Reading Comprehension

PT145 · S3 · P4 · Q27 African American Transnationalism

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

In contrast to the mainstream of U.S. historiography during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, African American historians of the period, such as George Washington Williams and W. E. B. DuBois, adopted a transnational perspective.

Central Topic / Purpose

African American historians / Highlight Noteworthy in 1870 - 1930 or Answer a Question

Main Point

Instead of the national perspective that mainstream historians had, Black historians were distinctive for having a transnational perspective. Why? For several reasons ... (felt estranged from U.S. citizenship and were instead writing the history for a nation of black people who originated from Africa but were now dispersed across the globe in many nations).

Passage Map

P1 - establishes the contrast between mainstream US historians (nationalist perspective) and black U.S. historians (transnational perspective).

P2 - discusses the fuzzy citizenship status of Black Americans and how that created a large emigrationist sentiment.

P3 - discusses the imperialist nationalism of mainstream US historians and how that made Black historians leery.

P4 - provides the author's takeaways, that the Black historians were doing their own sort of nationalism, but rather than writing the history of a nation, they were writing the history of a "nation of people", black people who came from a glorious African past and now were scattered across the globe.

Other Commentary

The first sentence presents as a possible thesis for two reasons: - Many passages that Clarify a Misconception or Highlight Something Noteworthy begin with language like - The second sentence immediately starts to unpack the first.

So we would encode, presumptively, that the Main Point is .

The second paragraph begins "First, ...", which alerts us to the fact that we are getting the first of the several reasons foreshadowed in the second sentence of the passage. Seeing again that we are fleshing out reasons for the first sentence of the passage would solidify our suspicion that the first sentence was the thesis.

Curiously, the author never uses a "Second, furthermore, moreover" to advance her list of several reasons. Instead, the 2nd and 3rd paragraph combine to give us a sense of the reasons why Black historians of the time had a transnational perspective.

The last paragraph moves on from listing reasons and begins the author's evaluation, signified by the classic Author's Pivot (but / yet / however / recently) that so frequently introduces the Author's voice or main point.

The word 'diaspora' was not one I knew when first reading this, but from context and outside knowledge, it's basically referring to the people and culture of "Post-African" black people around the world. They don't have a sovereign territory or official language, but these black historians felt as though this group of people still constitutes a "nationality" in some sense.

Basically, even if force and circumstance had inserted these people into different nations around the world, the common homeland of their ancestry made them a community (a diasporic community seems to be a physically discontinuous community ... a local high school basketball team's fans form a 'traditional' community, whereas LA Lakers' fans form a 'diasporic' community, because Lakers fans are spread out around the world).

27.

As it is presented in the passage, the approach to history taken by mainstream U.S. historians of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is most similar to the approach exemplified in which one of the following?

  1. An elected official writes a

    Weak Match

    "What worked in the past should work again in the future" doesn't seem to match any part of the 3rd paragraph. The mainstream historians are certainly discussing America's past, but there's no language about using the past as lessons about what to do in the future.

    14% picked this

  2. Correct

    A biographer of a famous

    Why this is right

    Tough answer. A precocious writer "showed unusual talent at an early stage". Innate talent means "they were born with it". It's pretty solid to match up "innate talent" with parts of the 3rd paragraph like "the genealogy of a nation / its temperament / its destiny". The "precocious early achievements" is harder to match up, but "the expanding spheres of influence of the US prompted the creation of thoughts about America's genealogy / temperament / destiny". Since these historians are writing in the late 1800s about an America that was only born 100 years prior and by the late 1800s had managed to expand from the eastern seaboard across more and more of the continent, it's pretty fair to call the westward expansion of America some of its early achievements. It's a lot of outside knowledge to make the context of that sentence work, but this is our best available answer. It reads better if you ask yourself, "Were these mainstream historians arguing that because America had so many early achievements, there must be something special / talented encoded in America's DNA?" Yeah, that sounds like them.

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

    64% picked this

  3. A doctor maintains that because

    Bad Match

    Were these historians saying that "because America was developed specifically to cure on problem, it is the best cure for that problem". Not really.

    11% picked this

  4. A newspaper runs a series

    Bad Match

    Were these mainstream historians writing things about America in order to inform the public about some potentially harmful things America does? Quite the opposite.

    5% picked this

  5. A scientist gets the same

    Bad Match

    In many ways this feels too similar to (A)'s sense of "If it was true in the past, it will be true again" for either of these answers to be correct. Were the mainstream historians "getting the same result from an experiment on America"? It's really hard to match up the idea of a scientist getting the same result from an experiment several times with the idea of historians writing puff pieces about how bad-ass America is. With an experiment, you don't know what result you'll get until you perform the experiment. With the mainstream historians, it sounds much more like they knew what sort of pro-America result they were trying to get from their writings.

    6% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free