PT29.S2.Q13-- tribal communities in North America

Darklord

Hi everyone,

Hard question here: can anyone explain why answer choice A is completely incorrect? I can see how, based on the passage, "standardizing traditional languages" is "sometimes unnecessary" from lines 39-42, but I still can not find textual evidence for how "standardizing traditional languages requires arbitrary choices". The rhetorical question raised in lines 36-38 express arbitrariness, but I don't understand how we were supposed to know that this arbitrariness was "required" by standardization. No need to explain B,C,D, and E.

Thanks!

help

Admin note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-2-passage-2-questions/

jmarmaduke96

Hi there! I don't believe that there is a single line to point to that says verbatim "standardizing traditional languages requires arbitrary choices." However, given the tone of the passage and a couple specific lines of text, I think it is a very reasonable inference. For example, at lines 36-42 the author says "Another obstacle is dialect. There may be many language traditions in a particular community; which one is to be written down and taught? The Northern Utes decided not to standardize their language, agreeing that various phonetic spellings of words would be accepted as long as their meanings were clear."

Although, I think a better part to point to would be the discussion that follows this regarding the balancing between the preferences of some community members who favored rigid linguistics and the needs of the broader needs of the community. The choice of where to draw that line (balancing the needs of different groups of people) is somewhat arbitrary. Likely, if you were a member of the group that favored rigid linguists you would feel one way, if you were a member of the group of children who benefited from the change then you might feel a different way.

There is no objective standard to say how those choices must be made. Maybe there are a lot more in the second group, so utilitarianism would say make the choice to benefit them - the greatest good for the greatest number. Perhaps it would be better to err on the side of benefiting those who prefer the rigid linguistics. Maybe they have been around longer than everyone else and they really know something we don't.

Another way to look at it is through analogy. If I am trying to make a balancing decision - I have two dogs but only one treat, so I break the treat in half but one half is bigger. It is an arbitrary decision I make when deciding which dog gets the bigger half.

I hope that helps, let me know if it doesn't and I will try to explain it better!

Darklord

Hi jmarmaduke96: sorry, for the late secondary reply, but could you explain how you were able to come to that reasonable inference regarding 36-42? I think I am still a little lost regarding your explanation

Darklord

Hi jmarmaduke96: sorry, for the late secondary reply, but could you explain how you were able to come to that reasonable inference regarding 36-42? I think I am still a little lost regarding your explanation

jmarmaduke96

Hi! no worries at all, I think that lines 36-42 give us two important things. First, as you noted in your initial post, the rhetorical question posed to us by the author suggests arbitrariness. Although, since the question is asking about the Northern Utes, without the information at the bottom of that paragraph I don't think that would be enough.

However, it is still useful context. With the rhetorical question the author asks, he/she sort of "tees up" the shot for us and then we complete it by connecting that rhetorical question to the information regarding the children who were beneficiaries of the change as well as the rigid linguists. The beginning and end of the paragraph together allow us to make the inference to arbitrariness. Just to be clear, obviously this question is not asking for something that must be true or something that is explicitly stated, just something that is strongly supported based on the passage. Those two pieces of information together strongly support arbitrariness.

The other reason that I thought 36-42 was important was support for the other half of answer choice A. The fact that the Northern Utes decided against standardization indicates that standardizing language is sometimes unnecessary. I know that your question was directed towards the "arbitrary" part of the answer, but I thought I would mention both parts just for the sake of thoroughness. I hope that makes more sense, thank you for clarifying!

Darklord

Yes that makes more sense, thanks for the help!