Let's deconstruct the argument:
The roads connecting two distant cities in the country of Kahuya allow travelers to drive at a speed of 20 miles per hour.
- A fact (can be a premise)If there are no monsoons which render the roads unusable, and if one makes only one half-hour stop every 4 hours,
the journey can be made in 5 days. - If X happens, then Y happens. (i.e. a conditional situation).
Clearly, the consequence (Y) of the condition (X) is a prediction and hence is a conclusion. Thus, 2nd (the consequence) should be a conclusion.
Let's see the choices now.
A. The first is a premise; the second is
a generality.2nd is a outcome of one or many conditions and is not a generality. B. The first is an inference; the second is a conclusion.
2nd is a conclusion. But, what is inference here in 1st?
1st is clearly mentioned "If there are no monsoons which render the roads unusable" and is not a deduction from the preceding statement. C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a piece of evidence.
2nd is not an evidence. D. The first is a condition; the
second is a premise limited by the first.
1st is a condition, but 2nd is not a premise. E. The first is an opinion, the second is the conclusion which leads to that opinion.
1st is a condition and 2nd is a conclusion , but 2nd does not lead to 1st ( in fact, it's opposite . In If X, then Y, X leads to Y)I am unable to select anyone here.
Since I have to select one (when none seems perfect), I will reject choice A, B and E for the reasons mentioned. (These reasons are too strong).
Between C and D :
The all I know that 1st is a condition and 2nd is limited by it - Thus, D looks better.
IMO
D I am awaiting someone to share a better approach.