LSAT 152 – Section 2 – Question 02

LSAT 152 - Section 2 - Question 02

November 2018

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:45

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
PT152 S2 Q02
+LR
+Exp
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Value Judgment +ValJudg
Analogy +An
A
99%
162
B
0%
151
C
0%
150
D
0%
153
E
1%
151
120
125
133
 +Easiest 147.463 +SubsectionMedium

Anderson: Taking the long view, history shows that word usage and grammar rules are constantly changing and evolving—sometimes resulting in entirely new languages. Since they will change regardless of our efforts, we shouldn’t worry about violations of grammar rules.

Lipton: That’s like arguing that we shouldn’t worry about enforcing laws since, in the larger scheme of things, laws change and nations come and go. But of course it is good that laws are enforced.

Speaker 1 Summary
Anderson says that we shouldn’t worry about enforcing grammar rules. In support, Anderson says that these rules will change over time anyway. And how do we know this? Because history shows that grammar rules are always changing.

Speaker 2 Summary
Lipton’s argument leads to the unstated conclusion that we should enforce grammar rules. Lipton supports this by drawing an analogy between grammar rules and laws, since both change over time. However, Lipton says, it’s good to enforce laws—implying that it’s also good to enforce grammar rules.

Objective
We want to find a disagreement between Anderson and Lipton. The two disagree about whether we should enforce grammar rules.

A
grammar violations should be resisted
Anderson disagrees with this and Lipton agrees, so this is the disagreement. Anderson’s main conclusion is that we shouldn’t enforce grammar rules—put differently, we shouldn’t resist grammar violations. Lipton’s implied conclusion is the opposite, that we should resist.
B
a language can evolve into an entirely new language
Anderson agrees with this, and most likely, Lipton does as well. Lipton seems to take Anderson’s claims about language evolution for granted, and just disagrees about whether that’s a basis to ignore grammar rules.
C
users of a language can easily adapt to changes in that language
Neither speaker makes this claim. Anderson is the only one who talks directly about how languages change over time, but even so doesn’t mention how users of the language are impacted by those changes.
D
people only rarely violate grammar rules
Neither speaker expresses an opinion about this claim. Anderson and Lipton are discussing in the abstract whether grammar rules should be enforced. Neither one mentions how often people actually violate those rules.
E
languages evolve through an accumulation of changes in usage and rules
Anderson most likely agrees with this, and Lipton probably does as well. Anderson’s description of language evolution (which Lipton seems to accept) does mention that changes in usage and rules can cause new languages. That’s consistent with this statement.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 152 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply