A question about two texts tests how one author would respond to the other’s underlined claim. Start with the question to find who answers whom, then read that claim and the evidence behind it. Ask whether the author rejects it as wrong or unsupported, treats it as partly true, or applies it to a new case. Then check the author’s reason against what that author says. A choice can take the right view but give a reason the author never uses.
Hints
- Hint 1
Read the underlined words and the sentence that leads into them. Find what discovery Text 1 uses to support its claim.
- Hint 2
What reasons does Text 2 give for its response to Text 1? Look for the evidence behind that response.
- Hint 3
How does Text 2’s final sentence affect its response to the underlined claim? Check how strongly the author states that response.
Step-by-step
Follow the claim and the reason
Step 1Trace the claim about early farming
The grains are dated to about 9,000 years ago, and Text 1 uses them to claim that agriculture arose in this region far earlier than previously documented. Text 2’s author must respond to that underlined claim, so what must the grains show for it to follow? They have to show people growing wheat in the region at that early date, rather than old wheat turning up there.
- Step 2
Find Text 2’s stance and reason
Does Text 2 accept that link between old grains and local farming? It says the wheat could have originated elsewhere, since trade or flooding can carry it to a site without anyone there growing it. The author also reports that no farming implements, storage pits, or irrigation features have been found, so the grains aren’t backed by other signs of farming. The author rejects the conclusion as unsupported because finding ancient wheat at a site doesn’t show that the people there cultivated it.
- Step 3
Match the reason and the limit
Which response gives the author’s own reason without claiming more than the author does? The phrase alternative explanations for the grains’ presence covers wheat arriving through trade or flooding rather than being grown at Tell Abidi. Text 2’s Until such corroborating evidence emerges leaves room for future evidence of local farming, so not yet sufficiently supported matches the author’s caution without declaring the underlined claim false. Choice C.