Thanks for the question! So let’s take a look at what the stimulus is telling us. We’re told that being articulate and having a large vocabulary have been equated. But actually, people with big vocabularies don’t really do creative linguistic self-expression that’s required when no available words seem adequate. So, the argument concludes, a large vocabulary actually gets in the way of using language in a truly articulate way.
We’re being asked for which of the following is an assumption made in the argument. In other words, this is a strengthen with necessary premise question. We can use the negation test to try out answer choices. But before we look at the answer choices, it looks like there’s kind of a connection here being made between creative linguistic self-expression when you don’t know what to say and using language articulately, so that’s something to keep an eye out for.
Now take a look at (A), which tells us that the argument assumes that when people are truly articulate, they have the capacity to express themselves in situations in which their vocabularies seem inadequate. Let’s negate this and see if it weakens the argument. So let’s say that there’s no connection between people being truly articulate and having this capacity for self-expression when vocabulary seems inadequate. Then that definitely weakens the argument, right, because that’s what the argument seems to be doing! And since the negation weakens the argument, it’s an assumption being made, and (A) is the correct answer choice here.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
