Hi,
My question is related to the attached question shown below:-
Honestly figuring out the logic for the above question was tough but here is my approach:-
i)I saw ‘without’ and thought it was a contrast.
ii)I solved the 2nd blank first by focusing on the sentence “enrich another” if we are trying enrich a field we want it to be better then the field we are borrowing from,thus i filled the second blank with “overtaken”
iii)Honestly could not find a semantic guess for the 1st blank, but the connotation had to be positive because of “without” and “overtaken” semantic.
iv)Looked at the option :-
(A)Is gone because ‘risk’ has negative connotation.
(B)“applied to” does not go with semantic.
(C)“illuminated by” does not make sense why would another field shine on a new field
(D)maybe
(E)maybe
v)I said hail Mary and ticked (E)
My question, is this approach right?Is their a better approach?
I don’t think your approach is quite right here, imo it’s not a support/contrast question. Can you try idea chunking the sentence and tell me what you think the ideas are?
I see two ideas:-
i)To test the ____ of borrowing from one field of study to enrich another.
ii)Simply investigate the extent to which terms from the one may,without forcing be____the other.
Yeah, for me this is an infinite possibility situation.
So you need to fill in blank 1 with each of the options to “complete” the idea, then do support/contrast to make a guess for blank 2 and then look for a suitable answer choice.
