It is common knowledge that a given word can have various

Question

It is common knowledge that a given word can have various shades of meaning, but how many people are aware that a single word can sometimes be used in completely contradictory ways? For example, the word "cleave" can mean "to adhere" or "to stick together." But just as easily the word "cleave" can mean "to split apart" or "to divide." This proves that words are fundamentally meaningless until they are placed in a sentence.

Which one of the following is an assumption necessary to the author's argument?

Every sentence is meaningful.
 Common knowledge is usually wrong.
 The possession of two contradictory meanings is equivalent to an absence of meaning.
 The word "cleave" is unique in that it can be used in completely contradictory ways.
 A word that possesses two shades of meaning is a word that possesses two contradictory meanings.

BlueRobin · Answer

Answer should be C. 
The author says that words can have various shades of meanings; words can also have contradictory meanings. For that, an example is given followed by a conclusion that  generalizes  words into meaningless words.

So the author needs to assume that all words that have contradictory meaning are meaningless.

vivesomnium · Answer

Every sentence is meaningful.  The author is not talking about menanigfulness of sentences. he is saying that words get meaning only when they are placed in a sentence. presumably, words can have meaning even in a meaningless sentence! 
Common knowledge is usually wrong.:  The author is not saying that. he is ot even arguing against common knowledge (that words have shades of meaning) he is just adding another aspect to it, which is not in common knowledge ( that sometimes words may have contradictory meanings) 
The possession of two contradictory meanings is equivalent to an absence of meaning.   This option is correct. Author argues that there are words which have contradictory meanings. and then in next sentence says that words are therefore meaningless! he is clearly (and wrongly) equating having two opposing meanings to having no meaning at all!   
The word "cleave" is unique in that it can be used in completely contradictory ways.  That is not author's assumption - in fact if anything he would assume something opposite of that - since he is using cleave as an example to support a general statement he is making.. his whole argument would fall apart if he would say that cleave is unique!  
A word that possesses two shades of meaning is a word that possesses two contradictory meanings.  No , auhtor is not assuming that - argument clearly says, 'sometimes' a word can possess.. that doesnt mean that the author is assuming always a word with shades of meaning will have contradictory meanings!

zuberahmed · Answer

I will go with C. what is the OA?

gijoedude · Answer

C. First he says that there are two different meanings. Then he jumps and says that words with two different meanings are fundamentally meaningless. C bridges that gap.

carcass · Answer

agree with C OA ???

OptimusPrimea1 · Answer

Agree with C..Though A might entice you..But it talks about the entire sentence and not of the word which is used in the sentence..

nishtil · Answer

C

the argument states one example as primise, and makes general claim that words are meaningless. 
assumption should make one of the primise true. option C explicitly makes the primise true.

Izvos · Answer

C fro me

viks4gmat · Answer

yup... nice question!! C is my take as well

bholakc · Answer

naveen1003 · Answer

+1 for C

It is common knowledge that a given word can have various

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards