English and the Austronesian language Mbarbaram both use the word

D)

Negating D will destroy the conclusion i.e ( when languages share words that are similar in sound and meaning the similarity is due
neither to language relatedness nor to borrowing. )

option D. author is assuming that there is not a third language to which both of Eng and Mbar have been in contact. If there is any third language shared by both of Eng and Mbar then we can find a relation and conclusion does not told true.

Negating D destroys the Conclusion and hence is the Answer.

This is a Find Assumption question type.

Conclusion: neither borrowing nor relatedness caused similarity. We need to make sure that the conclusion (cause --> effect) stands. So, we need to establish that borrowing or relatedness did not happen. Option (D) does what we need. As mentioned in previous posts, negated (D) completely kills the argument, i.e. (D) says that relatedness did occur.

The structure of the reasoning is the stem provides 2 factors ("related language" & "word borrowing") that the argument says does not cause the similarity in words common between the 2 languages.

Although there is neither any apparent relationship between the 2 languages mentioned nor borrowing of words involved, the question stem frames it in such a way that we are only investigating the relations between these two factors in connection with the end outcome.

However, what if the 2 languages themselves borrowed the words from another language? Also, what IF the languages are related to each other in a way that they descended from the same 'parent' language?

The conclusion would fall apart, and we need to place a defending assumption to protect the conclusion. Therefore, we need to find an answer that says the two languages aren't 'related' in any extend in that they dont descend from the same parent language, nor do the two languages borrow the word 'dog' from the same third language.

Answer: D

English and the Austronesian language Mbarbaram both use the word “dog” for canines. These two languages are unrelated, and since speakers of the two languages only came in contact with one another long after the word “dog” was first used in this way in either language, neither language could have borrowed the word from the other. Thus this case shows that sometimes when languages share words that are similar in sound and meaning the similarity is due neither to language relatedness nor to borrowing.

Conclusion: Sometimes when languages share words that are similar in sound and meaning the similarity is not caused by language relatedness or borrowing.

Evidence:

1.E & M both used the word "dog"
2.E & M are unrelated
3.It was not until the word "dog" was first used E&A had never been in contact with each other.

1-2-3 => the language could not have been borrowed from each other
Generalization: Similar words -> not caused by relatedness or borrowing.

What is the missing link here? The generalization is a jump If it fails to consider all scenarios that could break it apart.

Logically, we have A and B. The author concluded that A and B are not related to each other. Is that so? Imagine two guys(A and B) meet at a soccer field, they've never met each other before. Does that mean they are unrelated? Usually, we would think yes; however, it is possible that they share a father and that father(let's call him C) hides them from seeing each other. So now they are both related to each other or A and B are related to C. We must prove that they don't have the same father in other to say "YES, they are unrelated".

Let's check out the answer choice.





The argument requires that which one of the following be assumed?


This does not change the fact that they still share the word "dog". So it is possible that they borrow that word from each other. (A) can't be assumed.


What other languages do does not help to prove the relationship between E and M — ultimately, the generalization. (B) is out.


If it is USUALLY so, then the generalization that SOMETIMES both language are not related in not true. (C) is out.


Now C is introduced as not a possible third party that connects A and B. Hang on to this.

[/quote]
So If two unrelated languages share a word, they must have NOT come in contact with one another at sometime. Negate this is the conclusion. (E) is out.

Only D is left. hence, (D) is our answer.