GMAT Verbal 33: Inference in Reading Comprehension

O'qish Reading Comprehension 4-dars, jami 7

Shu mavzudagi darslar · 4/7

GMAT Verbal 30: How Reading Comprehension Works — Passages, Question Sets and a Reading Map
GMAT Verbal 31: Main Idea and Primary Purpose
GMAT Verbal 32: Detail Questions — Answering From the Line
GMAT Verbal 33: Inference in Reading Comprehension
5 GMAT Verbal 34: Function and Structure — Why the Author Says It
6 GMAT Verbal 35: Application, Tone and the Author's Attitude
7 GMAT Verbal 36: Reading Comprehension — Mixed Practice

Bir qadam narida

RCʼdagi inference savoli — It can be inferred…, The passage suggests…, The author implies… — matnda yozilmagan narsani soʻraydi. Lekin bu «taxmin qiling» degani emas. Toʻgʻri javob matndan bir qadam narida turadi: ikki faktni birlashtirsangiz yoki gapni boshqa tomondan oʻqisangiz, u albatta chiqadi.

22-darsdagi CR inference qoidasi shu yerda ham ishlaydi: eng ehtiyotkor, eng tor variant koʻpincha gʻolib.

⏱ Inference — ~1–1.5 daqiqa

Usul

1. Savol qaysi mavzu haqida? Xarita bilan kerakli abzasni toping.

2. Oʻsha joyni qayta oʻqing va ikki faktni birlashtiring: «A boʻldi; B boʻldi → demak…»

3. Har bir variantga: «Matn rost boʻlsa, bu yolgʻon boʻlishi mumkinmi?» Mumkin boʻlsa — chiqarib tashlang.

4. Ikki-uch qadamli «mantiqiy» hikoya qurishga majbur qilgan variant — tuzoq.

1-matn: Buyuk sasish (Great Stink)

In the hot summer of 1858, the smell rising from the River Thames became so foul that newspapers called it the Great Stink. For decades London's sewers and drains had emptied straight into the river, which also supplied much of the city's drinking water. Most doctors at the time believed that diseases such as cholera were spread by bad air, or miasma, so the stench seemed not merely unpleasant but dangerous. Within weeks, Parliament, whose new building stood beside the river, approved a plan by the engineer Joseph Bazalgette for a vast system of intercepting sewers that would carry the city's waste far downstream, east of London.

The miasma theory was wrong. Four years earlier, the physician John Snow had traced an outbreak of cholera in Soho to a single contaminated water pump on Broad Street, and he argued that the disease spread through water, not air. His view won few converts at first. Yet Bazalgette's sewers, built to remove a smell, also removed the contamination that actually spread the disease.

The results were striking. When cholera returned to London in 1866, the deaths were concentrated in the East End, in an area whose water was drawn from a polluted stretch of river not yet protected by the completed system. After that outbreak, cholera never again struck London on a large scale. A project justified by a false theory had delivered exactly what the true theory would have recommended.

⏱ Matn: ~3 daqiqa

Ishlangan namuna

Savol: 1866-yilgi epidemiya haqida nima xulosa qilish mumkin? Fakt 1: oʻlimlar ifloslangan suv olingan, tizim hali himoya qilmagan hududda toʻplangan. Fakt 2 (2-abzas): Snow kasallik suv orqali tarqaladi degan. Birlashtiramiz: 1866-yil epidemiyasi Snowning nazariyasiga mos keladi. Bu bir qadam. «1866-yilda 1854-yildagidan koʻp odam oʻldi» esa — matnda hech qayerda yoʻq, demak xulosa ham emas.

💡 Maslahat: Inference variantida yangi raqam, yangi ism yoki yangi taqqoslash paydo boʻlsa — ehtiyot boʻling: matn uni bermagan boʻlsa, javob ham emas.

It can be inferred from the passage above that Parliament approved Bazalgette's plan quickly at least in part because

Bazalgette's plan was cheaper than any alternative the river no longer supplied drinking water to the city John Snow had persuaded its members that cholera spread through water an outbreak of cholera had begun among its members the smell from the river was thought to be a danger to health and not merely a nuisance

The passage above suggests that, at the time Bazalgette's plan was approved, most doctors

believed that cholera had disappeared from London did not accept Snow's explanation of how cholera spread opposed Bazalgette's plan for intercepting sewers had studied the outbreak on Broad Street themselves worked for the companies that supplied London's water

Which of the following can be inferred about the cholera outbreak of 1866, as it is described in the passage above?

It began in the same part of Soho as the outbreak of 1854. It killed more people than the outbreak of 1854. Its pattern was consistent with Snow's view of how cholera spreads. It persuaded most doctors that the miasma theory was correct. It showed that Bazalgette's sewers had failed.

2-matn: lola isitmasi

The Dutch tulip mania of the 1630s is one of the most famous stories in economics. In the version popularised by the Scottish writer Charles Mackay in 1841, prices for rare tulip bulbs rose to absurd heights — a single bulb was said to be worth a house — before collapsing in February 1637 and ruining thousands of ordinary people across the Dutch Republic. The episode has been cited ever since as the first great speculative bubble and as a warning about the madness of crowds.

Historians who have gone back to the archives tell a different story. The prices themselves were real: some rare bulbs did change hands for very large sums. But in her 2007 study, the historian Anne Goldgar found little evidence of widespread ruin. The trade was concentrated among a fairly small group of merchants and skilled craftsmen, many contracts made in the final weeks were never honoured, and she could identify almost no one who went bankrupt because of tulips. Much of the moralising tone of the popular account, she argues, came from pamphlets published after the crash, which were themselves a form of entertainment and religious instruction.

None of this means that nothing happened in 1637. Prices did collapse, and people did lose money and trust. But the gap between the evidence and the legend is a reminder that a story told often enough can become more vivid than the events it describes.

⏱ Matn: ~3 daqiqa

It can be inferred from the passage above that Mackay's account of the tulip mania

drew partly on material that, according to Goldgar, was written to entertain and instruct was written in the Dutch Republic shortly after 1637 denied that tulip prices had ever been high was based on a careful study of Dutch bankruptcy records was the first written description of the tulip trade

Which of the following can be inferred from the passage above?

Most citizens of the Dutch Republic traded in tulips during the 1630s. Some people who agreed to buy tulip bulbs early in 1637 never paid for them. Tulip mania caused more bankruptcies than any other event of the 1630s. Goldgar found that tulip prices never rose above ordinary levels. No one lost any money when tulip prices collapsed.

Tuzoqlar

⚠️ Tuzoq: Ikki qadam — «hukumat qoʻrqdi → demak shifokorlar…» kabi uzun zanjir. Yangi maʼlumot — matnda yoʻq raqam yoki taqqoslash. Juda kuchli — «no one lost money», «most citizens». Teskari — matndagi faktning qarshisi.

📌 Eslatma: Ikkala matn ham bir xil saboq beradi: mashhur hikoya va dalil har doim ham mos kelmaydi. RC savollari aynan shu farqni koʻrishni tekshiradi — kim nima deydi (Mackay, Goldgar, muallif) va qaysi dalil bilan.