The following question is about data sufficiency in a coded language. You must decide which statements provide enough information to determine the code for the word "Actor". What is the code of "Actor"? Statement I: In a certain language, "road trip wine" is written as "bk mk tk" and "wine actor photo" is written as "gk rk bk". Statement II: In the same language, "photo wine cycle" is written as "bk ak rk" and "cycle actor photo" is written as "gk ak rk".

Introduction / Context:
This is a combined data sufficiency and coding–decoding question. Rather than directly asking for the actual code of "Actor", the question asks whether the given statements provide enough information to determine that code. Understanding how to judge sufficiency without fully solving every mapping is an important exam skill.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• All words are written using three distinct code symbols in each coded phrase.
• Each word is represented by one code token and each token represents one word within this question.
• Statement I: "road trip wine" → "bk mk tk"; "wine actor photo" → "gk rk bk".
• Statement II: "photo wine cycle" → "bk ak rk"; "cycle actor photo" → "gk ak rk".
• We must decide which statement(s) allow us to determine the code for the word "Actor".

Concept / Approach:
In coding–decoding sufficiency problems, we compare pairs of sentences that share words. A word common to two sentences must correspond to the code token common to their coded versions. Once we identify codes for some words, we check whether we can uniquely assign a code to "Actor". We then evaluate whether each statement alone is enough or whether they must be combined.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Work with Statement I only. From "road trip wine" → "bk mk tk" and "wine actor photo" → "gk rk bk", the common word is "wine" and the common code is "bk". So wine → bk. Then in "wine actor photo" → "gk rk bk", the remaining codes gk and rk represent "actor" and "photo", but we cannot tell which is which. So Statement I alone is not sufficient. Step 2: Work with Statement II only. From "photo wine cycle" → "bk ak rk" and "cycle actor photo" → "gk ak rk", the common words are "photo" and "cycle" and the common codes are ak and rk. Codes gk and bk appear only once each, but linking them uniquely to specific words requires knowledge of "wine" from another statement. So Statement II alone is also not sufficient. Step 3: Combine Statements I and II. From Statement I, wine → bk. Substitute this into "photo wine cycle" → "bk ak rk". Now bk is already used for wine, so ak and rk must represent "photo" and "cycle" in some order. Next, consider "cycle actor photo" → "gk ak rk". Here "cycle" and "photo" already use ak and rk, leaving gk as the only remaining code. Therefore gk must represent "actor". Thus, using both statements together, we can determine a unique code for "Actor".

Verification / Alternative check:
If we remove either statement, the code of "actor" is ambiguous between two possibilities. Only the combination resolves the ambiguity. This confirms that both I and II together are necessary and sufficient.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options A and B incorrectly claim that one statement alone is sufficient. Option D claims that even together they are not sufficient, which is false. Option E claims that either alone is enough, which contradicts the clear ambiguity when each is used by itself.

Common Pitfalls:
Test-takers often rush and pick a statement that seems rich in information without actually checking whether the mapping is unique. It is vital to check for leftover ambiguity in the code assignments.

Final Answer:
The correct choice is that both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient, so the answer is option C as rewritten above.