#18 - Specific Reference, Must Be True

[nusheenaparvizi]

Hi,

I am having trouble understanding what it is the question stem is asking. The way I interpreted it was that it is asking about the country in line 1, specifically how the proposed litigation involving the reclamation of stolen works of art has been working out for them. I chose answer choice E because I assumed well, if they are considering a bill designed to reduce the uncertainty inherent in the ownership of art, then litigation involving reclamation of stolen works of art have been "increasing as a result of an increase in the amount of stolen art." I wasn't entirely sold on this answer choice but none of the other ones made much sense to me.

I especially do not understand what correct answer choice A means. The sentence would flow like "litigation involving the reclamation of stolen works of art has been less common than Burke fears it will become without passage of a national statute of limitations for reclamation of stolen cultural property." I don't get what the answer choice is saying when it says "without".... Without the statute of limitations wouldn't it be more common for litigation involving reclamation occur?

Thank you!

[Adam Tyson]

Thanks for the question, nusheenaparvizi! That is a confusing one, isn't it? The question is not asking about the information that we got from the first sentence of the passage, but is actually asking about litigation in that "certain country" that is contemplating the new bill. We have to look beyond just that first sentence. Although the first sentence might allow us to infer that there is at least some uncertainly about ownership of stolen art under the current legal system, we cannot then infer that litigation has been increasing.

So, what DO we know about litigation in that country? We know from that end of the third paragraph that Burke is afraid that there could be a lot of it, and that it would cause a big problem for the nation. He wants that Statute of Limitations to keep the litigation down. We also know from the beginning of the third paragraph that so far, "such reclamation suits have not yet been a problem." Putting those ideas together, we get answer A - litigation in the country has, so far, been less common than Burke fears might become the case if we don't include that Statute of Limitations. If we don't have that statute, he is afraid the litigation will get worse than it has been.