GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 4): A Japanese noun is pronounced the

Question

A Japanese noun is pronounced the same way whether it is singular or plural, so to indicate plurality, speakers use number words paired with special endings known as counters. The phrase three fish could be rendered three (small animal)-count fish. Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude. The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional: even whales might be described using the small animal counter, as if saying number animal-count fish.

Which of the following can be most logically inferred on the basis of the information in the passage?

Which of the following can be most logically inferred on the basis of the information in the passage?

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south.

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage.

AndrewN · Accepted Answer

If you know anything about me by now, you probably know that I cannot resist a fun and quirky question. Where else are you going to come across a GMAT™-like question on Japanese counters? The passage map is easy to follow:

The first sentence introduces the idea of counter usage  to indicate plurality  in Japanese nouns   The second sentence provides an example of a translated phrase   The third sentence explains the importance of using counters, which extends into both grammar and culture   The fourth sentence illustrates just how specific counter usage can be   The last sentence tells us that  many speakers  are now using a blunt approach to counters, and provides another example (perhaps traditional usage labeled mammalian whales  fish , and at least this linguistic tradition hung around)

Because our task is to infer something based on the above information, I would not waste a second thinking of what the answer choices might hold in store. Just get cracking.

Notice that counters have completely dropped from the picture here. This answer choice is broadening the scope of the passage to say that someone from the far north would not comprehend the  Japanese  that someone from the far south was speaking. There is no information from the passage to support such a contention.

Again, we really cannot say. It is true that the fourth line of the passage tells us that the  age… of the speaker may dictate which counter to use , but  may  is not the same as  will , and without being fluent in Japanese ourselves, we have no way of knowing in which context counters may differ between elderly and younger speakers. Just because whales (from the passage) and elephants are large animals, we cannot conclude that what holds in one case will necessarily hold in another.

We have a few clues that lend support to this answer, not the least of which are the two examples,  three (small animal)-count fish  and  number animal-count fish  (in reference to whales). It does not seem like a stretch to assume that a native speaker would grasp  three… fish  and  number… fish , the phrases surrounding the counter words. Also, that seemingly throwaway third line comes in handy:  Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude . How can a phrase be considered  grammatically unsound  if it is not understood? Evidently, enough of the phrase must be grasped to be evaluated in such a manner. This does not require a real-world assumption, but a careful consideration of the information the passage provides.

Context is everything. We have discussed above how  may be perceived as rude  is not the same as  will be , so  likely  seems more speculative than what the passage supports. It could be the case that a restaurant worker would scowl at a non-native speaker butchering the language, but it could also be true that many native speakers would assume a non-native speaker would not know to use counters and would grant that person a free pass for a linguistic faux pas. (I think of how I might react if someone I understood to be from a non-native English-speaking background said, on the model of  I caught a cold , said something like  I caught  the  COVID .)

Like (B) and (D) before, this answer choice rates the likelihood of something loosely related to the passage. We are in no position to tell whether Tokyo would see more or fewer  regional variations in counter usage . There could be a standardized Tokyo dialect that pretty much everyone adhered to, or there could be a lot of variation because of the sheer number of people in and around such a metropolis. We also cannot assess what may be true in a different city.

Out of the five options, (C) is the only one that can reasonably be inferred from the information in the passage, no drawing from real life required.

I hope you enjoyed this one as much as I did. Game on, even if you did stumble.

- Andrew

mainbhiankit · Answer

Let's go one option at a time since the stimulus just gives us the premise. There's no argument. Our job is to figure out which of the following can be inferred.

(A) It is said that  without  these counters, a phrase can be considered grammatically unsound and rude. But can people understand them? Sure. Using different counters wouldn't mean someone would face difficulty in deciphering what the other person means. A is out.
(B) The usage of a counter depends on age, location and occupation. It's possible that all elderly people share the same counter. It's also possible that none of them too. We cannot infer B. Throw it out the window.
(C) This can be inferred. Sure, that person can be offended or turn out to be a grammar nazi, but they would still understand the intended meaning. Let's hold on to this option.
(D) Disapproval at the restaurant? Isn't this too specific? It  may be  perceived as rude. We don't know how likely is it to happen. D isn't the right choice.
(E) Bigger cities have a more diverse set of occupations, and that's one factor that defines the usage of a counter. So, again, this cannot be inferred.

Option C is the right choice.

Archit3110 · Answer

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south.  given The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.  same as A

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.  reason : A Japanese noun is pronounced the same way whether it is singular or plural Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude
 
(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.  is not relevant to argument

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage.  same as A

OPTION C is correct

NextGenNerd · Answer

Correct answer: Choice C

This is an inference question. So the answer should be 100% true

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south. - Wrong- Does not have to be 100% true

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.
 - Wrong- Does not have to be 100% true

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter. - Correct answer.
The statements in the argument say: without counters, it will be ungrammatical and may be considered rude. Also, the noun is the same irrespective of singular or plural. hence I think, the meaning can definitely be grasped

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage. - Wrong- Does not have to be 100% true

Kinshook · Answer

A Japanese noun is pronounced the same way whether it is singular or plural, so to indicate plurality, speakers use number words paired with special endings known as counters. The phrase three fish could be rendered three (small animal)-count fish. Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude. The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional: even whales might be described using the small animal counter, as if saying number animal-count fish.

Which of the following can be most logically inferred on the basis of the information in the passage?

Which of the following can be most logically inferred on the basis of the information in the passage?

The statement contradicts " However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional"
Incorrect

The statement contradicts the sentence " The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use."
Incorrect

Even if there may be many counter counters for the same thing, a Japanese persons would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase since it is stated in the argument, "The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional"
Correct

A non-native speaker may have trouble understanding and using a counter but it can not be concluded that he would be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant. He may use body language instead.
Incorrect

A major city having inhabitants from across the World, will have more variations in usage of the counters than a smaller city
Incorrect

IMO C

soudipsengupta · Answer

Inference question; one of the following must logically follow from the above statements.

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south.
 INCORRECT : This cannot be inferred from the given statements.

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.
 INCORRECT : This may be true but not must be true

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.
 CORRECT : This logically follows from the statements. From the statements: "Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude. The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional.." we see that although without the counters the phrase is considered ungrammatical and perceived as rude but for it to be rude, it may very well be understandable.

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.
 INCORRECT   This may be true but not must be true

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage.
 INCORRECT   Again this may be true but not must be true.

rxb266 · Answer

A Japanese noun is pronounced the same way whether it is singular or plural, so to indicate plurality, speakers use number words paired with special endings known as counters. The phrase three fish could be rendered three (small animal)-count fish. Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude. The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional: even whales might be described using the small animal counter, as if saying number animal-count fish.

Which of the following can be most logically inferred on the basis of the information in the passage?

The passage says counters are grammatically required, but it also says the exact counter used can vary by region, age, or occupation, and that many speakers now use some counters more broadly than tradition would require. So the best inference is that people can still understand a phrase even when a different counter is used.

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south.

This goes too far. The passage says regional dialect may affect which counter is used, but it does not say speakers from different regions would have trouble understanding one another.

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.

Too strong. The passage says age may affect counter choice, but it does not say elderly and younger speakers would rarely use the same one.

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.

This is the best answer. Since counters vary and are sometimes used more broadly than tradition allows, speakers can likely still understand the intended meaning even when the counter differs from the one they themselves would choose.

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.

This is tempting, but it adds too much. The passage says leaving out a counter is grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude, but it does not specifically support this restaurant scenario or say what reaction a non-native speaker would likely get.

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage.

The passage says nothing about city size and variation.

Answer: (C)

VelvetThunder · Answer

ANSWER C

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south.  Not necessarily. many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.  Age of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. So incorrect

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.  CORRECT. Could be true. many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage.  Variance in usage is not mentioned in the passage

gullyboy09 · Answer

Hi  MartyMurray ,  KarishmaB  can you please help me with this question, with option C and D.

C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.

How can we infer the person who is not using the counters, another person "would probably" will be able to understand what first person is saying. Passage only tells us that it is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude, but no hint on if person would be able to grasp the meaning or not.

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.

In paragraph, it is mentioned "may" be perceived as rude, and here "likely" be met, is it a right way to reject this, as may signifies possibility and likely signifies probability(significant)

guddo · Answer

A Japanese noun is pronounced the same way whether it is singular or plural, so to indicate plurality, speakers use number words paired with special endings known as counters. The phrase three fish could be rendered three (small animal)-count fish. Without these counters, a phrase is considered grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude. The regional dialect, age, or even occupation of the speaker may dictate which counter to use. However, many speakers across the country apply certain counters more broadly than is traditional: even whales might be described using the small animal counter, as if saying number animal-count fish. 
 
Which of the following can be most logically inferred on the basis of the information in the passage?

The passage says counters are grammatically required, but it also says the exact counter used can vary by region, age, or occupation, and that many speakers now use some counters more broadly than tradition would require. So the best inference is that people can still understand a phrase even when a different counter is used.

(A) A person from Hokkaido, the most northerly of the main islands of Japan, would have trouble understanding someone from Okinawa, located over a thousand miles to the south.

This goes too far. The passage says regional dialect may affect which counter is used, but it does not say speakers from different regions would have trouble understanding one another.

(B) Few elderly speakers would use the same counter as younger speakers to refer to an animal such as an elephant.

Too strong. The passage says age may affect counter choice, but it does not say elderly and younger speakers would rarely use the same one.

(C) A Japanese person would probably grasp the meaning of a phrase with or without a counter, even if that person would use a different counter.

This is the best answer. Since counters vary and are sometimes used more broadly than tradition allows, speakers can likely still understand the intended meaning even when the counter differs from the one they themselves would choose.

(D) A non-native speaker who did not know to use a counter would likely be met with disapproval when placing an order for two fish skewers at a restaurant.

This is tempting, but it adds too much. The passage says leaving out a counter is grammatically unsound and may be perceived as rude, but it does not specifically support this restaurant scenario or say what reaction a non-native speaker would likely get.

(E) A major city such as Tokyo, with tens of millions of inhabitants, would be less likely than a smaller city to see regional variations in counter usage.

The passage says nothing about city size and variation.

Answer: (C)

KarishmaB · Answer

From what we understand, different people use different counters. Also, if counters are not used, people may perceive it as grammatically unsound and may be rude - which makes me think that they would understand that a counter had to be used but wasn't.

Hence option (C) makes sense, especially since it uses "would probably" and not "will"

On the other hand, "likely" in option (D) is stronger than the possibility represented by "may" hence (D) doesn't work. Yes, if the argument gives you possibility, you cannot assume probability.

GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 4): A Japanese noun is pronounced the

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 4): A Japanese noun is pronounced the

Prep Toolkit

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