Logical Reasoning: What’s with the adverb?!
How are you at identifying parts of speech? If you’re looking for a logical reasoning tip, and you know your parts of speech, I’ve got one for you. And it’s all about adverbs.
Quick grammar review: Adverbs are similar to adjectives, except that adjectives modify nouns, and adverbs modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs. For instance (adverb in CAPS):
He drove QUICKLY.
Porsches are USUALLY fast.
etc.
Adverbs are used to provide nuance. For instance, in a novel, you might be told that someone said something “pointedly,” or said something “loudly,” which might express anger, for instance. But they’re not critical to telling you exactly what happened. Hemingway said that from Tolstoy, he learned to “distrust” adverbs. The “meat” of the sentence consists of nouns & verbs.
This is especially important in the logical reasoning section of the LSAT. Logic and argument are about nouns & verbs. Who did what? Nuances like adjectives are out of place. And that’s important, because they should stand out like a red thumb. Here’s an example…look at these two arguments:
A1: All cats have four legs.
A2: Spot is a cat.
A3: Therefore, Spot has four legs.
Perfectly valid syllogism. If the premises (A1 & A2) are true, the conclusion (A3) MUST be true. You can “Venn diagram” this (Google search if you don’t know Venn Diagrams). The little circle, cats, is completely enclosed by the big circle, things with 4 legs. Now look at this:
B1. Mammals usually cannot fly.
B2. Spot is a mammal.
B3. Therefore, Spot cannot fly.
INvalid. What’s the difference? “usually.” The adverb acts as a qualifier. In this case, it tells you that a small portion of mammals are NOT in the “things that cann0t fly” category. The argument fails, because even though most mammals can’t fly, Spot MIGHT be a bat.
This focus on the adverb comes up in all sorts of Logical Reasoning question types, and in many different ways. In argument B, above, it might be “Find the Flaw” (the speaker over generalizes that something that is usually true must be true in a particular case). Or in an “Unspoken Assumption” question (the speaker assumes that Spot is not one of the group of mammals that can fly). Or in a “strengthen the argument” question (Which of the following would strengthen the author’s argument? ‘Spot is not a bat’).
Adverbs don’t need to be in arguments. So when they ARE in your LSAT argument, very, very often it’s because they’re relevant to the right answer. An easy way to identify most adjectives is that many end in “LY.” Not all of them, but a lot of them. Train yourself to spot them. Somehow, some way, they’re relevant to the right answer. Maybe the right answer is the only one that addresses something the adverb brings up. Maybe the “qualifying” character of the adverb eliminates a wrong answer, when you’ve got it down to two choices. The bottom line, though, is that they serve a purpose, and that purpose usually isn’t necessary to the speaker’s argument — it’s examsmanship. It’s necessary to creating right or wrong answer choices.
Leave a Comment