PrepTest 116
Passage
Passage walkthrough
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)
- Definition of “code-switching”:
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”
- Author’s explanation:
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
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: B
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Strategy Overview
Answer Anticipation
Answer choices
-
ALinguists have observed that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
(A) Does this answer choice say that the author cites the study involving the Puerto Rican American family or cases in which code-switching occurs when the conversational situation suggests code-switching shouldn’t occur?
Nope. This brings up the study from the second paragraph, which supported a conclusion about situational factors explaining code-switching. The author thinks these results support the view that situational factors were relevant in code-switching behavior by showing that congruent factors led to agreement on what language would be used, while incongruent factors led to disagreement.
-
BCode–switching sometimes occurs in Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B matches the stem
(B) Does this answer choice say that the author cites the study involving the Puerto Rican American family or cases in which code-switching occurs when the conversational situation suggests code-switching shouldn’t occur?
Yes, this refers to the latter point. The author supports the contention that situational factors cannot explain some cases of code-switching by saying that there are cases of code-switching “when the domain would lead one not to expect it.” In these cases, the situation factors (domain) would lead one to expect no code-switching to occur — in other words, to expect the use of a single language. And yet, code-switching occurs anyway. These cases call for a separate explanation from situational factors, so this is the correct answer.
-
CBilingual people often switch Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
(C) Does this answer choice say that the author cites the study involving the Puerto Rican American family or cases in which code-switching occurs when the conversational situation suggests code-switching shouldn’t occur?
This answer is definitely tempting, as it seems to reflect the switch between languages that are “so subtle” that the speaker isn’t aware of it. However, be careful with the phrasing here! The second paragraph suggests there are some situational contexts that would suggest speakers would use a mix of two languages. When studying situational factors, the linguists asked students what mix of languages they’d use, even in cases where the situational factors didn’t change (Lines 29-32). So, switching smoothly between two languages can be explained by situational factors
-
DPuerto Rican Americans sometimes Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
(D) Does this answer choice say that the author cites the study involving the Puerto Rican American family or cases in which code-switching occurs when the conversational situation suggests code-switching shouldn’t occur?
Not quite. This answer is trying to get you to pick it because the Puerto Rican-American family believed they spoke only English at home, while in a similar situation in Paragraph 2, the language that high school students said they’d speak is Spanish only. However, that’s us bringing these situations together to support this answer, whereas the question asks us for something that the passage specifically references in support of the view that situational factors don’t explain all code-switching.
-
ESpeakers who engage in Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
(E) Does this answer choice say that the author cites the study involving the Puerto Rican American family or cases in which code-switching occurs when the conversational situation suggests code-switching shouldn’t occur?
No. The author states that speakers are often unaware that they’re code-switching, not that speakers are unaware of the situational factors that might cause them to switch. In fact, in Paragraph 2, the agreement on which language would be spoken in certain situations suggests that speakers do have at least some awareness of situational factors that influence the languages they use.
What this tests
Discussion
-
Why is E wrong? Thanks 2 replies
Started by jingjingxiao11111@gmail.com