Step 1: Identify the Conclusion
We focus strictly on Professor Wigmore’s argument.
Conclusion: It is the literature department’s responsibility to include the study of advertisements in its undergraduate courses.
Step 2: Identify the Structure / Line of Reasoning
Let us look at the premises that Professor Wigmore provides to reach this conclusion:
Premise 1: Advertisements have a powerfully detrimental effect on society because people cannot discern their real messages.
Premise 2: Literature department courses give students the critical skills to analyze and understand texts.
Category: Cause–Effect Argument
Professor Wigmore connects a societal problem (harm from advertisements) and a functional tool (critical skills taught by the department) to assign a moral/professional obligation (responsibility) to the department. He acts on the basis that because the department can provide the solution to a cause of harm, it must step in.
Step 3: Jot Down the Core Line of Reasoning & "Bridge the Gap"
To bridge the gap between the premise and the conclusion, we look at the core assumptions required by this specific line of reasoning:
Assumption 1 (Primary Factor/Role): The literature department's responsibility is actually tied to fixing societal issues/analyzing non-literary texts like advertisements, rather than only teaching true literary works as Professor Chan claimed.
Assumption 2 (No other factors): There isn't a strict boundary or rule preventing the literature department from taking on tasks outside of traditional "true literary works".
Step 4: Paraphrase the Answer
Before looking at the options, we pre-determine what the correct answer should say:
Paraphrase: The correct option must show that the literature department is allowed to, or responsible for, teaching things other than just traditional "true literary works." If its scope were strictly limited to true literary works, Wigmore's argument that it must include advertisements completely falls apart.
Evaluation of the Answer Choices
Let us analyze the options one by one:
(A) Texts that are true literary works never have a detrimental effect on society.
Incorrect. Professor Wigmore's argument focuses on why advertisements should be included based on their detrimental effect. What true literary works do or do not do to society is outside the scope of his argument.
(B) Courses offered by the literature department cannot include both true literary works and material such as advertisement.
Incorrect. This option actually contradicts Wigmore's conclusion. Wigmore is arguing that advertisements should be included alongside the curriculum. If they cannot coexist, his argument falls apart in the opposite direction.
(C) Students who take courses in the literature department do not get from those courses other skills besides those needed to analyze and understand texts.
Incorrect. Wigmore relies on the fact that students do get the skills to analyze and understand texts. Whether they get additional skills (like creative writing or historical knowledge) does not impact his argument about advertisements.
(D) Forms of advertising that convey their message entirely through visual images do not have a detrimental effect on society.
Incorrect. This narrows the scope to purely visual ads. Wigmore is making a broad claim about advertisements as "texts" that need analysis. This option is irrelevant to the structural gap between the department's boundary and its responsibility.
(E) The literature department’s responsibility is not limited to teaching students how to analyze true literary works.
Correct. This perfectly matches our paraphrase. If the department's responsibility were strictly limited to teaching true literary works, then it could not be responsible for including advertisements (which Wigmore admits "might or might not be true literary works"). Negating this choice completely destroys Wigmore's conclusion.