PrepTest 116

[lcid:3560] Prep Test 116 LSAT — Reading Comp — S1 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 6-13  .        In many bilingual communities of Puerto Rican  . Americans living in the mainland United States,  . Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Phenomenon (code-switching in Puerto Rican communities) introduced; explanations previewed (situational and rhetorical factors)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Definition of “code-switching”:
      • Bilingual people switching between both languages
    • Author’s explanation:
      • Some instances of code-switching do not have an explanation, but a vast majority are due to situation/rhetorical factors
    • Author’s attitude: “smoothly and frequently” (lines 4-5); “some cases that cannot currently be explained” (lines 7-8); “vast majority” (line 8); “subtle factors” (line 9); “explain” (line 10)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Explanation: Situational factors listed, supported with studies/examples
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Definition of “domain”: social contexts
    • List of three conversational factors that influence code-switching:
      • Setting, participants, topic
    • Definition of “congruent” factors and “conversational situation”:
      • When setting, participants, and topic go together naturally
      • A set of three “congruent” factors is a “conversational situation”
    • Researchers’ findings:
      • Researchers defined five domains (family, friendship, religion, education, and employment)
      • Provided two of three factors in each domain, sometimes congruent and others not, to see what effect the third factor had on the language used
      • Examples/Results:
        • If two congruent factors (such as parent/child as participants and “how to be a good child” as topic), students easily provided the third congruent factor and agreed on the language they would speak
        • If two incongruent factors (such as priest/parishioner as participants and beach as setting), students would disagree on the third factor and on which language they would speak

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Explanation: Rhetorical factors can also influence
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author’s explanation:
      • Situational factors don’t account for all code-switching; other language used for rhetorical effect
      • Sometimes, the speaker isn’t aware of the switch
    • Example of study on rhetorical factors
      • Puerto Rican Americans said they spoke English at home, but unwittingly used Spanish to communicate certain attitudes or to supply emphasis
    • Author’s attitude: “do not account for all code-switching”

Main Point: While some cases of code-switching by Puerto Rican Americans can’t currently be explained, the vast majority of cases are explained by situational and rhetorical factors.

Key Lines?

Lines 1-5 - Phenomenon defined

Lines 7-10 - Author’s explanation

Lines 32-36 - Key support on situational factors

Lines 51-54 - Key support on rhetorical factors

Meta-Structure?

Phenomenon/Explanation: We love it when the passage explicitly states which Meta-Structure it falls into! Line 5 refers to a “practice,” which is just another word for a phenomenon. Line 10 tells us that we’re going to be presented with explanations for it. The rest of the passage then provides those explanations. When the passage falls into a Phenomenon/Explanation Meta-Structure, the author’s explanation for the phenomenon (or their opinion on a key explanation) constitutes the main point. Here, since the author says that the “vast majority” of examples of the phenomenon can be explained by “situational [and] rhetorical” factors, that’s the main point, as reflected in our summary of it above.

Lists: Paragraph 2 goes into multiple lists of situation factors that are relevant in the explanation of code-switching. Those factors are themselves broken into two categories. Conversational factors include “setting, participants, and topic” (Line 16). The five domains a conversation can take place in include “family, friendship, religion, education, and employment” (Lines 23-24). Since these two lists of factors are central to the studies and results presented in the rest of the paragraph, it’s likely that they’ll be relevant to the questions.

Last Thoughts?

The last sentence in Paragraph 1 does a lot of work. Not only does it lay out the phenomenon that the author is trying to explain, but it also creates two broad “categories” of explanation that define the makeup of the rest of the passage! That makes it a lot easier to contextualize Paragraphs 2 and 3, as Paragraph 2 focuses on situational factors/explanations, while Paragraph 3 focuses on rhetorical ones. This should help immensely as we work through the questions, as finding specific information should be relatively straightforward based on this breakdown.

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Review the study of high school students, then find an answer choice that isn’t supported by that study

Answer Anticipation

For these Bizarro Must Be True questions, the incorrect answers will all be supported by the passage. The correct answer will either present a topic not discussed by the passage or assert a claim contradicted by the passage. Therefore, it can be difficult to predict what the correct answer will say. However, when the question stem provides some guidance as to where the textual support is located in the passage, we can predict what the incorrect answers will say. Taking a little bit of time to make this prediction can allow us to eliminate the incorrect answers very quickly.This question asks about questions the linguistics wanted to answer with their study on high school students. Reviewing the second paragraph, we can tell that the linguists were “test[ing] the effects” of three conversational factors that influence code-switching:setting, participants, topic. They’d give either congruent (consistent) factors (listed in Line 16), or incongruent factors, and they’d see what the students said about the third factor and the language they’d use. Congruent factors led to the students to agree on the third factor and the language they’d use; incongruent ones led to disagreement (Lines 32-36; Lines 40-43).Let’s find and eliminate answers within the scope of this study, and identify the correct answer which isn’t supported by this study.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Where do the students Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Is this part of the study from the second paragraph?

    Yes! The main factors outlined by the linguists were setting, participants, and topic. This answer brings up two congruent factors and asks about the third, which aligns with the methodology as described in the passage. It’s also explicitly mentioned as a question asked in the study! Therefore, we can eliminate this answer choice.

  2. B
    What language or mix Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Is this part of the study from the second paragraph?

    Yep. This answer has the researchers asking about the language spoken in a situation at home that involves three congruent factors, which was part of the study. It’s also explicitly mentioned as a question asked in the study! Therefore, we can eliminate this option.

  3. C
    What language or mix Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Is this part of the study from the second paragraph?

    Yes, this is another example of the researchers asking about a set of factors. In this case the researchers bring up incongruent factors and ask what language would be used. It’s also explicitly mentioned as a question asked in the study!

  4. D
    What topic do the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem

    (D) Is this part of the study from the second paragraph?

    Nope. The study, as described, had the researchers provide certain factors to the students and then ask about the third factor and the language(s) they would use in that situation. This answer choice features the researchers providing a factor and the language used, which doesn’t line up with the methodology of the study. Therefore, we can be confident that this is the correct answer.

  5. E
    What topic do the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Is this part of the study from the second paragraph?


    Indeed. This answer brings up a situation where two factors are provided and the students are asked about the third, which aligns with the methodology as described and reflects a specific example of a situation asked about in the study.

What this tests

Discussion