In a certain letter code, the word HUMBLED is written as JWODNGF by shifting each letter forward in the alphabet. Using the same pattern, how will the word WAX be coded?

Introduction / Context:
This is a straightforward letter coding question where each letter of a word is transformed according to a consistent rule. The transformation from HUMBLED to JWODNGF suggests a positional shift in the alphabet. Identifying the size and direction of this shift allows us to apply the same pattern to another word, WAX, and determine its coded form.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- The word HUMBLED is coded as JWODNGF.
- We must find the code for the word WAX using the same rule.
- The alphabet is treated cyclically, so if necessary letters near the end can wrap around, although this particular mapping does not require wraparound for WAX.

Concept / Approach:
The approach is to compare each letter of HUMBLED with the corresponding letter in JWODNGF. We check how many positions forward or backward in the alphabet each letter has moved. If the same shift applies to all letters, we conclude that the code is a uniform Caesar style shift. We then apply this shift to all letters in the new word WAX to get its code.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Write the pairs of letters: H → J, U → W, M → O, B → D, L → N, E → G, D → F. Step 2: Count the shift for H → J. H is the 8th letter, J is the 10th letter. The shift is +2. Step 3: Check U → W. U is 21st, W is 23rd, again a shift of +2. Step 4: Similarly, M → O (13 to 15), B → D (2 to 4), L → N (12 to 14), E → G (5 to 7), and D → F (4 to 6) all represent a +2 shift. Step 5: Apply the same +2 shift to WAX. W (23rd) goes to Y (25th), A (1st) goes to C (3rd), and X (24th) goes to Z (26th). So WAX becomes YCZ.

Verification / Alternative check:
Rechecking each pair confirms that the shift is consistently +2 for all letters in HUMBLED. Because a single uniform shift works for the entire word, it is reasonable to apply it to WAX. There is no evidence of a more complicated pattern like reversing the word or using alternating shifts, so the simplest consistent rule is the correct one.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- Option DHP would involve a completely different set of shifts, not matching the +2 pattern.
- Option VIS does not correspond to a +2 shift from WAX and cannot be generated from a uniform Caesar shift.
- Option JMH again fails to follow the consistent rule derived from HUMBLED and JWODNGF.

Common Pitfalls:
Learners sometimes look for an unnecessarily complex rule when a simple shift is enough. Others forget to verify the shift on every letter, which is crucial to avoid incorrect patterns that only fit some positions. Always confirm that the same shift works for all letters in the example before applying it to a new word.

Final Answer:
Using a uniform shift of two positions forward in the alphabet, the word WAX is coded as YCZ.