Five jumbled up sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), related to a topic, are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a coherent paragraph. Identify the odd sentence and key in the number of that sentence as your answer.
- Translators are like bumblebees.
- Though long since scientifically disproved, this factoid is still routinely trotted out.
- Similar pronouncements about the impossibility of translation have dogged practitioners since Leonardo Bruni’s De interpretatione recta, published in 1424.
- Bees, unaware of these deliberations, have continued to flit from flower to flower, and translators continue to translate.
- In 1934, the French entomologist August Magnan pronounced the flight of the bumblebee to be aerodynamically impossible
Five jumbled up sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), related to a topic, are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a coherent paragraph. Identify the odd sentence and key in the number of that sentence as your answer.
- Translators are like bumblebees.
- Though long since scientifically disproved, this factoid is still routinely trotted out.
- Similar pronouncements about the impossibility of translation have dogged practitioners since Leonardo Bruni’s De interpretatione recta, published in 1424.
- Bees, unaware of these deliberations, have continued to flit from flower to flower, and translators continue to translate.
- In 1934, the French entomologist August Magnan pronounced the flight of the bumblebee to be aerodynamically impossible
Entered answer:
Solution
Let us trace the logical flow step by step:
From passage: "Translators are like bumblebees" (sentence 1) -> sets up the comparison
From passage: "the French entomologist August Magnan pronounced the flight of the bumblebee to be aerodynamically impossible" (sentence 5) -> gives historical context
The thought process flows like this: Topic introduction -> Historical example -> Current status -> Conclusion about both continuing their work
The key is finding which sentence breaks this logical chain. Let's check each:
🟢 Sentence 1 -> correct -> introduces the main comparison between translators and bumblebees
🔴 Sentence 2 -> context-shift -> refers to "this factoid" but we need the specific factoid mentioned first before calling it disproved. It jumps ahead in the logical sequence without proper setup.
🟢 Sentence 3 -> correct -> connects the bumblebee example to translation (makes the parallel complete)
🟢 Sentence 4 -> correct -> perfect conclusion showing both bees and translators continue working despite the debates
🟢 Sentence 5 -> correct -> provides the specific historical claim about bumblebees being "impossible"
The logical order should be: 1 (comparison) -> 5 (historical claim) -> 3 (translation parallel) -> 4 (conclusion).
Sentence 2 tries to reference "this factoid" before the factoid is properly established, making it the odd one out.