G2 English K200 inference improves when learners distinguish what a statement entails from what it merely suggests. If one sentence must be true whenever another is true, the relationship is stronger than plausibility or association.
This one-hundred-and-thirty-third Learner’s Guide develops entailment control. It extends Vol 0085 Evidence-Strength Ladder and Vol 0129 Ambiguity Resolution.
The entailment test
Assume the source sentence is true. Ask whether the candidate conclusion could still be false. If yes, the source does not entail it. If no, and the meanings and scope are preserved, the conclusion may be entailed.
1. all entails some
For all entails some, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
2. none entails not all
For none entails not all, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
3. always entails sometimes if event occurs in scope
For always entails sometimes if event occurs in scope, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
4. must entails may in possibility sense contextually
For must entails may in possibility sense contextually, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
5. killed entails died in ordinary lexical relation
For killed entails died in ordinary lexical relation, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
6. bachelor entails unmarried in ordinary definition
For bachelor entails unmarried in ordinary definition, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
7. red does not entail dark red
For red does not entail dark red, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
8. large does not entail largest
For large does not entail largest, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
9. most entails more than half in ordinary quantitative use
For most entails more than half in ordinary quantitative use, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
10. some does not entail only some
For some does not entail only some, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
11. not all entails at least one exception
For not all entails at least one exception, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
12. not always entails at least one countercase
For not always entails at least one countercase, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
13. may does not entail will
For may does not entail will, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
14. can does not entail does
For can does not entail does, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
15. likely does not entail certain
For likely does not entail certain, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
16. because entails claimed causal relation
For because entails claimed causal relation, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
17. after does not entail because
For after does not entail because, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
18. associated with does not entail caused by
For associated with does not entail caused by, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
19. said does not entail proved
For said does not entail proved, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
20. claimed does not entail false
For claimed does not entail false, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
21. admitted can entail proposition ownership in context
For admitted can entail proposition ownership in context, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
22. denied does not entail proposition false
For denied does not entail proposition false, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
23. suggests does not entail states
For suggests does not entail states, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
24. example does not entail general rule
For example does not entail general rule, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
25. one case does not entail all cases
For one case does not entail all cases, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
26. mean increase does not entail every value increased
For mean increase does not entail every value increased, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
27. group trend does not entail individual trend
For group trend does not entail individual trend, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
28. character belief does not entail narrator fact
For character belief does not entail narrator fact, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
29. speaker accusation does not entail guilt
For speaker accusation does not entail guilt, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
30. writer quotation does not entail endorsement
For writer quotation does not entail endorsement, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
31. headline framing does not entail body conclusion
For headline framing does not entail body conclusion, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
32. question presupposition does not always equal verified fact
For question presupposition does not always equal verified fact, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
33. irony can reverse literal implication
For irony can reverse literal implication, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
34. metaphor does not entail literal event
For metaphor does not entail literal event, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
35. comparison better entails a criterion only if specified
For comparison better entails a criterion only if specified, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
36. same does not entail identical in every respect
For same does not entail identical in every respect, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
37. different entails at least one relevant difference
For different entails at least one relevant difference, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
38. before entails temporal order
For before entails temporal order, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
39. earlier knowledge restriction
For earlier knowledge restriction, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
40. return entails prior presence in ordinary use
For return entails prior presence in ordinary use, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
41. stop often presupposes prior activity
For stop often presupposes prior activity, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
42. continue presupposes prior state
For continue presupposes prior state, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
43. again presupposes earlier occurrence
For again presupposes earlier occurrence, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
44. still presupposes persistence
For still presupposes persistence, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
45. no longer presupposes earlier truth
For no longer presupposes earlier truth, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
46. even signals expectation scale
For even signals expectation scale, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
47. only restricts alternatives
For only restricts alternatives, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
48. both entails two members
For both entails two members, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
49. neither negates both members
For neither negates both members, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
50. either ambiguity
For either ambiguity, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
51. or does not always entail exclusive choice
For or does not always entail exclusive choice, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
52. and entails both conjuncts in ordinary logic
For and entails both conjuncts in ordinary logic, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
53. if does not entail converse
For if does not entail converse, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
54. only if marks necessity
For only if marks necessity, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
55. if and only if two directions
For if and only if two directions, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
56. unless conditional boundary
For unless conditional boundary, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
57. necessary does not entail sufficient
For necessary does not entail sufficient, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
58. sufficient does not entail necessary
For sufficient does not entail necessary, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
59. contradiction pair
For contradiction pair, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
60. compatible statements
For compatible statements, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
61. independent statements
For independent statements, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
62. stronger claim
For stronger claim, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
63. weaker claim
For weaker claim, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
64. equivalent paraphrase
For equivalent paraphrase, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
65. non-equivalent paraphrase
For non-equivalent paraphrase, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
66. entailment in summary
For entailment in summary, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
67. entailment in inference
For entailment in inference, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
68. entailment in MCQ
For entailment in MCQ, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
69. entailment in source comparison
For entailment in source comparison, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
70. entailment final rule
For entailment final rule, test the relationship by constructing a counterexample. If you can imagine a situation where the first statement is true and the second false without changing the meanings, entailment fails.
For practice, write a stronger claim, an entailed weaker claim and a merely plausible claim. Label the difference in quantifier, modality, causality or scope that separates them.
This method is useful in MCQ and paraphrase because distractors often strengthen a source by one step: some→all, may→will, association→cause, one example→general rule. Entailment control catches that inflation.
Entailment is source-bound
A character’s statement can entail another proposition within that character’s claim without making either proposition objectively true. Keep logical consequence separate from source credibility.
Links
Use the Secondary English Learning Hub, Vol 0109 Negation-Scope Control, Vol 0101 Exception Control, the Examination Craft hub and the PSLE Learner’s Guide.
Official-source discipline
For the current 2027 SEC G2 school-candidate framework, use the official SEAB G2 syllabus directory and linked K200 English Language syllabus. Entailment control is an eduKateSengkang reading framework, not a separate SEAB syllabus label.
Final rule
Do not ask only whether a conclusion sounds reasonable. Ask whether the source can be true while the conclusion is false. If it can, the conclusion needs additional evidence.
