2 groups that are traditionally “national minorities”
  • Nation tied to sovereignty

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • Problem from lack of clarity in definitions; Particular example
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Problem - ??? (Doesn’t state, just that there’s a problem)
  • Roma - Lack of clarity is particularly problematic; no ties/citizenship because fleeing persecution (List of causes of problem)

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • A definition of minority; problem for Roma
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Capotorti - Definition of minority - 4 empirical criteria (list); 1 legal criterion (citizens)
  • Problem - Legal criterion for Roma, as they cross borders to avoid persecution - gives states subjective ability to exclude them
  • Author - The legal criterion is unfair

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • Author’s view on Roma’s status
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Author - Roma fit 4 objective criteria, so they should be considered minority
  • Author goes through each of 4 points

Main Points:

Passage A - Because of their previously nomadic nature and their frequent movement to avoid persecution, the lack of clarity around key terms related to minority status presents a problem, particularly for the Roma.

Passage B - The legal criterion in Capotorti’s definition of minority is subjective and unfair, particularly to the Roma, who should be considered a minority because they meet the objective elements of that definition.

Passage A:

• Lines 1-2 - A lack of a definition is established
• Lines 10-11 - More words that lack clear definitions
• Lines 17-18 - Generic problems related to lack of definition are mentioned
• Lines 18-20 - A particular group for which it’s a problem

Passage B:

• Lines 28-34 - A definition is provided, involving 5 criteria
• Lines 34-36 - One of the criteria is shown to be a problem for a group
• Lines 39-43 - The Author’s opinion (“arbitrary,” “unfair”)
• Lines 44-47 - The Author’s opinion expanded

Both passages address the plight of the Roma, specifically as it relates to the categorization of a national minority (Lines 19-20; Lines 34-36). That said, they do view that problem through different lenses. Passage A says that the problem derives from the lack of a universally recognized definition of several key terms, including “national minority,” “people,” and “nation” (Lines 17-20). Passage B, on the other hand, provides a definition of minority, but one where the Roma fail to meet one of five criteria (Lines 28-34; Lines 34-36). They both seem sympathetic to this plight and note that it derives from their flight from persecution (Lines 24-25; Lines 36-37), with the Author of Passage B being more explicit with his support for the group being categorized as a national minority (Lines 44-47).

Problem/Solution (Both) - Both passages bring up a problem faced by the Roma - the failure to be categorized as a national minority (Lines 18-20; Lines 34-36). Neither passage, though, really goes into why this is a problem, nor do they offer any solutions to it (other than Passage B’s assertion that they should be treated as a national minority - but it doesn’t provide any solutions on how to make that happen). As such, the problem itself - and its cause - constitutes the main point of both passages, as reflected in what we wrote above.

Lists (Passage A) - Passage A provides a list of two groups that commonly have the term “national minority” applied to them in Lines 4-10. It also provides a list of words that lack clear definitions (spread throughout passage), and a list of elements of the Roma’s background that has contributed to the problem.

Lists (Passage B) - Passage B provides a list of criteria in a specific definition of minority (Lines 28-34). It also then provides a list of facts that mirror the first four elements on that list to show that the Roma meet those criteria (Paragraph 2).

First, there is undoubtedly some overlap between what the Author of Passage A says in Paragraph 2, and the criteria/facts listed in Passage B. You could compare those lists up front to identify overlap, but you could also wait until it’s relevant in a question to do so. The former will provide you with a stronger up-front understanding of the passage, while the latter will likely save you a little time as you don’t focus on elements that don’t end up being relevant. It’s a judgment call based on your personal style as to which strategy you’ll use!

Also, note how sparse our notes are on Paragraph 2 of Passage B. As long as we know it mirrors the information from the list in Lines 29-33, we should be able to navigate that paragraph well without having a tag for each element discussed.