In many languages other than English there is a word for "mother's brother" which is different from the word for "fat...

Naz September 12, 2014

The conclusion of the argument is: "speakers of languages that have fewer basic words for colors than English has must be perceptually unable to distinguish as many colors as speakers of English can distinguish."

Why? We are given an example on languages that have differing words for "uncle." We know that languages that have different words for "mother's brother" and "father's brother" have a more finely discriminated kinship system than do those whose language only has one word that signifies both people, e.g. "uncle."

Thus, the reasoning of the argument is that just as a language with more words distinguishing the specific relation of each of one's uncles has speakers with a more finely tuned understanding of the kinship system, a language with more basic colors than another will have speakers who could better distinguish colors.

So, pertaining to colors, if a language has fewer basic words for colors than another, then the speakers of that language must be perceptually unable to distinguish as many colors as the speakers of the language with more basic words for colors.

Answer choice (A) states: "Speakers of English are able to distinguish between lighter and darker shades of the color they call "blue,' for which Russian has two different basic words."

Here we have a scenario where a language that has only one word for the color "blue," can distinguish between lighter and darker shades. Thus, answer choice (A) breaks down the reasoning in the argument since the English language has fewer basic words for the color "blue" than the Russian language does, and yet speakers of English can distinguish between the different shades of blue; so the reasoning that speakers of a language with fewer basic words for colors will not be able to distinguish as many colors as speakers of a language with more basic words for colors no longer stands.

Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

judybaladi March 4, 2019

I don't understand why it is answer choice A since we do have many words in English to differentiate between different shades of blue and Russian only has 2. (we have navy, cerulean, etc.)

Ravi March 11, 2019

@judybaladi,

Happy to help.

(A) says, "Speakers of English are able to distinguish between lighter
and darker shades of the color they call "blue," for which Russian has
two different basic words."

The author's argument is assuming that if a language lacks two
distinct names for a given color (such as different shades of blue),
then it is impossible to distinguish the difference between these
colors. However, this is a pretty unreasonable assumption to make. (A)
provides information to undermine the author's conclusion by showing
that it is possible for people to distinguish two colors without
giving each color a distinct name. And, if (A) is true, then the
author's conclusion that speakers of languages that have fewer basic
words for colors than English has must be perceptually unable to
distinguish as many colors as speakers of English can distinguish is
weakened substantially. Thus,(A) is the correct answer choice.

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!

Shirnel May 20, 2020

Hi Ravi,

So is (A) stating that although Russian has two basic words for blue, Russian speakers can distinguish between lighter and darker shades of blue?

If that is the case I can't see how (A) spells that out.