Lesson 8 of 24 · Verbal comprehension
Cohesion and inference
Use connective words, pronoun references and a passage’s structure to identify the conclusion its evidence supports.
About 18 minutes
In this lesson
- Identify what a connective asks the reader to do.
- Trace a reference to its supporting phrase.
- Choose an inference that survives a counterexample.
The idea
Read for the movement of the argument
Read a short passage through once before deciding which individual phrase matters most. Ask what happens between the beginning and the end. A writer might introduce a proposal, describe a trial and qualify the conclusion drawn from it. In that structure the proposal belongs to its proposer, the figures describe the trial and the qualification tells you how far the writer is willing to go. Confusing those roles can make a genuine quotation from the passage into a poor answer about the writer’s view.
Connectives (connettivi) are instructions about relationships. “Because” introduces a reason. “Therefore” introduces something presented as following from a reason. “Although” gives space to a fact that seems to pull against the point the writer goes on to make. Read the clauses on either side aloud in ordinary words. A sentence beginning “Although fewer repairs were recorded” might end with a warning that fewer machines were inspected. The fall in recorded repairs remains a fact. The warning changes what a reader can infer about the condition of the machines.
Find what a reference picks up
Words such as “they”, “this” and “the latter” save the writer from repeating a whole phrase. To resolve a reference, replace it with a candidate and read the sentence again. Check agreement in number and check what kind of thing the verb requires. A policy can be adopted, a committee can vote and a measurement can fall. The nearest noun might fail one of these tests. A reference such as “this difference” often points to a comparison spanning a whole sentence rather than to a single noun.
Suppose a passage says that late deliveries fell in the morning but rose in the evening. “This contrast prompted a review” picks up the opposing changes. Replacing “this contrast” with “the evening” loses the comparison. If two candidates remain grammatically possible, use the surrounding argument to decide whether one makes better sense. When the passage leaves a reference genuinely unresolved, be cautious about any option whose conclusion requires choosing a particular candidate.
Separate an inference from a plausible addition
An inference (inferenza) draws on statements the writer has supplied. One sentence might tell you that all items on display were lent by residents. Another tells you that a particular model boat was on display. Together they establish the origin of that boat even though neither sentence names its lender. To test the conclusion, try making it false while keeping the two sentences true. A displayed boat from a museum would break the first sentence. The proposed counterexample fails, and that shows how the conclusion follows.
By contrast, a conclusion that the boat was built by a resident adds an extra link between lending and making. A resident could have bought it. Look for that same gap in arguments based on numbers. A larger total can result from more participants, more activity per participant or both. An observation about the total alone rarely settles which explanation is right. Preserve the population, period and measurement used in the passage before moving to an explanation.
Compare the strength of competing answers
Put two plausible options side by side and underline the word on which they differ. “May” leaves alternatives open. “Must” rules them out. “So far” limits a claim in time. “In every location” expands it across space. For each bold claim, ask which exact sentence would rule out an exception. You do not need outside knowledge to construct a possible exception. Give the passage a world in which its claims hold and the option fails. When explaining your choice, name the link that supplies the inference. Quoting one striking phrase without explaining its role leaves the reasoning unfinished.
Worked examples
Example 1: What prompted the review?
“The library opened an hour earlier. Morning visits rose, but the daily total stayed level. This discrepancy led staff to examine visits later in the day.” What does the discrepancy refer to?
Identify the two measurements contrasted by “but”.
Substitute the comparison for “this discrepancy” and read the final sentence.
Answer
It refers to the rise in morning visits alongside an unchanged daily total.
Example 2: An unobserved interval
“The counter was read at noon and at dusk. Its reading was higher at dusk. It records only entries and never resets during the day.” What can be inferred?
A higher cumulative reading requires at least one additional entry.
Neither reading identifies the time of an individual entry within the interval.
Answer
At least one entry occurred between readings. A steady rate throughout the afternoon is unproved.
Common traps
Attributing a quoted belief to the author
Locate who says a claim and read the writer’s response before assigning a view.
Turning sequence into cause
An event can follow another for many reasons. Look for evidence connecting the events before inferring cause.
Check yourself
Answer each question before you open its answer.
Question 1: An apparent improvement
Verbal comprehension
“A depot received fewer complaints in June than in May. However, June also had fewer deliveries, and the number of complaints per delivery was unchanged.” Why introduce the delivery count?
- A.To show delivery times improved.
- B.To explain why fewer complaints need not indicate a lower complaint rate.
- C.To dispute that complaint totals fell.
- D.To show complaints caused a fall in deliveries.
- E.To claim May was typical.
Show the answer
Answer: B. To explain why fewer complaints need not indicate a lower complaint rate.
Working
The second sentence supplies the denominator. A smaller volume allows fewer complaints at the same rate.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. The passage gives no delivery times.
- C. The passage accepts the fall in totals.
- D. No causal direction of this kind is given.
- E. There is no comparison with other months.
What carries over
Read a qualification as a limit on what earlier evidence establishes.
Question 2: A necessary source
Verbal comprehension
“Every item in the cabinet was recovered from the old quay. The cabinet contains a brass key. Objects from the quay were catalogued before display.” Which conclusion follows?
- A.Every key from the quay is brass.
- B.The key opened a door at the quay.
- C.The key was made at the quay.
- D.The brass key was recovered from the old quay.
- E.Everything recovered from the quay is in the cabinet.
Show the answer
Answer: D. The brass key was recovered from the old quay.
Working
Apply the rule about every cabinet item to the particular key inside. Its recovery location follows directly.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. One example does not describe every key.
- B. Recovery location does not establish use.
- C. A place of recovery need not be the place of manufacture.
- E. This reverses the direction of the first sentence.
What carries over
Combine a membership fact with a rule about every member.
Question 3: The writer’s position
Verbal comprehension
“The designer calls the shorter queue proof that the new desk works faster. Yet the building admitted fewer visitors during the trial. Timing individual transactions would distinguish the explanations.” What is the writer’s position?
- A.The desk definitely works more slowly.
- B.Fewer visitors always cause shorter queues.
- C.The queue alone cannot establish faster service.
- D.The new desk should be removed.
- E.Individual transactions were already timed.
Show the answer
Answer: C. The queue alone cannot establish faster service.
Working
The writer accepts the observation and offers an alternative explanation. The proposed measurement would address the unresolved question.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. The writer offers no evidence of slower transactions.
- B. The writer does not make a universal claim.
- D. No decision to remove equipment is proposed.
- E. Timing is proposed as a further measurement.
What carries over
Distinguish a criticism of evidence from rejection of the hypothesis.
Key points
Identify whose view each sentence expresses.
Replace a pronoun or reference phrase with its proposed antecedent.
Ask whether the passage permits an exception to the proposed inference.
All questions here are original and written for UniExamer; none comes from the test maker.
Written by the UniExamer team with AI assistance. Every worked example and check question was re-solved by an independent checker before publication. No subject expert has reviewed this lesson yet. If you find a mistake, write to support@uniexamer.com.