Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: Both statements together are NOT sufficient.
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:We must determine the exact code-token for the specific word ‘‘never’’ given two coded sentences. Data Sufficiency asks whether the provided overlaps pin the mapping uniquely, not to decode the entire language exhaustively.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:Use common words across statements to eliminate code-tokens and isolate the word of interest. If multiple tokens remain possible for ‘‘never’’ after all eliminations, the data are insufficient.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) From I alone: The four tokens {na, ja, ni, ho} represent {never, ever, go, there}. Without any second sentence overlap, we cannot identify which one is ‘‘never’’; I alone is insufficient.2) From II alone: The common words with I are {go, there} which correspond to {ni, ho}. But II does not include ‘‘never’’ at all, so II alone does not identify ‘‘never’’.3) Combine I + II: Since {go, there} are shared, they must be {ni, ho}. Eliminating {ni, ho} from I's set leaves {na, ja} corresponding to {never, ever}. With no further constraints to distinguish them, the code for ‘‘never’’ remains ambiguous between ‘‘na’’ and ‘‘ja’’.Verification / Alternative check:Construct two consistent assignments: Case 1: never→na, ever→ja; Case 2: never→ja, ever→na. Both respect all given sentences, confirming non-uniqueness.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Common Pitfalls:Assuming token order equals word order; forcing arbitrary tie-breakers (like alphabetical) which DS forbids.
Final Answer:Both statements together are NOT sufficient.
Discussion & Comments