PrepTest 143, Section 1, Question 4
Scientist: In testing whether a baby's babbling is(59 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AIt describes an(16 more words not shown)
- BIt questions the(21 more words not shown)
- CIt raises a(17 more words not shown)
- DIt describes an(22 more words not shown)
- EIt presents two(17 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What would looking at a baby's mouth tell us about whether the sounds are language?
The mouth movement initially seems like an odd thing to study. Then the scientist gives us the comparison: nonlinguistic sounds generally involve a wider opening on the left, while these babies open the right side wider. Now I see the point of the videotapes. The babies aren't showing the pattern associated with nonlinguistic sounds, and the scientist takes that as evidence for language.
Does that settle it? I'd still wonder whether the general pattern applies to babies in this situation. Their random sounds might not follow it. But we aren't being asked to find a flaw. We're being asked to describe the reasoning the scientist actually uses.
What we’re looking for
There are two proposed interpretations—language or random sounds—and the observed mouth movements are used to choose between them. Keep that basic comparison in mind when the answers describe the method in abstract terms.
Working the answers
- A
There isn't an initial argument followed by a counterargument rejecting its conclusion. The scientist presents two possible interpretations and gives evidence favoring one. A competing possibility isn't the same as a developed argument that the scientist then refutes.
- B
The scientist uses the earlier finding about mouth movements rather than trying to undermine and replace it. We aren't told that a generally accepted principle is inadequate or offered a new principle to take its place.
- C
The study has already been carried out: researchers videotaped the babies and obtained results. The scientist uses those results to answer the question. The passage doesn't merely propose a test and argue that conducting it is necessary.
- D
Nobody is quoted arguing that the linguistic interpretation is unlikely, and the scientist doesn't answer such objections. The explanation of babbling is the conclusion reached from the evidence, not a previously offered explanation defended against criticism.
- ECorrect
The phenomenon is the babies' babbling. The two interpretations are that it is linguistic or just random sound. Wider opening on the right differs from the reported pattern for nonlinguistic vocalizations, so the scientist uses that observation against the random-sound interpretation and in favor of language. We can describe that method accurately even if we still have questions about how convincing the evidence is.
More Strategy of Argument questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strategy of Argument questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.