Correct Answer: a simplistic categorization or definition of a language
Passage Reference: One language can have multiple dialects version of the language should be deemed
Why this is correct: Look at the last paragraph. Ducharme says, “One language can have multiple dialects,” and asks which version should count as “essential.” So Ducharme objects to treating a language as one simple thing.
Tips: “Objects to” means the person sees a problem. Find the question or worry the person raises, then match it to an option.
Why the other options are wrong:
- inflated claims about language preservation outcomes: Ducharme never questions how well preservation works. The worry is that one language has many dialects.
- public programs to revitalize dying languages for political reasons: Political motives are Houseman’s complaint about government schemes, not Ducharme’s.
- denials about the rate of language extinction: Ducharme never mentions the extinction rate, so there is nothing to deny.
Correct Answer: abandoned
Passage Reference: Houseman is skeptical about whether speakers of endangered languages benefit from linguistic preservation
Why this is correct: In the fourth paragraph, Houseman doubts that speakers of endangered languages gain anything from preservation. Houseman also says these schemes serve political goals. So she would want the programs dropped.
Tips: When someone doubts that a plan helps anyone, think about how strong the answer should be. A person who rejects the whole idea wants more than small changes.
Why the other options are wrong:
- modified: Houseman does not suggest ways to improve the programs. She doubts they help at all.
- continued: Houseman doubts the programs work and says they serve politics, so she would not want them to go on.
- consolidated: Houseman never talks about joining programs together. She questions whether they should exist.
Correct Answer: Houseman and Reideger
Passage Reference: all endangered languages should be saved Houseman is skeptical about whether speakers of endangered languages benefit from linguistic preservation
Why this is correct: Reideger says “all endangered languages should be saved.” Houseman doubts that speakers gain anything from saving them. So their views are direct opposites.
Tips: For “opposing viewpoints,” first sum up each person’s view in a few words. Then look for one pair that says “yes” and “no” to the same idea.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Ducharme and Houseman: Ducharme and Houseman both raise problems with preservation, so they are not on opposite sides.
- Ducharme and UNESCO: UNESCO only ranks languages by how much danger they are in. It gives no view that Ducharme argues against.
- Reideger and Ducharme: Ducharme does not argue against saving languages. The question is which dialect to save.
Correct Answer: people stand to gain from speaking a lingua franca
Passage Reference: those who abandon their language may be acting in their own best interests by adapting to a naturally evolving socio-economic climate
Why this is correct: Houseman says people who give up their language may be acting “in their own best interests.” They are adapting to a changing economy. A “lingua franca” is a widely shared language, so they gain from speaking one.
Tips: For “would most likely agree” questions, find the person’s main reason. Then choose the option that follows from it, even if the words are different.
Why the other options are wrong:
- investments in language immersion schools are defensible: Houseman questions government-funded language schemes, so she would not defend spending on them.
- language preservation policies deserve public attention: Houseman says these policies serve political goals. She does not ask for more attention to them.
- dying languages are a priceless cultural resource: Calling lost languages “priceless” is Reideger’s view. Houseman rejects that kind of argument.
Correct Answer: fraught with an array of sociopolitical complications
Passage Reference: The question is how, or whether, UNESCO or sovereign governments should intervene?
Why this is correct: The article asks “how, or whether,” governments should step in. After that, it shows political goals behind the schemes and the problem of choosing a dialect. So saving languages brings many social and political problems.
Tips: An “overall” question is about the whole text. Pick the option that includes every speaker’s view, not just one person’s.
Why the other options are wrong:
- hampered by the link between language and identity: Reideger uses the link to identity as a reason to save languages, not as an obstacle.
- warranted on the basis of disturbing global statistics: The article opens with grim numbers, but then asks whether governments should act at all.
- essential for the sake of preserving indigenous cultures: That is only one side. Houseman doubts the programs, and Ducharme raises the problem of dialects.
Correct Answer: the next generation
Passage Reference: If an endangered language is to be artificially propped up with government funded schools and preschools
Why this is correct: The last paragraph says languages are kept alive with “government funded schools and preschools,” which teach children. So the goal is to pass the language to the next generation.
Tips: Look at who the programs in the text are for. The blank in the comment usually names the same group in other words.
Why the other options are wrong:
- university language researchers: The funded programs are schools and preschools. They teach children, not researchers.
- other First Nation groups: The comment is about keeping Michif alive among its own people, not spreading it to other groups.
- government officials: The schools and preschools are for children. They do not train government officials.
Correct Answer: professor
Passage Reference: Concordia University linguistics professor Marianne Houseman adapting to a naturally evolving socio-economic climate
Why this is correct: Houseman, the “Concordia University linguistics professor,” says people give up languages as the world naturally changes. The comment answers that the loss of Michif was not natural at all.
Tips: When the comment answers someone’s idea, find who said that idea first. Then check that person’s job title in the text.
Why the other options are wrong:
- graduate student: The graduate student is Ducharme, who talks about dialects. The idea of a natural loss comes from Houseman.
- CALD representative: Reideger, the spokesperson for the language charity, wants every language saved. The comment has no reason to argue with that.
- United Nations: The United Nations never says language loss is natural.
Correct Answer: make a comeback
Passage Reference: Michif endured systematic government efforts to erase it we think Michif is worth reviving
Why this is correct: The comment says Michif survived government efforts “to erase it” and is “worth reviving.” So government help should let Michif make a comeback.
Tips: Read the sentence before the blank in the comment. Words like “therefore” show that the blank follows from that idea.
Why the other options are wrong:
- continue evolving: The comment wants to undo an attempt to erase Michif. The goal is a revival, not slow change.
- grow more diverse: The community chose to revive only two dialects, so the aim is not more variety.
- become official: Official status is never mentioned. The comment asks for help to bring Michif back.
Correct Answer: aggressive nationalist agendas
Passage Reference: Their proponents are typically nationalist regimes advancing their own territorial, political and economic agendas
Why this is correct: Houseman says the people behind these schemes are “typically nationalist regimes advancing their own territorial, political and economic agendas.” The comment strongly disagrees with this claim.
Tips: If the comment says “I strongly disagree,” the blank repeats a view from the text. Look for a sharp or critical opinion that matches it.
Why the other options are wrong:
- language standardization efforts: Houseman never complains about standardization. The problem of dialects comes from Ducharme.
- likely to proliferate: Nobody in the article says these programs are spreading.
- indulgent charity campaigns: The language group in the article is a charity, but Houseman attacks government schemes, not charities.
Correct Answer: arbitrary
Passage Reference: version of the language should be deemed Michif has several dialects; we chose to revitalize two
Why this is correct: Ducharme asks which version of a language should be “deemed ‘essential’ and therefore worth saving.” So choosing one version seems arbitrary, a choice with no clear rule.
Tips: Sometimes a person asks a question instead of stating a view. Ask yourself what that question suggests about the plan.
Why the other options are wrong:
- unnecessary: Ducharme never says revival is unnecessary. The question is how to choose which version to save.
- too expensive: Ducharme does not talk about cost at all.
- essential: Ducharme questions which version should be called essential. So Ducharme would not use that word here.
