Logical Reasoning

PT154 · S1 · Q20 That Shakespeare’s The Winter’s Tale

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning 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

Start practicing free

That Shakespeare’s The Winter’s Tale (1610–1611) is modeled after Euripides’ Alcestis (fifth century B.C.) seems undeniable.

Conclusion

Shakespeare probably came to know E's play Alcestis via a Latin translation.

Evidence

Shakespeare knew little to no Greek, so it's unlikely he read the original Greek version of Alcestis.

Evaluate

This is the Curious Fact / Explanation template that shows up so much on Strengthen and Weaken.

Curious Fact: How was Shakespeare exposed to Alcestis? Author's Story: He read a Latin translation

To strengthen a causal argument, we want to 1. Help Author's Explanation or 2. Rule Out Alternate Explanation

Goal

Get rid of four answers that Strengthen (the correct answer may weaken or may just be neutral).

They should either help us believe that Shakespeare learned Alcestis via a Latin translation, or rule out a different way that Shakespeare might have learned Alcestis.

20.

Which one of the following, if true, least strengthens the argument?

  1. Correct

    Latin phrases that were widely

    Why this is right

    This just has no impact, since it's not about knowing how to speak Latin or having access to a Latin translation of the play. There are French phrases widely used in America during our time that appear in lots of plays / books / movies (ensemble, ennui, je ne sais quoi, menage a trois, etc.), but that doesn't mean that I speak French or could read a French translation of an ancient Greek play.

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

    39% picked this

  2. The only English language version

    Rules Out Alternate Explanation

    This makes it highly unlikely that Shakespeare (an English writer) learned the English translation of the Alcestis. Ruling out that possibility makes us more likely to entertain the author's idea that Shakespeare used a different (possibly Latin) translation.

    46% picked this

  3. Paul Buchanan’s 1539 Latin translation

    Helps Author's Explanation

    This establishes a nice baseline of plausibility to the author's story: in order for Shakespeare to learn Alcestis from the Latin translation, he'd need access to it. This answer makes it clear that Shakespeare could have had access to a Latin translation that closely matched the original, since it was widely available during the 1600s.

    6% picked this

  4. Shakespeare’s father’s community standing makes

    Helps Author's Explanation

    This helps add plausibility to the author's story by establishing that Shakespeare would have been able to read a Latin translation. The author ruled out the idea of Shakespeare using a Greek translation, because Shakes didn't know Greek. In concluding that Shakes probably used a Latin translation, the author is assuming a difference: that Shakespeare did know Latin. This answer validates that assumption.

    7% picked this

  5. There is strong evidence to

    Helps Author's Explanation

    This bolsters the plausibility of the author's story by making it seem like using a Latin translation is very compatible with Shakespeare's writing career, since there are other examples of him using Latin translations.

    2% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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