How to Determine the Author’s Tone on the GMAT

When reading through Reading Comprehension texts, there are a few important concepts to keep in mind in order to be able to swiftly answer the upcoming questions. Every passage will have explicit information regarding the subject matter at hand, but some information will come from the author’s attitude and writing style. One of the most important things to do while reading a Reading Comprehension passage (other than staying awake) is determine the author’s tone.

Much like how inflection plays an important role in speech, tone plays an understated role in determining the intent of the words written in front of you. If you recall the classic Seinfeld exchange between Jerry and Elaine regarding whether Jerry was invited to Tim Whatley’s party (who knew that the funny dentist would someday become Breaking Bad’s Walter White?): “Which word did he emphasize? Did he say, “Why would Jerry bring anything?” or, “Why would Jerry bring anything?” Which word did he emphasize? The difference can be as dramatic as whether he was invited at all or why he would bring anything because his presence (presents?) is gift enough. Tone is very similar on the GMAT, but without the added hint of intonation in speech.

Passages on the GMAT can be branded into three broad categories of tone: Explanatory, Analytical or Opinionated. Explanatory, which can also be considered descriptive, is characterized by an arm’s length relationship between the author and the topic. The author offers no opinion, suggestion or analysis of the issue at hand. (Think Morgan Freeman voice over). Analytical is the tone when the author wants to analyze a situation or topic. The tone won’t necessarily be overt, but it will be somewhat suggestive and may contain some subjective passages. Finally, the tone can be characterized as opinionated if the author is clearly presenting their opinion or evaluating a hypothesis.

Let’s look at a GMAT passage and answer a question using the tone as a guideline (note: this is the same passage I used in May for scope)





The author of the passage would most likely describe YES as a _______

A)     Failed enterprise that is beyond repair

B)      Noble effort that has been hampered by external factors

C)      Limited success that can be improved through greater fiscal responsibility

D)     Potentially worthy program that has been mismanaged

E)      Waste of public resources that should never have received funding

Before diving into the question, let’s analyze the author’s tone and try and determine which of the three major categories it should fall into (explanatory, analytical, opinionated). It should be fairly clear that this passage isn’t explanatory: the author often interjects his opinion (“YES should…”) and uses personal opinion liberally (“this is a shame…”). Furthermore, the fourth paragraph reads like the conclusion of an opinionated editorial in the newspaper: “YES should heed the advice given in one of the program’s own publications”. The author clearly believes strongly in the advice he’s dispensing. This passage should be categorized as opinionated, as the author certainly doesn’t shy away from presenting his thoughts on YES’ current predicament.

Looking again at the question, the author of the passage would likely describe YES as some kind of program with a good idea that hasn’t executed properly. Answer choice A contradicts the entire point of the fourth paragraph wherein the author lays out his plan to save the program. Answer choice E also takes it way too far and is borderline hateful. Neither of these options captures the author’s tone, or as I say, they’re tone-deaf.  Thus, we can easily eliminate them.

Answer choices B, C and D all speak of how the program is okay but has had some troubles, so let’s examine them one by one. Answer choice B mentions that this noble effort has been hampered by external factors, which is incorrect. All the problems illustrated have been internal factors. It wasn’t the government, the economy or the Republic of Wadiya that have caused problems; it was the administrators and management within the company. This leads us towards answer choice D, which is roughly analogous to B with the word “external” being replaced by “internal”.

What about answer choice C, though? The limited success part seems correct, but again the reasoning that greater fiscal responsibility will resolve the underlying issues is unsupported by the text. The author meticulously made the case that management needs to respect their own criteria and work at improving their public relations image. The financial side of the business never really came up, so it won’t help atone (see what I did there?) for the poor choices that have been made in the past. Answer C can be eliminated, leaving only answer choice D, which already seemed like the correct response.

When it comes to reading comprehension, it’s important to understand the words written on the page, but also to pay attention to the author’s tone. Often questions concerning tone won’t ask you to regurgitate information written on the left-hand side of the screen, but rather to make a classification of the author’s opinion or thoughts. When such questions arise, understanding the author’s tone helps you a ton.

