In this guide, we will try to explain the strategy for each category we could categorize the TC/SE on the GRE. Therefore, let's dive into this. The first example is a not-so-tough but tricky question we do have an example of TC on the Official ETS website at this link https://www.ets.org/pdfs/gre/gre-sample-questions.pdf






So, it is true that we must also have a strong vocabulary for the GRE. Hands down. However, this comes after. You MUST know how to attack a question and scavenge its meaning, and find clues, and see why a word is there , what is the flow of the sentence, why a particular and precise portion of the same is telling me. All these things and many more we are going to dissect

My suggestion is to do EVERY time the following, in this precise sequence:

• Reading the sentence the first time to see what is happening at a glance. Not a precise idea but a general and overall panoramic of the same
• Reading the sentence once again, therefore the second time, to see possible clues/words/shifts if any
• At this time, DO NOT look at the blanks. They will confuse you or put you on the wrong path because you - and this is human nature - could fall in love with a particular word. Possibly because you like it, or you know its meaning and the others do not, then you will have a sort of bias toward it. NO. Your focus must be only on the sentence itself. Force yourself to do this.
• Divide all the questions into chunks. Do not try to digest at one time. Usually, what I do is divide it into as many parts as the full stops in it but could be also a colon or a semi-colon

It is refreshing to read a book about our planet by an author who does not allow facts to be (I) ________ by politics:

What do we have here ?

• Notice the keyword refreshing. Usually, we try to search some other keyword of another genre: a connection word, some shift word, and so on. Instead, here the pivotal word is a verb: refreshing. What does the word suggest us ?
  It suggests that reading a book about our planet brings us something new. Something that we haven't seen before the book itself. This is about when you are bored with the usual series on Netflix. When a new series is broadcasted and it is really amazing or particular, then is refreshing to watch something in a flat landscape.
  
• The book does not allow facts to be (I) ________ by politics: considering that the book is refreshing because it brings to us something in a way new and that the book itself, and its arguments, do not allow to politics what ? Clearly, the book and its argument will not stop to tell the truth or something else. And politics will not be able to mask this truth. I say the truth but could be another critical issue. Therefore, C is ruled out. We need a word that shows us politics will not stop or sink the argument in the book. This also shows you how is to analyze every part of the sentence and how logic is king.

well aware of the political disputes about the effects of human activities on climate and biodiversity, this author does not permit them to (ii) _______ his comprehensive description of what we know about our biosphere.


The arguments in the book show us clearly how there is a debate on climate change HOWEVER the author, through his book, does not permit them (those disputes) to do X about the description in the book about climate change.

What is our X?

• What is clear here is that the political debate will not obfuscate or downplay the clear description of climate change we find in the book. I.E. the facts are clear, and there is no way to hide them before our eyes, thanks to the same description. Therefore, the only possible blank is E. We are sure of that.
• Because our second blank is E and the first two portions of the sentence are in the same line, our logic suggests that the FIRST blank must be or follow the second blank. They must express the same concept. Therefore, the FIRST blank is A: overshadowed. C was already ruled out in the first part we explained. B is wrong just because does not express the same concept as expressed by E: obscure.

He emphasizes the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations, and the (iii) _______ , calling attention to the many aspects of planetary evolution that must be better understood before we can accurately diagnose the condition of our planet.

• the enormous gaps in our knowledge,= X = we do not that much after all about climate change;
• the sparseness of our observations= Y = our empirical observation are NOT enough;
• and the (iii) _______ , =Z= our third blank must be the third element in the equation.
  
  • G. plausibility of our hypotheses,
  • H. certainty of our entitlement,
  • I. superficiality of our theories
• X+Y+Z= I. Consequentially, our third blank is I. Not so many thoughts on that

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





The narratives that vanquished peoples


This is a long statement that usually has 3 blanks. However, the first sentence is complete and as such could have some clue to put us on track.
Moreover, remember always to read the entire sentence to grasp the overall meaning; this is the best strategy you might follow because even if you spot a clue or more if you do not grasp the entire meaning you could miss one of the answers. A clue does not represent what is all about.

That said, what I do always is to split a sentence (if long like this one) into chunks and do a brief, 2 to five seconds, of brainstorming. Just a pinch.

The narratives that vanquished peoples have created of their defeat have, according to Schivelbusch, fallen into several identifiable types.

The first thing I do notice is that the word vanquished is unknown to my vocabulary. This is normal: the English language is so vast it is impossible to even for the most skilled academic professor to know everything. Consider this at a student level. Your goal is to understand the overall sense of the sentence and not indulge that much on a single word-meaning which is distracting and detrimental to your performance.

The narrative that vanquished peoples (is enough to know for now the word people) have created of their defeat.........at this point you should have an ah-ha moment: some people create something else (the narratives or stories) of their defeat. This means that vanquished are people defeated is some battlefield or war. That is great. Now we do know more or less the meaning of the sentence and on top of that: we have already some possible clues to keep in mind for the forthcoming two sentences. The narratives said by people defeated in some war fall into several streams.

At this point is premature to make some sort of forecast. But so far so good.

In one of these, the vanquished manage to (i)_____the victor’s triumph as the result of some spurious advantage, the victors being truly inferior where it counts.

What we do have here: in one of this sub-type of narratives, manage to (i) ______ the victory of the enemies (the vanquished's enemy) as a consequence of some spurious advantage: this means that the vanquished attribute the other victory to something else that is not skill-related, strategy or the well-prepared army but they think is, for instance, fortune related. I.E. the victory is the result of fortune or some divine intervention or some other cause outside the logical reasons

Looking at the answer choices,

construe I do not know honestly what that means. I assume always that a student DOES NOT know how to manage a word. If it was the contrary, if we did know every single word of the Oxford dictionary, then 70% of the GRE exam was a stroll. And this is not the case. Our goal is to contextualize it as much as possible a word, trying to carve out the most from it and to see if it fits the ballpark or not. Not knowing the exact meaning. Keep it for now.

anoint This word is even worse than the previous one. I am blank in my mind. At this point, the GRE is much of a strategy: stay calm, stay focused, and be aggressive. Do not lose count.

acknowledge This is easy: it means, essentially, to recognize. Cross off immediately and move on.

At this point you have two choices ahead of you: or you try to attack the third sentence and consequently the second blank or stop here and try to nail the first blank. This is hard decision-making and overall is what GRE is all about. Decision-making.

I decide to pick the first choice of my strategy to go ahead. After all, I can go back if necessary.

Often the winners (ii)_____this interpretation, worrying about the cultural or moral costs of their triumph and so giving some credence to the losers' story.

Now, in this question, we do have on one hand the defeated, and now, of course, we do have the winners. Often they (ii) ________ this interpretation: which means they do something about the interpretation of the victory by the vanquished. I.E the vanquished managed in a certain way their defeated AND the winner act accordingly to this. Woww.

My strategy was right. reading the third sentence I had a huge clue to fill in the first blank and to fill in the second as well. Now the entire story is much more clear to me :-D

The winners when they won, at the same time they are worried of the implications of their victory to the defeated(vanquished) in terms of moral costs and as it turns out they give some credit to what the vanquished say, some deal to the losers' story.

At this point the big picture is quite clear and could be recap this way: the defeated attribute their defeat to some other reason than the skillful enemy but rather to the fortune (for instance). And the same vanquished manage, craft their defeat in a certain way. As a consequence, the winners react to this interpretation not in a harsh way, considering the moral costs that a defeat implies to the losers.

Perfect.

looking at the answer choices in the first blank: construe vs anoint, even though I do not know the exact meaning of the two, from the context almost clearly construe suggest me something as construction; artifact: something to build, to manage, maybe a house. They must be the answer.

Looking at the second blank, at this point:

take issue with means to delve into some discussion or something related to solve an issue. Here as you noticed there is no issue to solve. Cross off

disregard The winners do not disregard anything. On the contrary, they have a sort of soft approach to the losers for the implication that a defeat could have. They do not disregard it, they instead take it into account.

collude in this must be the second blank. Even if I do not know at all the meaning. However, the word collude reminds me of something close, which is the idea I had read the sentence. The winners are somehow close to the losers.

The answers are A and F.