Passage - General Discussion

[Administrator]

Passage Discussion

VIEWSTAMP Analysis:

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[HarryK]

Hi,

When I read passage (A) from line 20 to line 27, I read it as an informational bit of the passage but also showing why "the lack of definition" problematic for the Roma:
"They do not have a homeland" -> thus the Roma doesn't fit the first non-standard criterion for being a 'national minority' (Line 3).
"Some Roma are not even citizens of any country" -> thus the Roma doesn't fit the second criterion either (Line 6).

Thus, the Roma, in this situation, would most likely not count as a minority.
And I thought that this is why the lack of definition is problematic for the Roma (because the lack of standard def is what leaves the space open for the 'vague' criteria to be used, according to which the Roma is not a minority.)

I thought 'the reason for the problem is that the Roma is not recognized as a minority' line of thought is necessary for the answer choice (B) in question 21 to be correct (which says: it is a problem to not count as a minority).

But because this is not explicitly stated in the passage, I am not sure whether I can think in this way.
Please let me know whether this line of thought is correct.

Best,
Harry

[Adam Tyson]

That's a great analysis, Harry, and you certainly can draw that inference, even though the author never explicitly stated "it is a problem for the Roma to not fit those definitions of national minorities." Well done!