PT 60 LG #4 -interns

zky
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:14 am

PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby zky » Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:48 am

This game seems straightforward, except for one issue - how do you know from reading the setup whether all six interns are used? How do you know that one intern cannot be assigned to more than one story? On most games, they have explicit language to deal with this issue - "exactly six interns are assigned to stories", or "each intern is assigned to one story exactly." Nothing here. Left me thinking the game was much more complex than it turned out to be...

Appreciate any insight...

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby 2011Law » Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:52 am

Are you taking the Dec test? If so, why would you do PT60 so soon? Beside 61 (if you get it), what else do you have planned to do?

bee's vision
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:36 pm

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby bee's vision » Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:20 am

even if you assumed they could be assigned to more than one story, after you draw the initial diagram it's pretty clear that the rules won't allow it.

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby JazzOne » Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:42 am

bee's vision wrote:even if you assumed they could be assigned to more than one story, after you draw the initial diagram it's pretty clear that the rules won't allow it.

Why not?

skip james
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:53 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby skip james » Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:41 am

It doesn't specify directly, but it does through a combination of the rules:

"each" intern is trained, so we can't have any out.

"each" story has a team of two interns.

so, since there are 3 stories, each with two interns, and since we know we can't leave any intern out, that leaves us with only one option, as i see it.

zky
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:14 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby zky » Tue Nov 16, 2010 6:29 pm

"each intern is trained" does not mean that "each intern is assigned to a story." Being trained in a field, and being assigned to one of R, S, or T, are different things it would seem.

From the setup language, it seems possible I could assign J and G to every story. The other interns would be trained as photographers or writers, but not assigned to any stories.

Obviously the game is not supposed to be interpreted this way; the questions show that clearly. I'm just trying to figure out what I'm missing in the setup language.

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby JazzOne » Tue Nov 16, 2010 6:33 pm

zky wrote:"each intern is trained" does not mean that "each intern is assigned to a story." Being trained in a field, and being assigned to one of R, S, or T, are different things it would seem.

From the setup language, it seems possible I could assign J and G to every story. The other interns would be trained as photographers or writers, but not assigned to any stories.

Obviously the game is not supposed to be interpreted this way; the questions show that clearly. I'm just trying to figure out what I'm missing in the setup language.

I don't have PT 61, but if you PM the entire setup to me, and the clues, I will diagram it and see what I can come up with.

skip james
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:53 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby skip james » Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:36 am

zky wrote:"each intern is trained" does not mean that "each intern is assigned to a story."


This is true. But luckily they give us the first sentence which says 'firm X has hired 6 people to ASSIST in three stories'. Which from what I can tell, makes the following...

From the setup language, it seems possible I could assign J and G to every story. The other interns would be trained as photographers or writers, but not assigned to any stories.


... pretty much impossible.

After all, the stimulus does proceed 'each intern' (and grammatically, they're sorta committed to be referring to the six people hired to assist in the three stories) are trained in two fields. And 'each story' has a team of two interns trained in two different fields.

That sounds pretty specific to me... but I will admit I have made the occasional blunder of assuming that all of the variables are used when it definitely was not the case.


But even so, I would be more inclined to think they weren't all used if they said something more like 'Out of (insert six letters), the firms will be hiring assistants for three stories' or something like that.

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:35 pm

Here's the diagram I used for this game:

OFF TOPIC IMAGE SPAMMING CORPORATE LOGO REMOVED BY MODS.

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby JazzOne » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:37 pm

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:Here's the diagram I used for this game:

It was so helpful for you to ignore the question just to advertise for your company.

zky
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:14 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby zky » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:48 pm

I think I can see the logic now - I agree that the statement "hired six interns to ASSIST" is the key, because if they weren't assigned to any story, it doesn't make sense how they are assisting in covering those stories.

One thing I've noticed on recent PTs is that LSAC is less likely to use the word "exactly" in games, both in the setup and local conditionals, even when its obviously the intention of the question. So if this game was found in PT 30-40, I would expect it to say "Each story is assigned a team of exactly two interns", for example. I feel it makes life a bit more difficult for us.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:52 pm

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:Here's the diagram I used for this game:

Please don't give an answer that doesn't actually answer but contains your company logo in huge large print, thanks.

User avatar
plenipotentiary
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:13 pm

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby plenipotentiary » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:55 pm

I hate you, interns. I hate the word "field."

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:38 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:Here's the diagram I used for this game:

Please don't give an answer that doesn't actually answer but contains your company logo in huge large print, thanks.

Noted. Apologies.

skip james
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:53 am

Re: PT 60 LG #4 -interns

Postby skip james » Thu Nov 18, 2010 7:18 am

zky wrote:I think I can see the logic now - I agree that the statement "hired six interns to ASSIST" is the key, because if they weren't assigned to any story, it doesn't make sense how they are assisting in covering those stories.

One thing I've noticed on recent PTs is that LSAC is less likely to use the word "exactly" in games, both in the setup and local conditionals, even when its obviously the intention of the question. So if this game was found in PT 30-40, I would expect it to say "Each story is assigned a team of exactly two interns", for example. I feel it makes life a bit more difficult for us.


Yeah I'd agree that the wording has gotten trickier lately. One thing though, which you might possibly have overlooked, i dunno, was that the interns were actually assigned as 'assistants'. It was definitely one of a dirtier lsac's tricks..




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], clueless801, CMac86 and 7 guests