the analysis says we cant conclude a statement "isnt a lie" but if we take the contrapositive of the second conditional then it would be 'if its not a lie, then its not intended to deceive or its clarified after misinterpretation. im confused so it would be great if someone could clear this uo

@mg123 yeah man keep going, it clicks for everyone at different times and the "clicking" itself happens at different levels, just keep studying and don't stop until you find what your brain needs

Im confused about q3, I had believed it was an argument as if linguists conducted analysis of languages from different regions and eras that should mean human communication existed across different civilizations over time. I understand im wrong if the word "universal" means every civilization as the following statement doesnt include every civilization but then I dont understand how changing "conducted" to "discovered" would make it an argument as the fact that linguists have "conducted" "comparative analyses" of multiple traditional languages from various regions and eras means those languages had to have existed and been discovered.