Question 58·200 Super-Hard SAT Reading Questions·Expression of Ideas
Archaeologists once attributed the disappearance of a coastal city to a single catastrophic tsunami. New sediment cores, however, show multiple thin layers of marine sand separated by decades of urban debris, indicating repeated flooding events rather than one calamity. ______ the evacuation of the city appears to have been gradual, as wealthier districts were abandoned first while poorer neighborhoods continued to be occupied for years.
Which choice completes the text with the most logical transition?
For transition questions, always read the sentence before and after the blank without looking at the choices first and decide, in your own words, how the ideas relate: result, example, contrast, time/order, or topic shift. Then, check each option’s meaning and eliminate any transition whose function does not match that relationship, even if it sounds smooth; the correct choice must fit the logic, not just the flow.
Hints
Identify the two ideas being connected
Reread the sentence before the blank and the clause after the blank. What does the new sediment evidence show, and what is being said about the evacuation of the city?
Decide the relationship between the ideas
Ask yourself: Is the clause after the blank giving an example, giving a contrast, showing something happening at the same time, or drawing a conclusion from the evidence just presented?
Match meanings of transitions to that relationship
Think about what each type of transition usually does: one introduces examples, one signals contrast, one signals simultaneity/parallel events, and one signals a result or conclusion. Which function do you need here?
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand what the new information shows
First, summarize the ideas:
- Old view: the city disappeared because of a single catastrophic tsunami.
- New evidence: multiple thin layers of marine sand with urban debris in between.
- This means: there were repeated flooding events over time, not one sudden disaster.
Then the next clause says the evacuation "appears to have been gradual," with richer areas abandoned first and poorer ones occupied longer. That sentence is drawing a conclusion from the evidence in the previous sentence.
Decide the logical relationship needed
Ask: How does the idea about gradual evacuation relate to the evidence about repeated floods?
- The new evidence suggests the city did not vanish all at once.
- Instead, it supports the idea that people left the city slowly, over years.
So the second part is a result or conclusion based on the evidence just described, not an example, a contrast, or something happening at the same time for a different topic.
Match each transition type to that relationship
Now test each option against the relationship you identified:
- "For example," introduces a specific instance of something just mentioned.
- "Nevertheless," shows contrast or unexpected opposition.
- "Meanwhile," marks events happening at the same time or a shift to a parallel storyline.
- "Therefore," shows a result, consequence, or logical conclusion.
Because the sentence about gradual evacuation is a conclusion drawn from the sediment evidence, the transition that correctly shows a result/conclusion is A) Therefore,.