Logical reasoning PrepTest 147 · Section 1 · Question 19

Incorrect. First, this answer doesn't talk about a translation being flawed. Second, it does "forgive" a work for not adhering to meaning nor style, so this answer runs counter to the stimulus.

Incorrect. We can stop reading after the first half of this answer. We need a principle that provides a sufficient condition for concluding that a translation is a flawed approximation, not a principle that has that as the sufficient condition. Arguments can conclude necessary conditions based on the sufficient condition, so the necessary condition of the principle has to line up with the conclusion of the stimulus.

Incorrect. This answer discusses what can constitute a skillful translation, but not a flawed one, which is what the conclusion is about.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
Two mutually exclusive translation goals Ð Faithfulness to meaning; faithfulness to style
Conclusion Ð Even the best translation will be flawed

Answer Anticipation:
Strengthen (Principle) questions are all about connecting the judgment in the conclusion to the details in the premise. Here, the conclusion is that all translations (even the best) will be "flawed approximations."

Why? Because every translation requires faithfulness to the meaning of the original, and faithfulness to the style of the original, and those can't both be done at the same time. So we need an answer that says an inability to remain faithful to either meaning, style, or both means that a translation is flawed.

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects the premises to the conclusion, so it's our answer.

Key Takeaway:
For Strengthen (Principle) questions, focus on the judgment in the conclusion, as the correct answer has to justify that. Here, only two answers dealt with a translation being "at best a flawed approximation," so those were the only two that had a solid chance of being correct. Also, always note the "direction" of the answer—be sure that any conditional goes from the premise to the conclusion, not the other way around.

Incorrect. The stimulus already established that being faithful to both meaning and style is impossible ("cannot be entirely reconciled"), so this answer doesn't justify anything we didn't already know.