PrepTest 114, Section 2, Question 15
Ashley: Words like "of" and "upon," unlike "pencil"(20 more words not shown)
Joshua's remarks indicate that he(6 more words not shown)
- Aonly words that(5 more words not shown)
- Bwords that are(4 more words not shown)
- Cwords that refer(4 more words not shown)
- Dif a word(7 more words not shown)
- Eall words that(5 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
“Upon the table” still tells me something. It doesn't name a physical object the way “pencil” does, but it can express where one thing is in relation to another. Likewise, the word “of” does work in “cream of mushroom soup.” That makes me question Joshua's move from not referring to a thing to having no meaning.
We don't need to settle Ashley's account of reference to see the added step. Ashley says the words don't refer to anything. Joshua agrees and then calls them meaningless, using that judgment to recommend abandoning them. The question asks what Joshua has taken Ashley's statement to imply.
What we’re looking for
I'd look for the link between reference and meaning: if a word doesn't refer to something, it has no meaning. That is what allows Joshua to turn Ashley's description into the stronger judgment.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Only words that refer to something have meaning. Under this rule, reference is required for a word to be meaningful. So words that lack reference, such as the ones Ashley describes, would be meaningless.
That is the step Joshua adds. We can recognize it without agreeing with it: words could express relationships or serve another meaningful function without naming an object. The question concerns Joshua's interpretation, not whether his view of language is sound.
- B
This links usefulness with meaning, but Ashley didn't say the words were useless. She said they didn't refer to anything. B would need another connection before Joshua could apply it to those words.
- C
This runs in the other direction. Saying referential words are meaningful doesn't say that nonreferential words are meaningless. Both kinds could have meaning, and C would still be true. Joshua needs a rule that excludes meaning when reference is absent, which A supplies.
- D
This connects lack of usefulness with abandonment. It might look relevant to Joshua's recommendation, but it doesn't explain how he got “meaningless” from Ashley's statement about reference. We also weren't given the claim that the words are not useful. D skips the particular interpretive step the question asks about.
- E
Calling referential words useful doesn't tell us what to think about words that don't refer to something. They could be useful too. E also substitutes usefulness for the meaning claim Joshua makes, so it misses both the relevant group and the relevant judgment.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.