Introduction / Context:
Determine A's relationship to B from family-role statements. We must see if a unique relation (e.g., daughter, daughter-in-law, niece) can be fixed.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- B is explicitly stated as the wife of D (so B is female).
- C is B's daughter-in-law (C married to a child of B).
- A is C's sister-in-law (could be spouse's sister or sibling's spouse).
- II references A's son's only uncle's son, for whom B is the mother.
Concept / Approach:
Enumerate family trees consistent with each statement; check if B's relation to A is unique.
Step-by-Step Solution:
From I: If C married B's son, then C's sister-in-law A could be (1) another daughter of B (i.e., the son's sister), or (2) the wife of C's brother (outside B's immediate family). Thus B could be A's mother (case 1) or not related by blood (case 2).From II: 'A's son's only uncle' could be A's brother (mother's side) or A's husband's brother (father's side). The uncle's son's mother is B. This allows multiple placements for B (B could be A's mother if the uncle is A's brother, or B could be A's mother-in-law if the uncle is husband's brother whose mother is B, etc.).Combining I and II still leaves multiple consistent configurations (mother vs mother-in-law vs aunt by marriage) without contradiction.
Verification / Alternative check:
Attempting to fix genders and unique siblings still yields several valid trees; no single relation is forced.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- I alone / II alone: each permits more than one relation.
- Either alone sufficient / Both together sufficient: contradicted by multiple consistent family trees.
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming 'sister-in-law' only means spouse's sister; it can also mean sibling's wife. Also, interpreting 'only uncle' as maternal-only or paternal-only without basis.
Final Answer:
Both Statements I and II together are not sufficient.
Discussion & Comments