#18 - In many families adults speak to babies in simplified

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[JohnTan19]

How can we derive the answer to be (C), instead of (E)?

[Sky Brooks]

Hi JohnTan19,

The argument states that using simple phrases does not help a baby learn a language. It basis this argument on the claim that when babies are not exposed to simple phrases, they "master the grammatical structure of language" just as well as babies that are.

The assumption here is that, if a baby has mastered the grammatical structure, then it has learned the language.

C states the assumption directly and is the correct answer.

E states that to learn a language one must acquire its vocabulary and grammatical structure.
The passage does not mention vocabulary, so that part of the answer is out of scope. This answer also fails to make the connection between mastering grammatical structure and learning a language, which is the basis of the argument's assumption.

I hope this helps!

-Sky Brooks

[ssnasir]

Hi there,

This is more of a broad question, but I wanted to know that should we always treat conclusions in assumption questions as the necessary condition?

Best,
Noor

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Noor,

In a general sense, in every argument, the author assumes that his or her premises are sufficient to draw his or her conclusion. In other words, the very broad assumption underlying every argument is that "If my premises are true, then what I've said in my conclusion must be true" (in conditional diagramming terms: Premises Conclusion). So, yes, it's fair to treat the conclusion of an argument as something the author assumes to be a necessary condition following from the premises. This will have varying levels of application (or even relevance) depending on the nature of the assumption question. But having that background assumption in mind turns out to be especially helpful on many of what PowerScore classifies as "Supporter Assumption" questions (which this one is!).

I hope this helps!

Jeremy

[lsacgals101]

I am having trouble mapping out the statements here i think, because my mapping leads me to the conclusion that in order to master language, one must master the grammar (rather than if one has mastered the grammar, then one has learned the language).

Premise: ~ Simple phrases --> Master grammar
Contrapositive: ~Master grammer --> Simple phrases
Conc: Simple phrases --> ~ Help Learn

Missing assumption: ~Master grammar --> ~ Help learn
Missing assumption's contrapositive: Help learn --> Master grammar

The correct answer shows the reverse. Could you help me understand what I'm doing wrong?

[smtq123]

The argument is about "children of these families" which is a restricted set of children, then why we need "ANY CHILD" in the assumption.
If we negate C, I don't see how the argument fell! Can you please negate the correct option to show that ANY CHILD is required here!
Appreciate your reply.

[evelineliu]

Hi there,

The author argues that speaking to babies in simplified language does not help children learn language. The evidence is that children whose family's do not use baby-talk are just as capable of mastering grammar of a language. The children in both baby-talk and non-baby-talk households were equally good at mastering the grammar, but were both babies equally good at learning the language? The author is mismatching mastering grammar with learning a language.

For answer choice (C), let's try the denial test. If there are kids who have mastered grammar but HAVE NOT really learned the language, that would make the author's argument illogical. So the author's necessary assumption is: it must be true that mastering grammar is a sure sign of learning the language.

Hope that helps,
Eveline

[smtq123]

Option C: ANY child who has mastered the grammatical structure of a language HAS learned the language
Which of the below negation of Option C is correct:
1) SOME child who has mastered the grammatical structure of a language has learned the language, or
2) Any child who has mastered the grammatical structure of a language HAS NOT learned the language
Can you please help me in negating the Option C. Thanks for your support!

[atierney]

Yes option 2 is correct. The idea here is that the main conclusion is that children don't need baby talk to learn language, and the premise to support this is that there exists situations in which baby talk is not used yet in which children still master the grammatical structure. Well, we would need an answer choice that conditions learning the grammatical structure with learning the language in general. C does this. And the negation of C negates this sufficient linkage.