Explanation

Is D not the answer because it is used for 2 different meanings in the passages?

Why is it abstraction? It appears as if both authors are saying the typical writing style isn't abstract

I have the same question

Answer D (narrative) is incorrect because the question asks what is TYPICAL of writing in the respective professions. In the second paragraph of passage A, narrative is offered as a solution to the “problem” of turning history into an abstract debate, but it is a solution that only “some historians” are using. The paragraph also refers to narrative use as “a fad” Therefore, we know that narrative is not yet typical in the profession. The same is true for passage B. The use of narrative is described as a “currently fashionable call.” But again, note that in describing what is TYPICAL, the passage states: “because legal analysis strips the human narrative content from the abstract, canonical legal form of the case, law students learn to act as if there is no such story.” Thus, while both passages describe narrative as a fad/fashionable, both passages also make it clear it is not the norm. Instead, abstraction is what is typical, and thus answer A is correct. I hope this helps! Please let us know if you have further questions.

I see where abstraction is true for passage A but not for passage B. Could anyone help me locate it?

^^^

Hello @abigail—okereke, Yes, we can see that abstraction is typical of the respective profession (legal writing) of passage B in lines 48 to 51 which read: "But because legal analysis strips the human narrative content from the abstract, canonical legal form of the case, law students learn to act as if there is no such story." Here the legal form of the case, which is what most lawyers are writing, is associated with "abstract". In other words, lawyers ignore the narrative/concrete parts of cases and write about cases using abstract legal forms. Therefore, abstraction is typical of lawyers' writing. I hope this clears that up.

Thank you!