How to use the two pronged approach in this question?

I had a concern regarding the above question. How to approach this question via the two-pronged approach?

I couldn’t understand this. So, any explanation for this will be helpful.

Share your approach.

logic word for the first blank: that (support)
On the left side of “that”, the idea has a negative connotation so the right side will also have negative connotation.

  • As per semantics, the first blank should be something opposite to controversial claims as historians have been debating about them, and schools claim as correct. So, factual claims.
  • the second idea is connected with a logic word or which is support.
  • ii) blank is where extreme strategy should be used where extreme of debate is fully supported or fully rejected.
  • iii) by is supporting logic word so we have double possibility situation here.
  • and I got stuck here

What does “two pronged approach” mean?

Can anyone please reply how to approach this?

You did not respond to Ganesh’s question above.

Here is my approach:
For blank 1:
The connotation for this is neutral from the part “hotly debate”.
As for semantics, i went with “hotly” and chose “controversial” from the answer.
For blank 2:
I used extreme approach because of “even completely” and chose “contradicted” as the answer
For blank 3:
“hotly debate or that are even completely contradicted” indicated a negative connotation.
From the options, we can eliminate reliable as it is a positive connotation.
I eliminated “incomplete” as there is no evidence. For dubious, my justification is that the historians were debating.
Is this the right approach to the problem?

And a follow up question:
I was not able to come up with the semantic approach on my own for this question and I had to look at one of the options to see what kind of word they are looking for. How do I improve this?

Not quite. Describe the different steps in detail so we can analyse your thinking:

Firstly break the sentence into ideas.

Then, for each blank:

  1. What does the blank describe?
  2. Figure out if idea with blank is being supported/contrasted and why
  3. Figure out connotation (good, bad, neutral) of the blank’s idea and possibily the blank itself
  4. Figure out the semantics (what idea should the blank be conveying)
  5. Eliminate those that don’t match the connotation
  6. Eliminate those that don’t match the semantics:
    1. No evidence
    2. Contradiction
    3. Usage
  7. Justify the remaining answer by making sure the connotation and semantics align with what we guessed

Write your logic for step 1 to 7 for each blank.

Here is my approach

  1. Blanks:
  • B1 = what does the book contain
  • B2 = how are the historians affected by the source
  • B3 = describing the primary source
  1. Function word and Connotation:
  • B1 = support with “hotly debate”, function = “that”, negative connotation
  • B2 = extreme word of “hotly debate”, function = “even completely”, negative connotation
  • B3 = neutral connotation because of “just indictment”
  1. Connotation: Accidentally done above
  2. Semantics:
  • B1 = controversial
  • B2 = proven wrong
  • B3 = factual
  1. Eliminating options because of connotation
  • A, C
  • D, E
  • G, H
  1. Eliminating options because of semantics: Only one option per blank remaining
  2. Justifying chosen option:
  • B1 = controversial: indicated by “hotly debate”
  • B2 = contradicted: “or that are even completely” indicates extreme version of hotly debating
  • B3 = reliable: “sad but just indictment” hints that the readers are believing the information and hence can be relied upon

P.S. I changed my answer from the previous response

I think you might not quite be getting how to apply the process for B1.

Check this video, does that clarify it?

1 Like

Ah right, my mistake was that I did not take into the fact that “hotly debate…” is already negative

1 Like