Linguist: In English, the past is described as "behind" and the future "ahead," whereas in Aymara the past is "ahead"...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Assumption

HARD

...

Notes

Post a Query

Linguist: In English, the past is described as "behind" and the future "ahead," whereas in Aymara the past is "ahead" and the future "behind." Research indicates that English speakers sway backward when discussing the past and forward when discussing the future. Conversely, Aymara speakers gesture forward with their hands when discussing the past and backward when discussing the future. These bodily movements, therefore, suggest that the language one speaks affects how one mentally visualizes time.

The linguist's reasoning depends on assuming which of the following?

At least some Aymara speakers sway forward when discussing the past and backward when discussing the future.

Most people mentally visualize time as running either forward or backward.

Not all English and Aymara speakers tend to sway or gesture forward or backward when discussing the present.

How people move when discussing the future correlates to some extent with how they mentally visualize time.

The researchers also examined the movements of at least some speakers of languages other than English and Aymara discussing the past and the future.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
In English, the past is described as "behind" and the future "ahead," whereas in Aymara the past is "ahead" and the future "behind."	What it says: Two languages describe time in opposite ways - English puts past behind us and future ahead, while Aymara does the reverse What it does: Sets up a contrast between how different languages talk about time What it is: Factual comparison by the linguist
Research indicates that English speakers sway backward when discussing the past and forward when discussing the future.	What it says: English speakers physically move backward when talking about past and forward when talking about future What it does: Adds physical movement data that matches the English language pattern we just learned What it is: Research finding Visualization: English speakers: Past talk → body sways ← backward, Future talk → body sways forward →
Conversely, Aymara speakers gesture forward with their hands when discussing the past and backward when discussing the future.	What it says: Aymara speakers move forward when discussing past and backward when discussing future What it does: Provides matching physical evidence for Aymara that mirrors their language pattern, completing the parallel What it is: Research finding Visualization: Aymara speakers: Past talk → hands gesture forward →, Future talk → hands gesture ← backward
These bodily movements, therefore, suggest that the language one speaks affects how one mentally visualizes time.	What it says: The physical movements show that language influences how we think about time in our minds What it does: Draws a conclusion from all the evidence about language affecting mental time concepts What it is: Author's main conclusion

Argument Flow:

The argument moves from showing language differences about time, then presents physical movement research for both languages that matches their verbal descriptions, and concludes this proves language shapes mental time concepts.

Main Conclusion:

The language we speak affects how we mentally visualize time.

Logical Structure:

The evidence (matching physical movements with language patterns in two different languages) is used to support the broader claim that language influences mental time concepts. The argument assumes that physical movements reflect mental visualization.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Assumption - We need to find what the linguist must assume for their conclusion to be valid. The conclusion is that language affects how we mentally visualize time, based on the correlation between language patterns and body movements.

Precision of Claims

The key claims are about quality/nature relationships: (1) Language describes time directionally, (2) Body movements match language patterns, (3) These movements reflect mental visualization. We need to find gaps in this logical chain.

Strategy

To find assumptions, we'll look for ways the conclusion could fall apart while keeping all the stated facts true. The linguist jumps from 'body movements match language patterns' to 'language affects mental time visualization.' We need to identify what must be true for this jump to work.

Answer Choices Explained

At least some Aymara speakers sway forward when discussing the past and backward when discussing the future.

This choice misunderstands what evidence we already have. The passage tells us that Aymara speakers 'gesture forward with their hands when discussing the past and backward when discussing the future' - but it doesn't mention swaying. We don't need to assume they sway in any particular direction because the argument already works with the hand gestures that were observed. This isn't an assumption the argument depends on.

Most people mentally visualize time as running either forward or backward.

This is too broad and unnecessary. The linguist's conclusion is about how language affects mental time visualization, not about what 'most people' do in general. The argument works fine even if some people don't mentally visualize time as running forward or backward at all. We only need the connection to work for those who do have directional time concepts.

Not all English and Aymara speakers tend to sway or gesture forward or backward when discussing the present.

This choice about 'the present' is completely irrelevant. The entire argument focuses on past and future - how people move when discussing the present has nothing to do with the linguist's reasoning. The argument doesn't depend on any claims about present-tense discussions.

How people move when discussing the future correlates to some extent with how they mentally visualize time.

This is exactly what we need. The linguist jumps from 'body movements correlate with language patterns' to 'language affects mental time visualization.' But this logic only works if there's actually a connection between how people move and how they mentally think about time. Without this assumption, the physical movements could just be random habits that have nothing to do with mental concepts. This assumption is essential for the conclusion to be valid.

The researchers also examined the movements of at least some speakers of languages other than English and Aymara discussing the past and the future.

The argument doesn't require data from other languages beyond English and Aymara. Having just these two languages that show opposite patterns already provides sufficient evidence for the linguist's conclusion. Additional languages might strengthen the case, but they're not necessary for the reasoning to work.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...