The clause after line 17 says " the press saw that they could profit from the studio's promotion of new films." Cross-fertilization is used to imply that this arrangement resulted in positive outcomes for both. The film industry supplies gossip and news headlines and the press provided publicity for movies - therefore it was a mutually beneficial arrangement.
The agents are representatives in the grand scheme of the film industry. Similarly to how reporters are writing articles for the press, the agents are acting as brokers to arrange deals for the film industry.
I see two main issues with Answer Choice E:
1. To say that the phrase refers to the "interactions" is too simple and does not capture the mutually beneficial relationship between the two industries.
2. AC E uses the word "press" as opposed to reporters, columnists, etc. The agents were liaising with columnists, so this phrasing is not precise and not wholly accurate to the passage.
I chose C at first, but I see now A is better.
I think if the politician said "the true cause" instead of "main cause" then C would have been a stronger option.
I picked E but I realize now that I got baited by the suff/necessary trap.
If we were to remove "But clearly this conclusion is false" from the stimulus, would that be enough to turn this into a cogent argument? #help
my first time seeing the phrase "did not obtain"... got thrown by that
for these types of questions, would it be possible to see an answer choice that says /C -> /A and /B? #help
From PT B - Section 1 - Question 06.
None except the most virtuous deserve praise
I know it's part of the 4th group, where you negate the necessary. But I've only seen examples like "none of the Americans are political" and there's no video guide for this one.
How does the "except" affect the translation?
I'm unsure if this is supposed to be...
DP -> MV
MV -> DP
Should we generally be doing unlimited time for these initial drill exercises? I tried target time and ran out of time by question 3 #help
#help for #13
The only oral myths that have survived are the ones that were eventually written down.
Shouldn't this be
WRITTEN -> SURVIVE ? Can someone clarify this?
The example from few lessons earlier has a different argument structure.
This is the argument given by the argument in this page:
All violinists at the New York Philharmonic know how to play the violin. Most people who know how to play the violin are not exceptionally good at playing the violin. Therefore, some violinists at the New York Philharmonic are not exceptionally good at playing the violin.
A → B
B —m→ C
_
A ←s→ C
But this is wrong, for the reasons stated in the lesson.
The argument would have to be like so in order to yield a valid "some" statement.
All violinists at the New York Philharmonic know how to play the violin. Most Violinists at the New York Philharmonic are not exceptionally good at playing the violin. Therefore, some people who know how to play the violin are not exceptionally good at playing the violin.
A → B
A —m→ C
_
B ←s→ C
booooooooooo