PrepTest 146
[lcid:3683] Prep Test 146 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4
Reading comp
Passage
. Hundreds of clay tablets marked in cuneiform . have been found in excavations of the Sumerian city . of
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Social Science
Paragraph 1
Denise Schmandt-Besserat argues that tokens discovered in the Jordan river region represent an early predecessor of writing, eventually developing into an abstract system of marks and numerals before becoming signs for words.
Key Lines:
Lines 9-11 - A central paradox/phenomenon is introduced
Lines 11-15 - Another phenomenon is introduced
Lines 17-19 - A scientist's (DSB) explanation for the phenomena/paradox is introduced
Lines 28-33 - DSB's theory is restated/explored
Lines 38-45 - The progression that serves as DSB's core thesis is outlined
Line 45 - DSB's key example is introduced
Meta-Structure:
Phenomenon/Explanation - The passage introduces two different phenomena that the Author ends up showing how one scientist brought them together to form an explanation. The first phenomenon is the "seemingly sudden" development of abstract writing in Uruk (Lines 9-11). The second is the thousands of clay tokens found in the area around 1000 years before the abstract writing (Lines 11-15). Denise Schmant-Besserat ends up tracing the abstract language to these clay tokens, thus showing that abstract writing wasn't a seemingly sudden development but rather something that developed over 1000 years. And, in general, the Author's explanation for a central phenomenon (or two!) serves as the main point of the passage.
Paradox/Resolution - One of the phenomena to be described was a paradox—something "long puzzled" researchers (Lines 9-11). There's nothing additional to be said here other than that some answers might reflect the paradoxical nature of the question being explored. That said, the resolution of a paradox also tends to serve as the main point for a passage. Since the same theory both explains the phenomena and resolves the paradox, it's almost certainly the main point of the passage.
Progression/Development - DSB's theory is that clay tokens developed into language, suggesting that there were intervening steps. Paragraph 3 spends some time walking through those steps, using one specific example to highlight how it worked. We should expect some questions about this progression, and how the different "steps" relate to each other.
Timeline - The passage brings up several specific years and time periods (3000 BC, 3100 BC, 4000 BC; "few centuries"), so we want to have a clear idea of the progression here, as we noted in the last paragraph (Progression/Development). It's also important to note that higher numbers BC are farther back in time (i.e., 4000 BC is before 3100 BC is before 3000 BC).
Last Thoughts:
Note that we split up Paragraph 2 into two parts. This is because there are two "functions" of the paragraph with a nice transition. It wouldn't have been weird for a new paragraph to start with, "Noting that these," and since there were only 3 paragraphs to begin with, changing that up to have four "chunks" won't make it unmanageable while allowing us to better find information as needed. Specifically, the first half of this paragraph is where we'd go to look for information about the earliest tokens and clay envelopes, and the second half is where we'd look for anything about DSB's theory based on them.
Also, this passage seems like there are a lot of little details and differences between concepts that are going to be key (e.g., tokens and marks and numerals and abstract writing, nouns and signs and symbols). We need to be careful as we analyze the answer choices that we're not glossing over this terminology, as some answers might be wrong just because they use the wrong word.
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- Two phenomenon and a paradox are noted, and they're linked by an archaeologist
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Phenomenon 1/Paradox - 3000 BC: abstract writing seemingly popped up out of nowhere in Uruk
- Phenomenon 2 - 4000 BC: Thousands of clay tokens were made
- Archaeologists - Clay tokens ignored, or amulets, or game pieces
- Denise Schmandt-Besserat (DSB) - Clay tokens are precursors to written word
- Paragraph note
- More on the phenomenon
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- The tokens were found in tablet envelopes, some of which had impressions of the tokens inside
- Paragraph note
- DSB's explanation
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Inscriptions equate to later farm inscriptions
- Explanation - Envelopes tracked villagers' farm contributions
- After 4000 BC: Hundreds of new tokens = specialization of villagers
- Paragraph note
- A progression of developments is explained
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- 3100 BC - Tokens develop into marks on clay
- Few hundred years - Marks use numerals
- DSB - Over time, marks and numerals turn into writing
- DSB evidence/example - 2 jars of oil (development from 2 tokens to 2 marks to 3 signs)
Denise Schmandt-Besserat argues that tokens discovered in the Jordan river region represent an early predecessor of writing, eventually developing into an abstract system of marks and numerals before becoming signs for words.
Key Lines:
Lines 9-11 - A central paradox/phenomenon is introduced
Lines 11-15 - Another phenomenon is introduced
Lines 17-19 - A scientist's (DSB) explanation for the phenomena/paradox is introduced
Lines 28-33 - DSB's theory is restated/explored
Lines 38-45 - The progression that serves as DSB's core thesis is outlined
Line 45 - DSB's key example is introduced
Meta-Structure:
Phenomenon/Explanation - The passage introduces two different phenomena that the Author ends up showing how one scientist brought them together to form an explanation. The first phenomenon is the "seemingly sudden" development of abstract writing in Uruk (Lines 9-11). The second is the thousands of clay tokens found in the area around 1000 years before the abstract writing (Lines 11-15). Denise Schmant-Besserat ends up tracing the abstract language to these clay tokens, thus showing that abstract writing wasn't a seemingly sudden development but rather something that developed over 1000 years. And, in general, the Author's explanation for a central phenomenon (or two!) serves as the main point of the passage.
Paradox/Resolution - One of the phenomena to be described was a paradox—something "long puzzled" researchers (Lines 9-11). There's nothing additional to be said here other than that some answers might reflect the paradoxical nature of the question being explored. That said, the resolution of a paradox also tends to serve as the main point for a passage. Since the same theory both explains the phenomena and resolves the paradox, it's almost certainly the main point of the passage.
Progression/Development - DSB's theory is that clay tokens developed into language, suggesting that there were intervening steps. Paragraph 3 spends some time walking through those steps, using one specific example to highlight how it worked. We should expect some questions about this progression, and how the different "steps" relate to each other.
Timeline - The passage brings up several specific years and time periods (3000 BC, 3100 BC, 4000 BC; "few centuries"), so we want to have a clear idea of the progression here, as we noted in the last paragraph (Progression/Development). It's also important to note that higher numbers BC are farther back in time (i.e., 4000 BC is before 3100 BC is before 3000 BC).
Last Thoughts:
Note that we split up Paragraph 2 into two parts. This is because there are two "functions" of the paragraph with a nice transition. It wouldn't have been weird for a new paragraph to start with, "Noting that these," and since there were only 3 paragraphs to begin with, changing that up to have four "chunks" won't make it unmanageable while allowing us to better find information as needed. Specifically, the first half of this paragraph is where we'd go to look for information about the earliest tokens and clay envelopes, and the second half is where we'd look for anything about DSB's theory based on them.
Also, this passage seems like there are a lot of little details and differences between concepts that are going to be key (e.g., tokens and marks and numerals and abstract writing, nouns and signs and symbols). We need to be careful as we analyze the answer choices that we're not glossing over this terminology, as some answers might be wrong just because they use the wrong word.
Question prompt
It can be inferred
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: C
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Social Science
Answer choices
-
Athere were many tokens Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 20-21; Lines 33-35) This is a tempting answer. Paragraph 2 starts out by saying that the early tokens were simple, geometric shapes. This suggests that they might have represented more than one type of item, since only three shapes are listed. However, there are two problems here. First, three tokens representing multiple items doesn't really qualify as "many." And second, the paragraph ends with discussing how more tokens developed as people's crafts diversified, suggesting that maybe there were only a few goods being represented by those early tokens. So this answer isn't supported. -
Bnonagricultural goods and products Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 30-33; Lines 35-37) While Paragraph 2 does discuss agricultural contributions to temple pools and then diversification leading to tokens representing other, nonagricultural goods, it never states that the latter became preferred as contributions to these pools. As people diversified, the temples may have continued to take agricultural contributions while people traded the nonagricultural ones amongst themselves. -
Csome later tokens were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Review the section on clay tokens in Paragraph 2 and then find an answer that reflects those details
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
Paragraph 2 discusses the tokens and the clay envelopes that contained them, but this question focuses on the latter. Limiting ourselves to the parts of Paragraph 2 discussing the tokens, we learn a few things.
First, they started out as simple in form (shapes) with inscriptions. They were placed in envelopes to measure individual contributions to temple pools. And later, hundreds of new forms developed as people diversified and specialized, including some figurative forms (e.g., bowls).
Let's find an answer that lines up with these details.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 20-21; Lines 30-33; Lines 35-36) The paragraph starts by noting that early tokens were cones, spheres, and pyramids with inscriptions, and they represented different grain and livestock. It ends by noting that new tokens developed, and many are "figurative, such as bowls or jars." A cone, sphere, or pyramid representing grain is much more abstract than a bowl or jar representing a bowl or jar, so this answer is correct.
Key Takeaway:
We're developing a theme on the takeaways here! This question is interesting. We know that the overall point of the passage is to highlight DSB's theory on the development of abstract writing from tokens over a 1000-year period. The correct answer here does reflect progression. However, it seems to run counter to the progression in the main point—it talks about things becoming less abstract. But be careful—while the end point of the progression is abstract writing, DSB doesn't claim that the system developed from something that wasn't abstract to something that was. In fact, the starting point is itself abstract—tokens that are cones, spheres, and pyramids but aren't representing those shapes. This is why it's important to have a very precise view of the progression—it was from tokens (tangible objects) to abstract writing, not from figurative to abstract. -
Dthe storage and transportation Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. Paragraph 2 doesn't say anything about this answer, so it's out of scope. -
Ethe token system was Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 33-37) While Paragraph 2 does establish that the token system expanded to include many other tokens as people's crafts diversified, it never compares the abstraction and flexibility of this system to later written systems. And it's hard to believe that a system requiring the sculpting of clay tokens could be as flexible as the written word.
What this tests
Discussion
-
Textual evidence 3 replies
Started by rmkrutz@crimson.ua.edu