15chocolate wrote:Hi bp,
I have a question about infer/strengthen/weaken/Ex questions on RC...
So far those questions bother me the most.
Is there any ways we can predict which part would be asked or related to those questions while reading passages?
How should we tackle those Qs?
For infer question, it is particularly hard to find the related parts...I have to read all of them to answer the Q.
Also should we read all answer choices before go back to the passage or just read the question and skim the whole passage?
These will either be completely open-ended ("Which of the following statements can be inferred from the passage?"), or specific ("Which one of the following inferences about Mexican nationalism during Frida Kahlo's life can be inferred from the passage?"). The former is all about using your Primary Structure (the viewpoints/main point) to quickly eliminate a few answers that don't align witht he passage while then using your tags to go back and find the one answer that is explicitly supported by the passage. The latter is all about having good tags so you can find where that information is, find the answer, and then find the correct answer choice.
These are difficult questions. However, a good sign that one is going to come up is if there is a strong, causal argument presented as the main viewpoint of one of the ... viewpoints. Use the same techniques you would in LR to +/- the argument. If it's not causal, the correct answer usually gives a counterexample (or provides another example, for strengthen).
I'm not sure what an Ex question is.
And as far as reading all the answer choices, that strongly depends on the question. For +/-, I'd probably re-read the argument you're trying to operate on and then go to the ACs. For Inference questions, it depends on how open-ended the question is (the more open-ended, the more likely I am to look at the ACs first; the more specific, the more likely to re-read the passage and then the ACs).