SSAT Elementary Level Reading › How to Make Inferences Based on Nonfiction Passages
Adapted from A Catechism of Familiar Things: Their History and the Events Which Led to Their Discovery (1881) by the Benziger Brothers.
After bursting from the egg, it becomes a large worm or caterpillar of a yellowish-white color, (which is its first state); this caterpillar feeds on the leaves of the mulberry tree, until, arriving at maturity, it winds itself up in a silken bag or case, called a cocoon, about the size and shape of a pigeon's egg, and becomes a chrysalis, in which state it lies without signs of life. In about ten days it eats its way out of its case, a perfect butterfly, which lays a number of eggs and then dies. In the warmth of the summer weather, these eggs are hatched and become worms, as their parents did at first.
What can you infer about the life of a butterfly?
It is very brief.
It is full of danger.
It is peaceful and long-lasting.
It is full of drama.
It is pointless.
When discussing the life of a butterfly the author says "a perfect butterfly, which lays a number of eggs and then dies." It seems as if all a butterfly does is "lay eggs" and "then die." This suggests that it’s life is "very brief" or not very long. The author does not offer any information to suggest that it is dangerous, dramatic, pointless, or peaceful.
Adapted from A Catechism of Familiar Things: Their History and the Events Which Led to Their Discovery (1881) by the Benziger Brothers.
Thebes was an ancient city in Greece, founded by Cadmus, a Phoenician, though of Egyptian parentage. Sailing from the coast of Phoenicia, he arrived in Greece, and built the city, calling it Thebes, from the city of that name in Egypt. The prince is credited with the invention of sixteen letters of the Greek Alphabet. Athens was the capital of Attica, founded by Cecrops, an Egyptian. It was the seat of learning and the arts, and has produced some of the most celebrated warriors, politicians, orators, poets, and sculptors in the world. Since the liberation of Greece from the Ottoman Empire, Athens has been chosen as its capital, and is still a considerable town adorned with splendid ruins of the beautiful buildings it once possessed.
Which of these inferences can most easily be made from this text?
Many Greek cities were founded by Egyptians.
Cadmus died a violent death.
Athens has never been ruled by a tyrant or a foreign power.
Athens was founded before Thebes.
Had Athens never been founded, Thebes would be the current capital of Greece.
You are told in this text that Thebes was founded by a man of Egyptian parentage who named the city after a famous city in Egypt. You are also told that Athens was founded by an Egyptian. From this information you can infer that "many" Greek cities were founded by Egyptians. This is not a certain inference, but can be made more reliably made than any of the other answer choices. There is no evidence to support that Cadmus died a violent death or that had Athens never been founded then Thebes would be the current capital. It is not mentioned whether Athens or Thebes was founded first, and you can reasonably infer from the fact that Greece had to be "liberated" from the Ottoman Empire that it has, at least once, been ruled by a foreign power.
Adapted from The Story of Mankind by Hendrik Van Loon (1921)
Early in the tenth century a Viking by the name of Rollo had repeatedly attacked the coast of France. The king of France, too weak to resist these northern robbers, tried to bribe them into "being good." He offered them the province of Normandy, if they would promise to stop bothering the rest of his domains. Rollo accepted this bargain and became Duke of Normandy.
But his children remained interested in conquest. Across the channel, only a few hours away from the European mainland, they could see the white cliffs and the green fields of England. Poor England had passed through difficult days. For two hundred years it had been a Roman colony. After the Romans left, it had been conquered by the Angles and the Saxons, two German tribes from Schleswig. Next the Danes had taken the greater part of the country and had established the kingdom of Cnut. The Danes had been driven away and now (it was early in the eleventh century) another Saxon king, Edward the Confessor, was on the throne. But Edward was not expected to live long and he had no children. The circumstances favored the ambitious dukes of Normandy.
In 1066 Edward died. Immediately William of Normandy crossed the channel, defeated and killed Harold of Wessex (who had taken the crown) at the battle of Hastings, and proclaimed himself king of England.
In another story I have told you how in the year 800 a German chieftain had become a Roman Emperor. Now in the year 1066 the grandson of a Norse pirate was recognized as King of England. Why should we ever read fairy stories, when the truth of history is so much more interesting and entertaining?
Why does the author believe the the situation in England favored the Dukes of Normandy prior to their conquest?
Because the existing King had no children or heirs.
Because England was in a state of disarray.
Because the English military was weak from several exhausting campaigns.
Because the Normans had greater military strength and better tactics.
Because the Battle of Hastings was to be fought on Norman ground.
Immediately before the author says “The circumstances favored the ambitious dukes of Normandy,” he says that “Edward the Confessor, was on the throne. But Edward was not expected to live long and he had no children.” This tells you that the author primarily believes that the situation favored the Dukes of Normandy because the current King (Edward the Confessor) had no children to pass on his title to. You could perhaps infer from the author’s description of the various groups who came to control England for a short period of time that the military would be weak from several exhausting campaigns, or that the country was in a state of disarray (chaos), but this requires far more inference than the correct answer which is directly stated.
Adapted from Ten Great Events in History by James Johannot (1887)
The children of Germany and France caught the madness of the hour, and resolved upon a crusade of their own. Inspired by the preaching of a fanatical priest named Nicholas, twenty thousand young boys assembled at Cologne. They came from all ranks of life; the heir of the proud noble marched side by side with the son of the humblest peasant. Sisters, priests, and servants joined the throng, swelling the numbers and adding to the confusion. They stayed in Cologne for several weeks, set back by chaos and disease. Eventually the ill-fated group set off for the Holy Land, but their difficulties were just beginning.
What can you infer was “the madness of the hour?”
The Crusades
Religion
Apathy
The death of children
The city of Cologne
This passage is about the famous and ill-fated Children’s Crusade to the Holy Land. From the context you can infer that the “madness of the hour” was the idea of the Crusades in general. The author states “The children of Germany and France caught the madness of the hour, and resolved upon a crusade of their own.” These two clauses are related; the children caught the madness of the hour, and then they decided to go on their own crusade.
Adapted from A Child’s History of England by Charles Dickens (1905)
France was a far richer country than Scotland, and the new King was eager to conquer it. So, he left Scotland alone, and pretended that he had a claim to the French throne. He had, in reality, no right at all; but that mattered little in those times. He brought over to his cause many little princes and rulers and with these forces Edward invaded France; but he achieved little by that, except running himself into debt. The next year he did better; gaining the harbor of Sluys. This success, however, was very short-lived, for the King’s allies took fright at the siege of Saint Omer and ran away, leaving their weapons and allegiance behind them. When Philip, the French King, arrived with his army some moments later, Edward proposed to settle the difference by single combat with him. The French King said, he thanked him; but seeing as how the English King was without allies the French King would take his chances.
Why does the French King refuse to engage in one-on-one combat with the English King?
The French King is already in control of the situation and does not need to take risks
The French King has no allies
The English King is a much better fighter and would surely defeat the French King
The English King is a notable cheater and cannot be trusted to hold to his promises
The French King and English King are brothers
The author describes how the English King’s allies had left him and therefore he was probably going to lose. To try and swing the odds in his favor, the English King proposes that they settle the battle between the two armies in one single hand-to-hand combat between the two kings. However, the French King knows that he already has the advantage and does not need to risk it: “The French King said, he thanked him; but seeing as how the English King was without allies the French King would take his chances.”
The stock market crashed on October 29, 1929, which officially began the Great Depression in the United States. Starting on the above date (often called "Black Tuesday"), unemployment rapidly rose, causing economic hardships for many workers and their families. President Herbert Hoover tried to halt the Great Depression, but his numerous attempts were futile. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt took the presidential office in 1932, he enacted the "New Deal" to offer work relief for many displaced American workers. All of the "New Deal" programs were focused on the 3 Rs: relief for the poor and unemployed, recovery from the economic downturn, and reform efforts to prevent a second Great Depression. The Great Depression ended in 1941 when the United States entered World War II.
Why is October 29, 1929 referred to as "Black Tuesday"?
It was a horrible day for the United States and had long-lasting negative effects on its economy.
The American working class started an uprising in response to higher taxes.
President Herbert Hoover was inaugurated, even though the American public did not want him to become president.
The United States began World War II.
The American unemployment rate was at its peak on that date.
"Black Tuesday" received its nickname because it was the most economically devastating stock market crash in modern American history. It took over ten years for the United States to recover from "Black Tuesday," thus causing the Great Depression.
The stock market crashed on October 29, 1929, which officially began the Great Depression in the United States. Starting on the above date (often called "Black Tuesday"), unemployment rapidly rose, causing economic hardships for many workers and their families. President Herbert Hoover tried to halt the Great Depression, but his numerous attempts were futile. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt took the presidential office in 1932, he enacted the "New Deal" to offer work relief for many displaced American workers. All of the "New Deal" programs were focused on the 3 Rs: relief for the poor and unemployed, recovery from the economic downturn, and reform efforts to prevent a second Great Depression. The Great Depression ended in 1941 when the United States entered World War II.
How long did the Great Depression last?
Twelve years
Nineteen years
Twenty-two years
Two years
One hundred years
The Great Depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash and ended in 1941 when the United States entered World War II. So, it lasted for twelve years.
Adapted from The Story of Mankind by Hendrik Van Loon (1921)
Early in the tenth century a Viking by the name of Rollo had repeatedly attacked the coast of France. The king of France, too weak to resist these northern robbers, tried to bribe them into "being good." He offered them the province of Normandy, if they would promise to stop bothering the rest of his domains. Rollo accepted this bargain and became Duke of Normandy.
But his children remained interested in conquest. Across the channel, only a few hours away from the European mainland, they could see the white cliffs and the green fields of England. Poor England had passed through difficult days. For two hundred years it had been a Roman colony. After the Romans left, it had been conquered by the Angles and the Saxons, two German tribes from Schleswig. Next the Danes had taken the greater part of the country and had established the kingdom of Cnut. The Danes had been driven away and now (it was early in the eleventh century) another Saxon king, Edward the Confessor, was on the throne. But Edward was not expected to live long and he had no children. The circumstances favored the ambitious dukes of Normandy.
In 1066 Edward died. Immediately William of Normandy crossed the channel, defeated and killed Harold of Wessex (who had taken the crown) at the battle of Hastings, and proclaimed himself king of England.
In another story I have told you how in the year 800 a German chieftain had become a Roman Emperor. Now in the year 1066 the grandson of a Norse pirate was recognized as King of England. Why should we ever read fairy stories, when the truth of history is so much more interesting and entertaining?
What can you most easily infer from the information in the underlined final paragraph?
This article is part of a larger collection of stories.
The author is new to the study of history.
The author is an avid reader of fairy tales.
The author does not believe fairy tales have any use.
This article is written by an Englishman.
The most relevant piece of information for answering this question is when the author says “In another story I have told you how in the year 800 a German chieftain had become a Roman Emperor.” Because he says “In another story,“ you can reasonably infer that this article is likely to be part of a larger collection of stories. There is no information to support an inference that the author is an Englishman or new to the study of history. Although the author does mention his belief that history is more interesting than fairy tales, he does not go so far as to imply fairy tales have no use whatsoever. The answer choice “The author does not believe fairy tales have any use” is close to correct, but the question asks what you can “most easily” infer, and this answer requires more of a leap of inference than the correct answer.
Adapted from A Catechism of Familiar Things: Their History and the Events Which Led to Their Discovery (1881) by the Benziger Brothers.
After bursting from the egg, it becomes a large worm or caterpillar of a yellowish-white color, (which is its first state); this caterpillar feeds on the leaves of the mulberry tree, until, arriving at maturity, it winds itself up in a silken bag or case, called a cocoon, about the size and shape of a pigeon's egg, and becomes a chrysalis, in which state it lies without signs of life. In about ten days it eats its way out of its case, a perfect butterfly, which lays a number of eggs and then dies. In the warmth of the summer weather, these eggs are hatched and become worms, as their parents did at first.
Why does the author describe the cocoon as "about the size and shape of a pigeon's egg?"
To provide a comparison so that the audience can understand the dimensions of the cocoon
To illustrate the close relationship between butterflies and pigeons
To show how pigeons are a blight on society, whereas butterflies are a blessing
To explain how the hatching process of a caterpillar is very similar to that of a pigeon
To help the audience understand the color of a cocoon
The information about the size and shape of a cocoon as being similar to that of a pigeon’s egg is given to help the audience understand the dimensions of a cocoon. The author clearly assumes that to his audience the size and shape of a pigeon’s egg is more familiar than the size and shape of a cocoon. So he is attempting to provide clarity by using a comparison.
It has often been asserted by modern historians that the Czech Republic ought to be known as the Republic of Bohemia and Moravia. These are the two regions of Europe that constitute the modern Czech country. The problem is that each of these names has a loose association with the short-lived reign of Hitler and the Nazis in what was then called Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovakia was also the name of the country in the Communist Era, until Slovakia voted to separate from the Czech Republic. So it has come to pass that the Czech people are left with a name that is to them, at least, somewhat unsatisfying. Perhaps several generations from now, as the horrors of World War Two fade further from European memory, these other names of the Czech region will once more emerge into prominence.
What can you infer about Slovakia?
It is another country in Europe.
It is a state in the Czech Republic.
It revolted against the Nazis.
It despised the Communist regime.
It is a city in the Czech Republic.
The author tells you that Slovakia chose to break away from the Czech Republic and that once the two had been combined under the name of Czechoslovakia. This information should enable you to infer that Slovakia is "another country in Europe."