GRE's definition of "several"

[Blackwidow]

http://greprepclub.com/forum/qotd-3-4-5-the-massive-influx-of-women-cyclists-making-up-2691.html

i was doing the question no 4 linked above in an official prep book "official gre verbal reasoning practice questions 2nd edition" 

It seems the ETS has the wrong definition of "several", as choice 'c' says several, but the passage only mentions two reasons.

 

im not sure how i would go about answering similar questions in the future if i see the word 'several.'

 

[cowgirlsdontcry]

1 hour ago, Blackwidow said:

http://greprepclub.com/forum/qotd-3-4-5-the-massive-influx-of-women-cyclists-making-up-2691.html

i was doing the question no 4 linked above in an official prep book "official gre verbal reasoning practice questions 2nd edition" 

It seems the ETS has the wrong definition of "several", as choice 'c' says several, but the passage only mentions two reasons.

 

im not sure how i would go about answering similar questions in the future if i see the word 'several.'

 

Perhaps I'm not looking at this in the same way you are, but if the passage mentions two reasons, and one of the answers uses the word several, then that answer would be incorrect. I think that answer (c) is asking if you can define several. Look at the question again:

Which of the following does the passage suggest about pioneer women cyclists?
 

• They saw cycling as a means to promote the advancement of women.
• They argued that cycling would encourage women to get involved in a variety of noble causes.
• They provided several reasons for a cross section of the female population to use the bicycle.

While the question uses the word 'suggest,' it's really asking which one statement is true. In option 'c' the statement would be true if it had stated 'couple,' which means two. Instead, it uses 'several' which defined means more than two but not many. The passage listed two reasons. Option 'C' is incorrect. You will find the GRE is interested in more than just the correct answer. It tests your ability to reason in fine detail at times, by throwing in the odd challenge of a definition.

[Concordia]

Only two?

Not only would cycling (1) encourage healthy outdoor exercise, they reasoned, it would also (2) hasten long-overdue dress reform. To feminists, (3) the bicycle affirmed nothing less than the dignity and equality of women.

 

[Blackwidow]

sorry to revive the old post that i started. but isnt it too much of an inferential leap to "equate pioneer women cylists" to "feminists" ?

[Blackwidow]

also, if you look at the explanation in the back, it says "the passages mentions that pioneer women saw at least two independent reasons for all women to use bicycles: they believed that cycling would "encourage healthy outdoor exercise" as well as "hasten long-overdue dress reform."  But the text doesnt actually say "at least", meaning theres no clear mention in the actual passage that there are more than two reasond unless you say feminists = pioneer women cyclists.   what do you guys think???

[Kezion]

Several reasons for the "cross section" of the females is written in option C, there fore it include feminists

 "Not only would cycling encourage healthy outdoor exercise, they reasoned, it would also hasten long-overdue dress reform. To feminists, 10 the bicycle affirmed nothing less than the dignity and equality of women."