LSAT 114 – Section 2 – Question 19

LSAT 114 - Section 2 - Question 19

October 2002

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:57

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT114 S2 Q19
+LR
+Exp
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Rule-Application +RuleApp
Value Judgment +ValJudg
Analogy +An
A
0%
152
B
4%
156
C
1%
160
D
1%
156
E
94%
166
131
140
149
 +Easier 145.502 +SubsectionMedium

Professor Beckstein: American Sign Language is the native language of many North Americans. Therefore, it is not a foreign language, and for that reason alone, no student should be permitted to satisfy the university’s foreign language requirement by learning it.

Professor Sedley: According to your argument, students should not be allowed to satisfy the university’s foreign language requirement by learning French or Spanish either, since they too are the native languages of many North Americans. Yet many students currently satisfy the requirement by studying French or Spanish, and it would be ridiculous to begin prohibiting them from doing so.

Speaker 1 Summary
Beckstein concludes that students shouldn’t be allowed to satisfy the foreign language requirement by learning ASL. This is because he believes ASL isn’t a foreign language, based on the fact that it’s the native language of many people in North America.

Speaker 2 Summary
Sedley undermines Beckstein’s argument by pointing out that Beckstein’s logic would commit him to arguing that French and Spanish shouldn’t satisfy the foreign language requirement, because many North Americans speak these languages natively. The point is Beckstein’s assumption for what’s required to be considered a foreign language is absurd.

Objective
They disagree on whether a language is foreign simply because it’s native to many North Americans.

A
whether American Sign Language is the native language of a significant number of North Americans
Sedley has no opinion. He doesn’t say anything suggesting an opinion about whether ASL is native to a lot of North Americans.
B
whether any North American whose native language is not English should be allowed to fulfill the university’s foreign language requirement by studying his or her own native language
Sedley doesn’t have an opinion. He doesn’t comment on whether studying one’s own native language should satisfy the foreign language requirement. (Beckstein also doesn’t have an opinion, but it’s easier to see that Sedley doesn’t.)
C
whether the university ought to retain a foreign language requirement
Neither speaker has an opinion. They don’t comment on whether universities should keep this requirement.
D
whether any other universities in North America permit their students to fulfill a foreign language requirement by learning American Sign Language
Neither speaker has an opinion. They don’t comment on the requirements of other universities besides the university that Beckstein refers to.
E
whether the fact that a language is the native language of many North Americans justifies prohibiting its use to fulfill the university’s foreign language requirement
This is a point of disagreement. Beckstein assumes that if a language is native to many North Americans, it shouldn’t fulfill the requirement. Sedley disagrees. He says French/Spanish are native to many, but that we shouldn’t disqualify these from satisfying the requirement.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 114 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply