In many languages other than English there is a word for "mother's brother" which is different from the word for "fat...
MeredithAugust 29, 2019
Issue with passage and answer choice
I am still confused as the passage says "languages that have few basic words for colors than ENGLISH ...." Thus how is A refuting if the conclusion is involving having less than English yet using English as their counter example and not another country
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
The argument tells us that the number of distinct words for colors equals the ability to distinguish colors, thus speakers of a language that have fewer basic words for colors than English must lack the physical ability to distinguish as many colors as English speakers. (A) tells us that English speakers have only one word for "blue" but can perceptually distinguish between lighter and darker shades, i.e. light blue/ dark blue, whereas in Russian there are two basic words for blue. This fact demonstrates that the number of words has no relation to the ability of a speaker of a certain language to distinguish colors.
The basic structure of the argument and the counterevidence is:
X speakers have fewer basic words for colors than Y speakers, X speakers must see fewer colors Y speakers have fewer words for blue than Z speakers but Y speakers can distinguish shades of blue just as fine
I see how it could be confusing using English speakers in the argument and the counterexample, but the choice of language is immaterial to the argument. We could use any other pair of languages with similar characteristics to reach the same result.
