Middle Eastern Civilizations

[ashokkkannan]

As the climate in the Middle East changed beginning around 7000
B.C.E., conditions emerged that were conducive to a more complex and
advanced form of civilization in both Egypt and Mesoptomia. The
process began when the swampy valleys of the Nile in Egypt and of the
Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotomia became drier, producing
riverine lands that were both habitable and fertile, and attracting
settlers armed with the newly developed techniques of agriculture.This
migration was further encouraged by the transformation of the
once-hospitable grasslands of these regions into deserts. Human
population became increasingly concentrated into pockets of settlement
scattered along the banks of the great rivers.

Question

According to the passage, the increasing aridity of formerly fertile
grasslands in Egypt and Mesopotomia caused settlement patterns in
those regions to become

(A) less stable
(B) more sparse
(C) more concentrated
(D) less nomadic
(E) more volatile

OA is (C). But I chose (B), since the question asks about the
settlement pattern in formerly fertile grasslands (see 'those'
preceded by formerly fertile grasslands in the question), and not on
river banks.

Explanation (this Q is from Peterson's) is not clear:
The last two sentences in the paragraph explain that the
transformation of the grasslands into deserts made the human
population "increasingly concentrated...along the river banks of the
great rivers".

Am I misinterpreting the question , can someone pls help?

[Psyzygy]

As the climate in the Middle East changed beginning around 7000
B.C.E., conditions emerged that were conducive to a more complex and
advanced form of civilization in both Egypt and Mesoptomia. The
process began when the swampy valleys of the Nile in Egypt and of the
Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotomia became drier, producing
riverine lands that were both habitable and fertile, and attracting
settlers armed with the newly developed techniques of agriculture.This
migration was further encouraged by the transformation of the
once-hospitable grasslands of these regions into deserts. Human
population became increasingly concentrated into pockets of settlement
scattered along the banks of the great rivers.

The last line of the paragraph mentions that the population became more concentrated along the banks of the Nile and the Tigris
The question is asking you to predict what happened to the populations in these places when the swamps dried up and became conducive to agriculture.

I think you may have misinterpreted the term "aridity" on reading the passage in a hurry and picked choice B.
Read this portion of the passage again --
"swampy valleys of the Nile in Egypt and of the
Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotomia became drier, producing
riverine lands that were both habitable and fertile" the next line goes on to describe how that positively affected the migration patterns of people in those regions.

HTH

[gmat168]

I actually disagree with you Psyczgy.

The question is clearly asking about the grasslands, which "turned into deserts" according to the passage. The question is NOT asking about the swamplands, which then becamse drier and livable.

I think the original poster's interpretation is correct.

[thebullfighter]

The question is clearly asking about the grasslands, which "turned into deserts" according to the passage. The question is NOT asking about the swamplands, which then becamse drier and livable.

As the climate in the Middle East changed beginning around 7000
B.C.E., conditions emerged that were conducive to a more complex and
advanced form of civilization in both Egypt and Mesoptomia. The
process began when the swampy valleys of the Nile in Egypt and of the
Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotomia became drier, producing
riverine lands that were both habitable and fertile, and attracting
settlers armed with the newly developed techniques of agriculture.This
migration was further encouraged by the transformation of the
once-hospitable grasslands of these regions into deserts. Human
population became increasingly concentrated into pockets of settlement
scattered along the banks of the great rivers.

Question

According to the passage, the increasing aridity of formerly fertile
grasslands in Egypt and Mesopotomia caused settlement patterns in
those regions to become

(A) less stable
(B) more sparse
(C) more concentrated
(D) less nomadic
(E) more volatile

i don't understand What's confusing u guys, but i agree with th Original OA, ie C

ashok, i think u guys are gettin confused by 'THOSE' in the Q.

But, if u try to read th whole para lil carefuly, u'll see tht th author is refrin to Egypt & Mesopotomia when he says, 'THESE regions'.

Similarly, in th Q stem, 'THOSE' refers to Egypt & Mesopotomia and not particularly a specific part of these regions. ie grasslands (or river banks)

& hence, the increasing aridity of formerly fertile
grasslands in Egypt and Mesopotomia caused settlement patterns in
those regions to become more concentrated. (ie, conc. to specific areas or parts of 'those' regions. ie of Egypt and Mesopotomia)

hope tht clears out th confusion.

[rak]

I agree with thebullfighter. 'C' it is.

-Rak

[gmat168]

i don't understand What's confusing u guys, but i agree with th Original OA, ie C

ashok, i think u guys are gettin confused by 'THOSE' in the Q.

But, if u try to read th whole para lil carefuly, u'll see tht th author is refrin to Egypt & Mesopotomia when he says, 'THESE regions'.

Similarly, in th Q stem, 'THOSE' refers to Egypt & Mesopotomia and not particularly a specific part of these regions. ie grasslands (or river banks)

& hence, the increasing aridity of formerly fertile
grasslands in Egypt and Mesopotomia caused settlement patterns in
those regions to become more concentrated. (ie, conc. to specific areas or parts of 'those' regions. ie of Egypt and Mesopotomia)

hope tht clears out th confusion.

Though I agree with your explanation, I think it's a poorly worded question. They talk about separate regions in the question stem, and I think the way the question is phrased, it is easily confused as to what they mean. Though, obviously, you disagree.

Now I see firsthand why Peterson's materials get horrible reviews.

[thebullfighter]

Though I agree with your explanation, I think it's a poorly worded question. They talk about separate regions in the question stem, and I think the way the question is phrased, it is easily confused as to what they mean. Though, obviously, you disagree.

Now I see firsthand why Peterson's materials get horrible reviews.

i agree wth u, but then thts wat we have to do. I don't look for the 'Correct' answers but rather the answer i know the 'Question-setter' thinks to be correct. works perfectly for me. (many a times i 'Have' to pick an answer counter to wat i think should actually be correct, wat a pity, but it seems to work)

i would personally give a very Bad review for even ETS' understanding of the subjects. , but wat choice do we have, then to think Smart rather than Intelligent.

regards.
Bull

[thebullfighter]

btw, which one tests ur managerial skills better. You have a report which is perfect in every way, ie very nicely ordered, Illustrative, lot's of examples, lot's of evidence to support th fact, data & information provided to make th understanding of the report easy. You are to analys/judge some of it's content & have to take a Decision based uon it. Is it tht difficult???

on the other side, ur given a report tht's very 'poorely' made, absolutely no examples or additional data/info. to support or strenghten the facts or observations. Just based on some particular instances rather than on more general approach to increase it's validity. Now, again you have to Judge/analyse it's content & based on just tht, make a decision tht will be th least risky for ue bussiness. What u can conclude by the limited content tht u have so as to get the least illogical conclusion. Now, tht Tests ur aptitude.


alternatively,
task1: Pick out a Black grain out of a plate full of White grains.

task2: Pick out a Black grain out of a plate full of a number of Dark coloured grains, some brown, some dark gray etc.

???

[gmat168]

I would agree with your analogy more if it were more apt to this situation.

There is a difference between a tough question and one where it is poorly written.

Using your analogy, which one would enable you forecast your sales better:

- A report that is tough to decipher but full of CORRECT facts and figures.
- A report that is vague and poorly collected data full of wrong figures and charts.

I would say the first one, which is what ETS does. A poorly made question DOES NOT test your aptitude...it only exposes the inadequate thought put into a product that people spend good money on to help them "prepare for the GMAT," when it does nothing of the sort.

[thebullfighter]

I would agree with your analogy more if it were more apt to this situation.

There is a difference between a tough question and one where it is poorly written.

Using your analogy, which one would enable you forecast your sales better:

- A report that is tough to decipher but full of CORRECT facts and figures.
- A report that is vague and poorly collected data full of wrong figures and charts.

I would say the first one, which is what ETS does. A poorly made question DOES NOT test your aptitude...it only exposes the inadequate thought put into a product that people spend good money on to help them "prepare for the GMAT," when it does nothing of the sort.

ETS - Correct facts, figures. always, ya sure!!!

anyways, depends.
A report that is tough to decipher but full of CORRECT facts and figures.

might be tough for 1 not for th other. it's a relative term.

BTW,
Using your analogy, which one would enable you forecast your sales better:

- A report that is tough to decipher but full of CORRECT facts and figures.
- A report that is vague and poorly collected data full of wrong figures and charts.

u don't always have that choice. What if u don't hav access to the first kinda report, only the second kinda report is wat u hve access to???? Then u need to Get the best out of the report given based on ur smartness.
mind it, th above Q is not Wrong, it's very well CORRECT. just tht it's PRESENTED poorly, THT's wat a person with th proper 'aptitude' be able to judge & then using his own understanding, get th best out of the Given Data. I guess it's clear who ws able to.

anyways, best of luck for ur journeys in the 'Real World'.