PrepTest 131, Section 1, Question 14
It would not be surprising to discover that(81 more words not shown)
That a migration from Africa(25 more words not shown)
- AIt is cited(21 more words not shown)
- BIt is an(17 more words not shown)
- CIt is offered(26 more words not shown)
- DIt is offered(22 more words not shown)
- EIt is the(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The author thinks earlier trade would be unsurprising. The proposed reason is that the features making the Silk Road useful for trade—level ground, manageable mountain passes, and oases—would also have appealed to people migrating to China long before 200 B.C.
I can see why that makes an earlier route plausible. But migration and trade are not the same activity. People might move to a new home without traveling back to exchange goods.
A physically usable route also does not guarantee that later travelers know where it leads. Imagine an ocean crossing that ends at another continent: the land's existence alone would not make travelers willing to sail into the unknown.
What we’re looking for
Those questions keep us from treating the migration as proof that trade occurred. The author is more cautious, though, saying earlier trade would not be surprising. We are asked what the ancient migration does in this argument. It supplies evidence for that possibility. The author takes the migration as a fact and uses its early date, together with the favorable geography, to support the claim about earlier trade.
Working the answers
- A
“Conclusive” is too strong. The migration is offered to make earlier trade plausible, not to guarantee that it occurred. The conclusion itself says discovering earlier trade would not be surprising; it does not say the evidence has conclusively established it.
- B
An intermediate conclusion would have support of its own within the argument and then support something further. The passage does not establish the migration's date from the terrain. It presents that date as a fact, so this is a premise rather than an intermediate conclusion.
- CCorrect
The migration is evidence supporting the claim that trade routes could have been established much earlier than currently believed. It places movement toward China far back in time, and the discussion of geography suggests a route that would have been attractive then. That is its role in supporting the cautious opening claim.
- D
The author is not comparing the dates of trade with Africa and trade with the Middle East. Both regions appear as origins of the early migrants. Their inclusion does not turn the passage into an argument against one trade connection preceding the other.
- E
The main conclusion concerns the plausibility of earlier trade, not the date of migration itself. The migration is one of the facts offered to support that conclusion. E reverses their roles.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.