In a certain coded language, the phrase "pit nac mit" means "red pant shirt". Which coded word stands for "pant" in that language? Statement I: "mit tim nac sir" means "he wore red pant". Statement II: "nee jic pit" means "shirt is dirty".

Introduction / Context:
This data sufficiency problem is about a simple coding language where each word in English is mapped to a coded token. We are told that "pit nac mit" corresponds to the three words "red pant shirt" in some order. Additional coded sentences with their translations are given in the statements. The objective is to determine which coded word stands specifically for "pant" and to test whether the given information is sufficient to identify that code uniquely.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The base phrase "pit nac mit" represents the words "red pant shirt".
• Statement I: "mit tim nac sir" means "he wore red pant".
• Statement II: "nee jic pit" means "shirt is dirty".
• Each word in English corresponds to exactly one coded word, and vice versa.
• Word order in the code does not necessarily match word order in English.

Concept / Approach:
The typical approach to coded language problems is to compare sentences that share some common English words and to find the overlap in the corresponding codes. Intersection of code sets helps identify which code stands for which word. For data sufficiency, however, our task is to check whether we can uniquely determine the code for "pant" with the information provided, and not merely to perform partial decoding.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: From the base information, the set of codes {pit, nac, mit} corresponds to the set of words {red, pant, shirt}. Step 2: Consider statement II, where "nee jic pit" means "shirt is dirty". The set {nee, jic, pit} corresponds to {shirt, is, dirty}. Step 3: The common word between the base English set {red, pant, shirt} and the translation of statement II {shirt, is, dirty} is "shirt". The common code between {pit, nac, mit} and {nee, jic, pit} is "pit". Step 4: Therefore, "pit" must stand for "shirt". This means that the remaining two codes "nac" and "mit" represent "red" and "pant" in some order. Step 5: Now consider statement I: "mit tim nac sir" means "he wore red pant". The code set {mit, tim, nac, sir} corresponds to {he, wore, red, pant}. Step 6: From earlier, we know that "nac" and "mit" together represent "red" and "pant". The new words "he" and "wore" must correspond to "tim" and "sir" in some order. Step 7: However, there is no way from the given data to decide whether "nac" is "red" and "mit" is "pant", or "nac" is "pant" and "mit" is "red". Both assignments are consistent with all codes and translations. Step 8: Therefore, even combining statements I and II, we cannot uniquely decide which of "nac" and "mit" is the code for "pant".

Verification / Alternative check:
Possibility one: Assume "nac" means "pant". Then "mit" means "red". Check statement I: "mit tim nac sir" would map to "red he pant wore" or a rearrangement, which fits "he wore red pant". Possibility two: Assume "mit" means "pant". Then "nac" means "red". Under this assumption, "mit tim nac sir" maps to "pant he red wore" or some arrangement, which also can be a rearrangement of "he wore red pant". In both cases, the sentences still represent valid translations consistent with the given English phrases. Therefore, the identity of the code for "pant" is not uniquely fixed.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option a is wrong because statement I alone only reduces the possibilities for "nac" and "mit" but does not distinguish between them for "pant". Option b is wrong because statement II alone only identifies "pit" as "shirt" and leaves both "nac" and "mit" as potential candidates for "pant". Option c is wrong because neither statement alone can fix the code for "pant". Option d is wrong because, as shown, even both statements together still allow two possible consistent mappings, so the answer is not unique.

Common Pitfalls:
Many students incorrectly assume that once they have narrowed down "pant" to one of two codes, they have effectively solved the problem. However, data sufficiency requires a unique answer. Another frequent error is to assume that the order of coded words must match the order of English words, which is not guaranteed. The correct method is to use set intersections and to check whether multiple mappings remain possible. If more than one consistent mapping exists, the information is not sufficient.

Final Answer:
The specific coded word for "pant" cannot be uniquely determined from the given statements. Correct option: Even using both statements I and II together, the data are not sufficient to answer the question.