do you need to put parentheses?

list → e → (people ←s→ limit → improve)

if you didn't have parentheses, would it fall under the "all before some" invalid argument in which case you can't say that:

e ←s→ improve

list ←s→ improve

making (A) not a valid conclusion?

Would C be incorrect also because it is attacking a premise? Are we to take it to be true that Azco's owner is a political supporter of hers?

My first instinct was (A) but in thinking of

inaccurate reproduction of object leading to inaccurate reproduction of reproduction, I thought that the reproduction had to be more similar and didn't think that inaccurate speech content was similar enough to sound quality.

If it were that George's speech was inaccurate and therefore the tape recording of it also could not be accurate, then it would make a lot more sense to me - sound quality just feels like an entirely different dimension - you can still have an accurate representation even with lower sound quality. you can still hear every single word he says even if it's lower sound quality

which lead me to rethink it like:

if not accurate to original --> reproduction not accurate

contraposing to: if reproduction accurate --> accurate to original

mapping that to (C)

if child's eyes resemble mothers (if reproduction accurate) --> accurate to original (both eyes brown)

which didn't feel entirely correct but still better than (A)

helpp how to go about rethinking it and improving on this