Here we have a strengthen with necessary premise question. Remember that a premise is necessary for a conclusion if the falsity of the premise guarantees or brings about the falsity of the conclusion. First we check to see if the answer choice strengthens the passage, and then, if it does strengthen, we negate the answer choice to see if its negation makes the argument fall apart. If the answer choice does both those things then it is our correct answer.
Let's diagram this argument.
"People with large vocabularies have no incentive for, and tend not to engage in, the kind of creative linguistic self-expression that is required when no available words seem adequate."
P1: LV ==> not ENWA ENWA ==> not LV
"Thus, a large vocabulary is a hindrance to using language in a truly articulate way."
C: LV ==> not TA TA ==> not LV
Answer choice (A) states: "When people are truly articulate, they have the capacity to express themselves in situations in which their vocabularies seem inadequate.
(A): TA ==> ENWA not ENWA ==> not TA
Okay, so first we must ask ourselves: does this strengthen the argument? Yes. We can use the transitive property to connect (A) to the contrapositive of P1 like so: TA ==> ENWA ==> not LV. From this we can conclude: TA ==> not LV, which is the contrapositive of the conclusion. Therefore, answer choice (A) supports the conclusion.
Next, let's negate answer choice (A). Remember, there are three types of sentences we can negate: (1) Sufficient & Necessary statements, (2) Quantifier statements, and (3) Statements of Fact. Answer choice (A) is a Sufficient & Necessary statement (the word "when" is a temporal indicator of a sufficient condition). So how do we negate a Sufficient & Necessary statement? We must show the sufficient condition without the necessary condition.
Therefore, the negation of answer choice (A) is: If people are truly articulate, they do not necessarily have the capacity to express themselves in situations in which their vocabularies seem inadequate.
Negation: TA ==> not ENWA ENWA ==> not TA
In order to get to our conclusion, we have assumed that being truly articulate requires "ENWA." Thus, since we established that having a large vocabulary means that you do not have "ENWA," we conclude that if you have a large vocabulary, you are not truly articulate. However, if being truly articulate did not require "ENWA," i.e., if the negation of answer choice (A) were true, then we could no longer conclude that having a large vocabulary was sufficient to conclude that you are not truly articulate, since - according to the negation of answer choice (A) - one who is truly articulate is not ENWA, just as one who has a large vocabulary is not "ENWA." Therefore, the negation of answer choice (A) makes the argument fall apart because the conclusion is no longer necessarily true.
Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.
Veda-BhadharlaJuly 28, 2020
I was thrown off by A because it refers to peoples' "capacity", but nowhere in the question does it say that people with large vocabularies don't have the capacity, it just says they have no incentive, so I feel like that is a big difference. When you look at the negation, the answer makes sense, but is that the only way to decipher that this is the answer. And do I have to do this for every assumption question?
VictoriaAugust 10, 2020
Hi @Veda-Bhadharla,
Happy to help!
This is a Strengthen with Necessary Premise question. The correct answer choice for this type of question will always be the underlying assumption that is necessary for the conclusion to be properly drawn.
Therefore, the correct answer choice is usually not explicitly addressed in the stimulus. Rather, we are looking for the underlying assumption that has been made, but not articulated, by the author.
When addressing Strengthen with Necessary Premise questions, you are always looking for the answer choice that, if negated, no longer allows the conclusion to be properly drawn. In this way, the assumption is necessary for the argument as, without it, the argument cannot be properly concluded.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any further questions.
