Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Answer choices

1. A

   Wrong Role: contrasting definitions2% picked this

   to contrast the different definitions of human rights in the

   We don't know how either document defines "human rights", from this 1st paragraph, so contrasting the two different definitions can't be the author's purpose.

   2%
2. B

   Correct77% picked this

   to compare the strength of the human rights language in the

   Why this is right

   Comparing "the strength of language" can be matched up with a lot of the text from the 1st paragraph. We anticipated something like, "the author tells us about the UN Charter to explain that there had been a previous attempt to safeguard human rights, but it didn't have enough teeth behind it, so that's what motivated the creation of the UDHR". The UDHR "expressly affirms universal respect for human rights", while the UN Charter "encourages respect for human rights". UN members weren't happy with the Charter because they said "the language was not strong enough / it didn't go far enough to guarantee rights". They "lobbied vigorously to strengthen the human rights provisions" and proposed that member states be required / obligated to act on human rights issues. It still seems weird to say that the author's purpose in quoting the Charter and quoting the Proposal was to compare strength of language in each, but the author is telling the backstory that led up to the UDHR, and the crux of that backstory is "Are we being forceful enough in guaranteeing human rights"? There's a progression from the Charter's weak-sauce "we encourage respect" to the Proposal's obligatory "member states are required to co-operate with the promotion of human rights" to the eventual language of the UDHR.

   Skill tested: Local Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   77%
3. C

   Out of Scope: common vocabulary1% picked this

   to identify a bureaucratic vocabulary that is common to the

   The only common vocabulary we might find here is "human rights", but the author's main point in the 1st paragraph isn't saying something like, "Check it out -- both of these documents use this same bureaucratic term, human rights." It doesn't even really seem fair to call that "bureaucratic vocabulary", which implies something more like technical jargon specific to a certain bureaucracy.

   1%
4. D

   Too Strong: most important12% picked this

   to highlight what the author believes to be the most important point

   There's no text to support that the author thinks that either quoted excerpt is the most important point in each document. The author's overall goal isn't to spotlight a certain line she likes. She's trying to tell the story of what led up to the UDHD, and the idea is that the UN Charter took a swing at safeguarding human rights and people weren't happy with how weak it was.

   12%
5. E

   Out of Scope: prose styles8% picked this

   to call attention to a significant difference in the prose styles of

   The author is never discussing the different styles of prose. It's hard to even call something like a charter or a proposal a work of prose ("prose" normally means a literary work that isn't poetic in nature, like an essay or story or novel). Comparing prose styles would be like talking about how one write likes to use very long sentences with lots of descriptive clauses and flowery vocabulary, while another author keeps it simple and casual.

   8%