Thanks for the question! So we’re being asked here for something that lends support to the view that language has an essential correspondence to the things it describes. This one’s tough because the answers are wordy, but isn’t terrible once you break everything down. We just want something that shows that there’s some inherent nature of a thing for language to correspond to. (A) says that there are two independent language that categorizes physical objects the same way. Well, they developed independently, so the two languages couldn’t have influenced each other. But they just happened to categorize things the same? That suggests that the reason for the categorizations has to do with the objects themselves, which supports the theory. That’s why (A) is correct.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.