PrepTest 130, Section 4, Question 4
Linguist: Most people can tell whether a sequence(23 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ASome people are(25 more words not shown)
- BEngineers who apply(23 more words not shown)
- CSome people are(26 more words not shown)
- DThose travelers who(20 more words not shown)
- EQuite a few(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
You can hear that something sounds wrong without being able to name the rule it breaks. In standard English, for example, “The books is on the table” may immediately sound wrong even to someone who cannot explain subject-verb agreement.
The linguist makes that distinction within each person's own dialect. Many people can recognize grammatical word sequences; few of those people can state the rules behind their judgments. Recognizing a pattern and explicitly describing its rules are different abilities.
What we’re looking for
The question wants another situation illustrating that principle. Look for someone who can recognize whether something fits a category but cannot explain the features that make it fit. A contrast between any two abilities will not be enough.
Working the answers
- A
Writing an accurate narrative and writing an emotionally moving poem are two different kinds of composition. Neither side concerns recognizing whether something follows a pattern while being unable to state the relevant rules. A supplies a difference in skills, but not the difference the linguist describes.
- B
This compares how much two groups know: engineers who apply principles and physicists who discover them. The original does not say that people who judge grammar know more than people who formulate grammatical rules. It contrasts recognition with explicit explanation within the same group.
- CCorrect
These people recognize a waltz when they hear one, just as the speakers recognize a grammatical sequence. Most of them cannot state what defines a waltz, just as most of the speakers cannot specify the relevant grammatical rules. Both involve successful recognition without an explicit account of the criteria.
- D
Enjoying a journey is not recognizing that it fits a rule or category. Describing the journey vividly is also different from stating the rules used to recognize it. D contrasts enjoyment with description, so it does not reproduce the relationship we need.
- E
This gives us explicit knowledge of rules without much skill at playing the game. The linguist's example goes the other way: people successfully recognize grammatical language without being able to state the rules. Knowing how chess pieces move while being a weak player illustrates a different gap.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.