CR: Nation's Unity

[amitg_ind]

No nation can long survive unless its people are united by a common tongue. For proof, we need only consider Canada, which is being torn asunder by conflicts between French-speaking Quebec and the other provinces, which are dominated by English speakers.

Which of the following, if true, most effectively challenges the author’s conclusion?

(A) Conflicts over language have led to violent clashes between the Basque-speaking minority in Spain and the Spanish-speaking majority.

(B) Proposals to declare English the official language of the United States have met with resistance from members of Hispanic and other minority groups.

© Economic and political differences, along with linguistic ones, have contributed to the provincial conflicts in Canada.

(D) The public of India, in existence sine 1948, has a population that speaks hundreds of different, though related, languages.

(E) Switzerland has survived for nearly a thousand years as a home for speakers of three different languages.

[gmatlove]

Between D and E; I would go for E as it says the three langauges are completely different and have been that way for 1000s of years.

 

No nation can long survive unless its people are united by a common tongue. For proof, we need only consider Canada, which is being torn asunder by conflicts between French-speaking Quebec and the other provinces, which are dominated by English speakers.

Which of the following, if true, most effectively challenges the author’s conclusion?

(A) Conflicts over language have led to violent clashes between the Basque-speaking minority in Spain and the Spanish-speaking majority.

(B) Proposals to declare English the official language of the United States have met with resistance from members of Hispanic and other minority groups.

© Economic and political differences, along with linguistic ones, have contributed to the provincial conflicts in Canada.

(D) The public of India, in existence sine 1948, has a population that speaks hundreds of different, though related, languages.

(E) Switzerland has survived for nearly a thousand years as a home for speakers of three different languages.

[geekybiz1]

My pick is C.

 

D and E talk about existence/survival of population in other countries with many languages, but no details whether provinces of these countries are conflict free is available.

[dbharti]

Geekybiz: I too feel that E is clearly the correct one...

In C, economic n political factors along with linguistic ones are responsible for Canada's chaos.... so it is strengthening the conclusion that linguistic factors are responsible in some way or the other...

E by citing an example states the reverse...

[davetordesillas]

IMHB it's C

 

The reasoning of using Canada as an example (i.e. premise to back up the argument) is flawed because it is based on other factors as well (Economic and political differences, NOT ONLY LINGUISTIC ONES). Therefore if the so called "proof" is undermined, the argument is sufficiently challenged.

[tamgehteca]

I think it should D or E,more specifically E,as the author is making a conclusion about any country in general and is taking Canada as an example.He is stating that Canada's socio-economic turmoils are attributed to the two different languages.

The statement in E challenges the authors conclusion by stating another example of Switzerland which has survived with three different languages.

so I think its E.

any more comments?

[merlinacious]

IMO E

 

No nation can long survive unless its people are united by a common tongue.

 

Switzerland has survived for nearly a thousand years as a home for speakers of three different languages

 

Need I say more?

[BigGameJames]

I think it's E.

[Razind]

I am for E .

 

Between D and E ..E has a hgher degree..

[zahuruddin]

i go for 'E'

[tablesalt]

I agree with E.

[sickvick]

Its saying no country can survive for long and we have Switzerland, that has survived for over 1000 years (long enough) E is clearly the right answer.

[safazal]

E is the answer.

[rayarya]

What is the OA. Clearly C or E makes the cut.

The question is asking which option most effectively challenges the conclusion than which option refutes or undermines the author's conclusion.

 

E is totally refuting the conclusion

C is challenging the conclusion by adding that language is not the only reason for the conflicts and also it refers to Canada and not a different country as in E. How can we assume what type of government system/policies we have in Switzerland that may have a bearing on the conflicts.

[amitg_ind]

OA is E.

[Queen09]

Clear (E).

C is a trap - The conclusion is "No nation can long survive unless its people are united by a common tongue". Author cites an ex of Canada.

E directly challenges the conclusion while C attacks the example stated by author.

[shsingh]

E is the ans. Argument says that country can not survive if people does not use same dialact. but E shows an example that switzerland did survive.

question maker could have made things more easier by removing the word "thousand years" by something else. because it makes the period relative opposed to ever.

 

C is wrong because language still is shown as cause of the conflict. its just that other cuases are surfaced as well .. it does not shuts up the author completely. but E does

 

 

 

(A) Conflicts over language have led to violent clashes between the Basque-speaking minority in Spain and the Spanish-speaking majority.

(B) Proposals to declare English the official language of the United States have met with resistance from members of Hispanic and other minority groups.

© Economic and political differences, along with linguistic ones, have contributed to the provincial conflicts in Canada.

(D) The public of India, in existence sine 1948, has a population that speaks hundreds of different, though related, languages.

(E) Switzerland has survived for nearly a thousand years as a home for speakers of three different languages.

[kooldude]

I go with "E", which directly attacks the conclusion "Survival."