I think the cat argument is the weaker one due to the use of the word " intentionally". You cannot say he intentionally tipped it over without providing stronger evidence.

How would we make question 3 an argument?

Does this suffice?

Human communication is a universal phenomenon that has existed across different civilizations over time. Linguists have conducted many comparative analyses of traditional language from various regions and eras. The results showed that different civilizations had their own form of communication that dated 1000 of years.

@BowenZaunbrecher I see your point. But I think what helps me understand that it is not, is by always asking myself to find a connection between statements and a conclusion. The two statements do some what connect but the author does not reach a conclusion. 1) Human communication is universal ect--2) Linguists have conducted ect----

3) (what does this prove? It leaves me hanging).

I do not know if that helps you, but it helped me. Always ask what does this prove? And if you find yourself having to find a statement that reveals the answer to that question, then there is no conclusion and therefore no argument.