In 1988 services moved ahead of manufacturing as the main product of the United States economy. But what is meant...
GMAT Reading Comprehension : (RC) Questions
Source: Official Guide
...
...
Post a Query
In 1988 services moved ahead of manufacturing as the main product of the United States economy. But what is meant by "services"? Some economists define a service as something that is produced and consumed simultaneously, for example, a haircut. The broader, classical definition is that a service is an intangible something that cannot be touched or stored. Yet electric utilities can store energy, and computer programmers save information electronically. Thus, the classical definition is hard to sustain.
The United States government's definition is more practical: services are the residual category that includes everything that is not agriculture or industry. Under this definition, services includes activities as diverse as engineering and driving a bus. However, besides lacking a strong conceptual framework, this definition fails to recognize the distinction between service industries and service occupations. It categorizes workers based on their company's final product rather than on the actual work the employees perform. Thus, the many service workers employed by manufacturers bookkeepers or janitors, for example-would fall under the industrial rather than the services category. Such ambiguities reveal the arbitrariness of this definition and suggest that, although practical for government purposes, it does not accurately reflect the composition of the current United States economy.
Ques. 1/5
The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
Solution
1. Passage Analysis:
Progressive Passage Analysis
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| In 1988 services moved ahead of manufacturing as the main product of the United States economy. | What it says: By 1988, services became more important than manufacturing in the US economy. What it does: Sets up the topic and establishes a historical fact that motivates the discussion. Source/Type: Factual statement Connection to Previous Sentences: This is the opening - establishes our main topic (services in the economy) Visualization: Imagine the US economy as a pie chart where in 1988, services became larger than the manufacturing slice for the first time. Reading Strategy Insight: This sentence tells us the passage will be about defining "services" - the question that naturally follows is "what exactly are services?" |
| But what is meant by "services"? | What it says: The author is asking: how do we define "services"? What it does: Poses the central question that the rest of the passage will address Source/Type: Author's guiding question Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly follows from sentence 1 - if services are now dominant, we need to understand what they are. Visualization: Think of this as the author saying "Wait, before we celebrate services taking over, let's make sure we know what we're talking about." Reading Strategy Insight: This question structure signals that multiple definitions will follow - the passage will be organized around different ways to define services. |
| Some economists define a service as something that is produced and consumed simultaneously, for example, a haircut. | What it says: One group of economists says services happen in real-time - like getting a haircut. What it does: Provides the first definition attempt with a concrete example Source/Type: Economists' definition Connection to Previous Sentences: This answers the question posed in sentence 2 - here's one way economists define services. Visualization: Services = things that happen immediately when you get them (haircut, restaurant meal, live concert) Reading Strategy Insight: The haircut example makes this abstract economic concept concrete and understandable. |
| The broader, classical definition is that a service is an intangible something that cannot be touched or stored. | What it says: A more traditional definition says services are things you can't physically touch or save for later. What it does: Introduces a second, different definition of services Source/Type: Classical economic definition Connection to Previous Sentences: This provides an alternative to the "simultaneous production/consumption" definition from sentence 3. Visualization: Services = invisible products (consulting advice, education, entertainment) vs. Physical products (cars, computers, books) What We Know So Far: Services dominate the economy, but economists disagree on definition What We Don't Know Yet: Which definition is better, and what definition does the government use |
| Yet electric utilities can store energy, and computer programmers save information electronically. | What it says: But electric companies can store electricity, and programmers can save data - both are considered services but can be stored. What it does: Provides counter-examples that challenge the classical definition Source/Type: Author's analysis/critique Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly contradicts the "cannot be stored" part of the classical definition from sentence 4. Visualization: Classical definition says services can't be stored, but: Electric utility stores power in batteries/grid + Programming stores code on computers = Contradiction! Reading Strategy Insight: The author is systematically showing problems with each definition - this is critique, not just description. |
| Thus, the classical definition is hard to sustain. | What it says: Therefore, the traditional definition doesn't work well. What it does: Restates the conclusion from the previous sentence in simpler terms Source/Type: Author's conclusion Connection to Previous Sentences: This is NOT new information! The author is helping us by clearly stating what the counter-examples in sentence 5 proved. Visualization: Classical definition = Failed attempt #1 Reading Strategy Insight: Feel relieved here - this is simplification, not new complexity. The author is giving us a clear takeaway. |
| The United States government's definition is more practical: services are the residual category that includes everything that is not agriculture or industry. | What it says: The US government uses a simpler approach: services = everything except farming and manufacturing. What it does: Introduces a third definition and labels it as more practical Source/Type: Government definition Connection to Previous Sentences: After showing two economist definitions have problems, now we get the government's approach. Visualization: US Economy = 3 buckets: [Agriculture] + [Industry/Manufacturing] + [Everything Else = Services] Reading Strategy Insight: The word "practical" suggests this definition works better in real-world application, even if it's not theoretically perfect. |
| Under this definition, services includes activities as diverse as engineering and driving a bus. | What it says: Using the government definition, services includes very different jobs like engineering and bus driving. What it does: Provides concrete examples to illustrate how broad the government definition is Source/Type: Author's examples Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on sentence 7 by showing what the "everything else" category actually looks like in practice. Visualization: Services bucket contains: [High-skill: engineering, consulting] + [Physical: bus driving, cleaning] + [Many others] Reading Strategy Insight: The diversity of examples (engineering vs. bus driving) hints that this definition might be too broad to be useful. |
| However, besides lacking a strong conceptual framework, this definition fails to recognize the distinction between service industries and service occupations. | What it says: But the government definition has problems: it's not based on a clear theory, and it confuses service companies with service jobs. What it does: Introduces criticisms of the government definition Source/Type: Author's critique Connection to Previous Sentences: After presenting the government definition as "practical," now the author shows its flaws. Visualization: Service Industry (what the company makes) vs. Service Occupation (what the worker does) - these are different categories that get mixed up Reading Strategy Insight: The pattern continues - the author presents each definition, then shows its problems. |
| It categorizes workers based on their company's final product rather than on the actual work the employees perform. | What it says: The government definition classifies workers by what their company sells, not by what the workers actually do. What it does: Restates and clarifies the "service industries vs. service occupations" problem from the previous sentence Source/Type: Author's explanation Connection to Previous Sentences: This explains exactly what was meant by the "distinction between service industries and service occupations" in sentence 9. Visualization: Worker doing bookkeeping → Government asks: "What does your company make?" not "What do you do?" → Classification based on company product, not job function Reading Strategy Insight: This is clarification, not new complexity - the author is helping us understand the previous critique. |
| Thus, the many service workers employed by manufacturers bookkeepers or janitors, for example-would fall under the industrial rather than the services category. | What it says: So bookkeepers and janitors who work for manufacturing companies get counted as "industrial" workers, even though they do service work. What it does: Provides specific examples to illustrate the classification problem Source/Type: Author's examples Connection to Previous Sentences: This gives concrete examples of the abstract problem described in sentences 9-10. Visualization: Ford Motor Company employees: [Assembly worker = Industrial] + [Company bookkeeper = Called "Industrial" but does service work] + [Company janitor = Called "Industrial" but does service work] Reading Strategy Insight: The examples make the abstract critique concrete and understandable - this helps rather than complicates. |
| Such ambiguities reveal the arbitrariness of this definition and suggest that, although practical for government purposes, it does not accurately reflect the composition of the current United States economy. | What it says: These confusing examples show that the government definition is somewhat random and, while useful for government work, doesn't really capture what the US economy looks like. What it does: Provides the final conclusion that summarizes all the criticisms of the government definition Source/Type: Author's final judgment Connection to Previous Sentences: This is NOT new information! This summarizes everything we've learned: the government definition seemed practical (sentence 7) but has serious flaws (sentences 9-11). Visualization: Government definition = Useful for bureaucracy but Poor reflection of economic reality Reading Strategy Insight: This is the passage's conclusion - feel confident that you understand the main point. All three definitions have been shown to have problems. What We Know Now: Three definitions of services all have significant flaws, making it hard to understand what "services dominating the economy" really means. |
2. Passage Summary:
Author's Purpose:
To show why defining "services" in the economy is problematic by examining and critiquing three different definitions used by economists and the government.
Summary of Passage Structure:
The author builds their argument by systematically examining each definition and showing its flaws:
- First, the author establishes that services now dominate the US economy and asks what "services" actually means
- Next, the author presents the first definition (services are produced and consumed simultaneously) and the classical definition (services are intangible and cannot be stored), then shows the classical definition fails with counter-examples
- Then, the author introduces the government's definition (services are everything except agriculture and industry) and explains how it seems more practical but has serious problems with how it classifies workers
- Finally, the author concludes that the government definition is arbitrary and doesn't accurately reflect the real economy
Main Point:
All current definitions of "services" have significant flaws, making it unclear what it really means when we say services dominate the American economy.
3. Question Analysis:
The question asks us to identify the author's primary concern in the passage. This is asking for the main purpose or central focus of the entire passage - what the author is fundamentally trying to accomplish.
Connecting to Our Passage Analysis:
From our passage analysis, we can see clear patterns in how the author structures the argument:
- The author begins by establishing that services dominate the US economy, then immediately asks "But what is meant by 'services'?"
- The author systematically examines three different definitions:
- Economists' definition (simultaneous production/consumption)
- Classical definition (intangible, cannot be stored)
- Government definition (everything except agriculture and industry)
- For each definition, the author shows specific problems and limitations
- The passage concludes that all current definitions have significant flaws
The passage analysis reveals this is fundamentally about exploring what "services" means, not about advocating for one particular definition or comparing advantages.
Prethinking:
Based on the passage structure, the author's primary concern is exploring different ways to define "services" and showing the problems with each approach. The author isn't trying to argue for a specific definition (they show problems with all of them) or discuss research data, but rather to examine the concept itself and reveal how difficult it is to define accurately. This points toward an answer focused on exploring or examining definitions of a concept.
Answer Choices Explained
A
discussing research data underlying several definitions
Why It's Wrong:
- The passage doesn't discuss research data or underlying research methodology
- The author presents definitions and critiques them with logical examples, not research findings
- No mention of studies, surveys, or empirical data collection
Common Student Mistakes:
- Does mentioning "economists" and "government" mean the author is discussing research?
→ No, these are sources of definitions, not research data. The author uses logical examples (haircuts, electric utilities) to critique definitions, not research findings.
B
arguing for the adoption of a particular definition
Why It's Wrong:
- The author shows problems with ALL three definitions presented
- No preferred definition is advocated for or recommended
- The passage ends by calling the government definition "arbitrary" and saying it doesn't "accurately reflect" the economy
Common Student Mistakes:
- Since the author calls the government definition "more practical," are they arguing for it?
→ No, the author immediately follows this with extensive criticism showing the definition's flaws and arbitrariness.
C
exploring definitions of a concept
Why It's Right:
- The passage opens by asking "But what is meant by 'services'?" and then systematically examines different definitions
- Three distinct definitions are presented and analyzed throughout the passage
- The author explores the strengths and weaknesses of each definitional approach
- The entire passage structure is organized around examining different ways to define "services"
Key Evidence: "But what is meant by 'services'? Some economists define a service as... The broader, classical definition is... The United States government's definition is more practical..."
D
comparing the advantages of several definitions
Why It's Wrong:
- The author doesn't compare advantages between definitions
- The focus is on showing problems with each definition, not weighing benefits
- No systematic comparison of which definition works better in different situations
Common Student Mistakes:
- Since multiple definitions are presented, isn't the author comparing their advantages?
→ No, the author shows problems with each definition rather than comparing benefits. The pattern is: present definition → show its flaws.
E
clarifying some ambiguous definitions
Why It's Wrong:
- The passage shows that definitions are ambiguous but doesn't primarily aim to clarify them
- Instead of making definitions clearer, the author demonstrates why each definition fails
- The passage ends by showing the government definition is "arbitrary," making it less rather than more clear
Common Student Mistakes:
- Since the author explains each definition in detail, aren't they clarifying them?
→ The author explains definitions in order to critique them, not to make them clearer. The overall effect is to show how difficult defining "services" really is.
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More