PrepTest 82, Section 3, Question 18
In many families adults speak to babies in simplified language. Yet constantly repeating simple phrases like "Nice kitty. See the kitty?" does not provide extra help to children in learning a language. We know this because there are families in which no one speaks to babies this way, yet the children in these families master the grammatical structure of their language just as well and as quickly as other children do.
In many families adults speak to babies in simplified language. Yet constantly repeating simple phrases like "Nice kitty. See the kitty?" does not provide extra help to children in learning a language. We know this because there are families in which no one speaks to babies this way, yet the children in these families master the grammatical structure of their language just as well and as quickly as other children do.
In many families adults speak to babies in simplified language. Yet constantly repeating simple phrases like "Nice kitty. See the kitty?" does not provide extra help to children in learning a language. We know this because there are families in which no one speaks to babies this way, yet the children in these families master the grammatical structure of their language just as well and as quickly as other children do.
In many families adults speak to babies in simplified language. Yet constantly repeating simple phrases like "Nice kitty. See the kitty?" does not provide extra help to children in learning a language. We know this because there are families in which no one speaks to babies this way, yet the children in these families master the grammatical structure of their language just as well and as quickly as other children do.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Babies pay no extra attention to spoken phrases with simple grammatical structures.
Speaking to babies in simplified language could impair their language learning.
Any child who has mastered the grammatical structure of a language has learned the language.
Many linguists believe that speaking to babies in simplified language helps the babies learn language.
To learn a language one must acquire its vocabulary as well as its grammatical structure.
Explanations
The passage argues that using simple phrases doesn't help children learn language. Why? Because, according to the author, in families who don't speak to kids this way, kids master the grammatical structure of their language as quickly as those in families who don't.
The author's treating grammatical structure mastery as sufficient for learning a language. That leaves this argument unproven, and it's something the argument necessarily assumes, so I'm fully expecting a necessary assumption question here.
Sure enough, it's a necessary assumption. We need the answer choice the author must agree with—the one, without which, the argument's conclusion falls to pieces.
Nah, the author doesn't have to agree with this. Negate it: "Babies pay at least some extra attention..." Cool—even if babies pay this extra attention, extra attention given does not equate to language learned, so the author could still make their argument.
No. Again, the author doesn't have to agree with this. Even if speaking to babies in simple language does not impair their language learning, the author could still conclude that it doesn't provide extra help.
Bingo. This is the answer. Any implies if. Here's this answer choice rephrased: "If a child has mastered the the grammatical structure of a language, then the child has learned the language." The author's mistake is equating learning grammatical structure with learning a language.
No way. What linguists believe is utterly irrelevant.
Nah, this is a trap. The addition of the word vocabulary adds one layer of wrongness. But even if we took out the vocabulary bit, the answer choice confuses the conditional relationship the author implies between learning language and grammar structure—it would read, "If you learn a language, then you learn its vocab and its grammar structure."
0 Comments