Q9

 
amywasylyk
Thanks Received: 0
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 5
Joined: June 20th, 2011
 
 
 

Q9

by amywasylyk Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:54 pm

For the first question, I don't understand why (B) is not the correct choice.

From what I gathered from the passage, the author believes that custom-made medical illustrations would a visual presentation of data that otherwise would be complex (lines 50-55). So wouldn't road maps (a visual representation for verbal directions) be the most analogous? It would be difficult to understand verbal directions about an area that one was unfamiliar with and the map would be much easier to comprehend.

I guess I can see why (A) is the credited answer if I think about it like the engineer is giving a presentation with complicated engineering data, formula, etc. Or wait, I think maybe I answered my own question? Would it simply be because the schematics accompany the oral presentation and in the map/directions analogy, the map does not supplement any other presentation? Maybe I over thought this - any one with any feedback? Thanks in advance.
User avatar
 
ohthatpatrick
Thanks Received: 2865
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 4188
Joined: April 01st, 2011
 
This post thanked 2 times.
 
 

Re: Q9

by ohthatpatrick Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:22 pm

Excellent work. :)

Thanks for "televising" your thought process on this question. The appropriate window to consider is definitely the last paragraph, although I would particularly suggest the last sentence as our strongest link to answering this question.

I would similarly be down to (A) and (B) after a first pass, and the distinction you drew is critical.

In A, the illustration supplements an oral explanation.

In B, the illustration replaces (or obviates the need to get) any oral explanation.

In the context of the passage, the author is implying that medical experts will deliver their testimony no matter what, but that the illustration can help laymen convert that testimony into more visual imagery.

So since the illustration accompanies the complex testimony, (A) is a better match.

Nicely done, retroactively.
 
farhadshekib
Thanks Received: 42
Elle Woods
Elle Woods
 
Posts: 99
Joined: May 05th, 2011
 
 
trophy
Most Thanked
 

Re: Q9

by farhadshekib Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:06 pm

ohthatpatrick wrote:Excellent work. :)

Thanks for "televising" your thought process on this question. The appropriate window to consider is definitely the last paragraph, although I would particularly suggest the last sentence as our strongest link to answering this question.

I would similarly be down to (A) and (B) after a first pass, and the distinction you drew is critical.

In A, the illustration supplements an oral explanation.

In B, the illustration replaces (or obviates the need to get) any oral explanation.

In the context of the passage, the author is implying that medical experts will deliver their testimony no matter what, but that the illustration can help laymen convert that testimony into more visual imagery.

So since the illustration accompanies the complex testimony, (A) is a better match.

Nicely done, retroactively.


Indeed, this is actually directly supported in lines 27-30, which suggests that expert testimony is necessary to verify the accuracy of such illustrations.
 
JamesM914
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 11
Joined: October 05th, 2017
 
 
 

Re: Q9

by JamesM914 Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:56 am

I went with B, but that's because I didn't know the meaning of the word schematic. Had I known the meaning I would have gotten this question right.
 
JesseM947
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 1
Joined: August 27th, 2018
 
 
 

Re: Q9

by JesseM947 Thu Jan 10, 2019 8:07 pm

It feels weird responding to year and a half old post but I was just running through this passage and had a question:

I like most people, was down to A and B and chose B because the author never explicitly stated that medical experts would testify alongside the medical illustration. In lines 27-30, the author mentions that even in the rare instance that an "an unscrupulous illustrator" creates a biased medical drawing, "such illustration would be inadmissible as evidence in the courtroom unless a medical expert were present to testify to their accuracy." My mind, this doesn't insinuate that a medical expert would always or even normally testifying alongside the illustration, it just means that even in the highly unlikely event that a medical illustrator was on the take and created a bias illustration, an expert would correct it.

I understand how the analogy of answer A makes sense, however, I somehow missed the language or inference that would lead us to say medical illustrations were presented alongside experts.

This issue lead me to get question number 11 wrong as well.

Any guidance you could provide here would be greatly appreciated

Thanks in advance for your help!