Bunuel wrote:
Competition Mode Question
A linguist recently argued that all human languages must have a common origin because some concepts are universal; that is, they appear in all languages. For example, all languages are capable of describing lightness and darkness.
Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument?
(A) The Burmese language does not contain basic nouns like automobile and airplane.
(B) No one linguist could possibly speak all known languages.
(C) All speakers, regardless of their languages, are confronted with similar stimuli like lightness and darkness.
(D) The similarity between human language and dolphin language has not been attributed to a common origin.
(E) Some languages include concepts of which speakers of other languages are not even aware.
Official Explanation
Choice (A) uses a false claim ploy. We have no way of knowing whether the Bernese language contains words for automobile or airplane (it probably does not); regardless, automobiles and airplanes are not universal terms.
Choice (B) is true but irrelevant, not to mention silly.
Choice (D) is irrelevant [unlike with choice (B), we have no way of knowing whether it is true or false]. Notice how this answer-choice is baited with terms, common origin and human language, that use the same language as in the argument.
Choice (E) overstates the claim. The author says only that some, not all, concepts are universal. This is the only incorrect choice with any merit.
Finally,
choice (C) is the correct answer because if all people are subject to similar stimuli, then one would expect that they would all create words for those stimuli.