Bernand: For which language, and thus which frequency distribution of letters and letter sequences, was the standard typewriter keyboard designed?

Cora: To ask this question, you must be making a mistaken assumption: that typing speed was to be maximized. The real danger with early typewriters was that operators would hit successive keys too quickly, thereby crashing typebars into each other, bending connecting wires and so on. So the idea was to slow the operator down by making the most common letter sequences awkward to type.

Bernand: This is surely not right! These technological limitations have long since vanished, yet the keyboard is still as it was then.

Which one of the following, if true, could be used by Cora to counter Bernard’s rejection of her explanation?

(A) Typewriters and word-processing equipment are typically sold to people who have learned to use the standard keyboard and who, therefore, demand it in equipment they buy.
(B) Typewriters have been superseded in most offices by word-processing equipment, which has inherited the standard keyboard from typewriters.
(C) The standard keyboard allows skilled operators to achiever considerable typing speeds, thought it makes acquiring such skills relatively difficult.
(D) A person who has learned one keyboard layout can readily learn to use a second one in place of the first, but only with difficulty learn to use a second one alongside the first.
(E) It is now possible to construct typewriter and word-processing equipment in which a single keyboard can accommodate two or even more different keyboard layouts, each accessible to the operator at will.


I could not understand the highlighted part.

Bernand: This is surely not right! These technological limitations have long since vanished, yet the keyboard is still as it was then.

the "technological limitations" eliminated referred here is how operators overcame the obstacle of the absence of common letter sequences. So in other words, Bernand is saying why are the keyboard keys still designed the way they are even though operators can now type just as fast (with the ackward sequence not being a problem anymore).


the answer should be C

I think its B.

His counter argument is that. the word processing systems of today inherited the keyboard from the type writer which has the earlier problems.

C for me.

What was I thinking in choosing C...If the typewriters were designed for use of a specific segment of the population then A totally makes sense and counters Bernad's argument...any thoughts??

I picked D to contradict the fact that the layout remained the same, but now I understand I am wrong.

I agree with A.

(A) Typewriters and word-processing equipment are typically sold to people who have learned to use the standard keyboard and who, therefore, demand it in equipment they buy.

We need to contradict the statement stating that layout be same as it is designed for better efficiency of the language. Contradiction by A: It is not because of the efficiency but the customer who are accustomed to the layout.

opinions?
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ...
My debrief : journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

B is not contradicting bernand statment. It, I think, is mostly supporting(not too strongly but still)

As it says that typewriters has been replaced, it is supporting the statement "These technological limitations have long since vanished" by Bernard.
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ...
My debrief : journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Yeah, should be A.