Top Law Schools

Prep 36
Section 1
3. Finnish author Jaakko Mikkeli was accused by Norwegian author Kirsten Halden of plagiarizing a book that she had written and that had been published 20 years before Mikkeli’s. The two books, although set in different periods and regions, contain enough plot similarities to make coincidental resemblance unlikely. Mikkeli’s defense rests on his argument that plagiarism was impossible in this case because Halden’s book has been published only in Norwegian, a language Mikkeli does not understand, and because no reviews of Halden’s book have ever been published.

The argument in Mikkeli’s defense depends on the assumption that

(A) Mikkeli has never met Halden
(B) Halden’s book did not become popular in Norway
(C) Nobody related the plot of Halden’s book in detail to Mikkeli before Mikkeli wrote his book
(D) There is a common European myth to which both authors referred subconsciously in the books in question
(E) Mikkeli is not familiar with Old Icelandic, an extinct language related to an earlier form of Norwegian


I don't understand the rationale for the answer for this problem.
I at first chose E, and then A, but I was wrong both times.

I'm not sure you're allowed to post the question on here. I'm sure most people have this PT, so it will be easy to reference.

In any case, the correct answer is C. The conclusion states, "plagiarism was impossible in this case because halden's book has been published only in Norweigian, a language he doesn't understand and no reviews have been published" after seeing such a strong word such as impossible in the conclusion, you need to ask yourself, "Why is impossible for him to have plagarized?" to correctly answer this, you need to find the answer that brings up any doubt since we are so sure it is impossible. Answer choice (C) does just that. If nobody related the book to him, then it is definitely impossible for him to plagiarize.

Answer A is incorrect because you don't need to meet someone in order to plagiarize. This is about publishing and one can plagiarize off the Internet and not meet the person. In addition, this is a necessary assumption, illustrated by the word depend. It's very seldom that such an extreme word like never will be in the assumption. So, this can quickly be eliminated.

Answer E is incorrect because it's irrelevant whether he is familiar with it. This is related to an earlier form of Norweigian but it means nothing. If this is negated, the argument can still work because he could find another way to plagiarize. This is saying that because he didn't know the earlier form of Norweigian that he couldn't have copied. It doesn't matter.

Thanks, this is an excellent reply. One of the best replies I have gotten thus far.
I guess I did not understand the meaning of the word "relate." I only knew the general meaning of this word and newly learned its another meaning; to narrate or give an account of. I am a foreign student.

Do you know a place which is more appropriate for posting questions from the prep test?
I am at the beginning stage of my preps and will have many questions to ask probably.
I hope to get more enlightening answers like the one you have posted.
Are you a law school student btw?

Anyhow,
Thanks brilliantly.
It helped greatly.

Sincerely Yours

soyeonjeon wrote: Do you know a place which is more appropriate for posting questions from the prep test?

I would check the explanations here, http://www.manhattanlsat.com/forums/?si ... 937ac67255 , first. And if that isnt clear enough, then make a TLS thread.

Remember though, we are not supposed to directly post LSAT questions in this forum. So you should edit out of your original post. Simply putting PT 36 S# Q# will be enough for people to look the question up real quick.