Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaEvaluating Intermediate Conclusions

Linguist: Creole languages emerge when groups lacking a common tongue are forced into prolonged contact. Notably, the syntax of early, first-generation creoles completely lacks the recursive structures characteristic of fully established languages. This demonstrates that the initial formation of a creole is driven strictly by immediate transactional necessity rather than an intrinsic drive for complex cognitive expression. However, when a creole is acquired by a subsequent generation as their native tongue, it rapidly develops these missing recursive features. Therefore, the activation of the human brain's full capacity for complex grammar requires the process of native language acquisition, not merely the pressure of basic communication.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the linguist's argument by the claim that the initial formation of a creole is driven strictly by immediate transactional necessity rather than an intrinsic drive for complex cognitive expression?

  1. A
    It is the argument's main conclusion, which is supported by the evidence concerning how subsequent generations acquire language.
  2. It is an intermediate conclusion that is derived from the observation about early creole syntax and serves to support the argument's overall conclusion.Cevap
  3. C
    It is a generalization that the linguist introduces primarily in order to refute it with evidence about recursive grammatical features.
  4. D
    It provides purely contextual background information meant to establish the historical conditions under which creole languages typically emerge.
  5. E
    It is an unstated assumption relying on outside information regarding the psychological motivations of early creole speakers.

Cevap

The statement acts as an intermediate conclusion. It is deduced from a premise and then used to support the final main conclusion.
The target statement is introduced by the phrase 'This demonstrates that', which clearly signals it is a deduction based on the preceding premise (that early creoles lack recursive structures). It is not the final point of the argument, however. The author uses this established point about 'immediate transactional necessity' to set up a contrast with subsequent generations, ultimately building toward the final main conclusion (signaled by 'Therefore') regarding native language acquisition. A statement that is supported by a premise and in turn supports the main conclusion is an intermediate conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The main conclusion is the final sentence: 'Therefore, the activation of the human brain's full capacity for complex grammar requires the process of native language acquisition...'
Finding the main conclusion first provides the anchor point for understanding how all other structural elements function.
2
Analyze the relationship between the target statement and the preceding sentence.
The preceding sentence states that early creoles lack recursive structures. The target statement begins with 'This demonstrates that...', showing it is a conclusion drawn from that fact.
This establishes that the target statement is a conclusion rather than a basic premise or background information.
3
Analyze the relationship between the target statement and the main conclusion.
The target statement establishes that basic communication needs only produce simple syntax. This contrasts with the subsequent generation's development of complex syntax, logically leading to the main conclusion.
Because the statement is a conclusion itself, but also supports a further conclusion, it is structurally an intermediate (or subsidiary) conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions

Bu konudan daha fazla soru