- Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:08 am
I chose B for this question during my timed test, and then chose B again when doing this question untimed before seeing the correct answer (C) , though I actually had C as one of my two contenders. I was deterred by C on both occasions when C states that the associations of colors were important precursors and serve as the foundation for later wampum representations that didn’t depend directly on those associations of the two wampum colors. That, to me, suggests that the associations of color are before the formation of the Confederacy. In particular (and I’m probably going to sound dumb on here), at the time of my untimed review, I felt these “later wampum representations” referred to the formation of the Confederacy in the third paragraph, and that while a date was given for the formation of the Confederacy (1451, per line 39), there was no date expressed (e.g. 1450 or earlier) to confirm that the associations of color with wampum really were before the formation of the confederacy (as discussed in the third paragraph).
For what’s it’s worth, I was able to comfortably eliminate A (lack of evidence), D (unsupported comparison), and E (lack of evidence).
Looking back at B after my second untimed review, I notice that B puts in a causal connection between “use of colors in wampum to express meaning” and “formation of the Haudenosaune Confederacy”, because of the “arose in response to” separating the former concept from the latter. While lines 56-57 do state that "the arrangements of the two colors also direct interpretation of the (wampum’s) symbols”, it doesn’t seem to be sufficient to assert a causal connection between the associations of the two colors and the formation of the confederacy.
With all those said, my questions are:
1) Is B incorrect because it’s one of those incorrect answers where concepts have been taken from the passage, but are connected in a way that is ultimately unsupported from the passage? And,
2) Did I miss a commonsense assumption or anything in the text that confirms that the use of colors to express meaning preceded the formation of the confederacy, or am I reading too much into the text? The text does mention the “ancient Haudenosaune anglers” in line 29, but wasn’t sure if that, alone, is sufficient to infer that the association of colors was before the formation of the confederacy in 1451. (Maybe this is just me with thinking that "ancient", at the time, was too subjective to definitively mean "before 1450").
Thanks very much for your assistance with these questions!
-Dustine B. (“AnimalCrossingLSATer”)