Introduction / Context:
This verbal reasoning question is about interpreting an everyday conversation and seeing what logically follows from it. Nita sees Limay's new watch and says, 'Oh, that's so awesome. Where did you buy it from?' We must decide whether it logically follows that the watch is attractive and that Nita wants to know where to buy a similar watch. The focus is on reasonable and direct implications of the words spoken, not on far-fetched possibilities.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Statement: Looking at Limay's new watch, Nita comments, 'Oh, that's so awesome. Where did you buy it from?'
- Conclusion I: Limay's watch is attractive.
- Conclusion II: Nita wants to know where to buy a similar watch from.
- We assume normal conversational meaning of the words 'awesome' and the question about the place of purchase.
Concept / Approach:
We need to determine which conclusions are directly supported by the statement. In such questions, a conclusion follows when it is a natural and necessary reading of the statement, not when it is merely a remote or forced interpretation. Expressions of admiration and questions about purchase location typically carry clear implications about liking the item and interest in where it was bought.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Interpret Nita's word 'awesome'. In everyday language, calling something awesome is clearly a strong compliment. It implies that she finds the watch very impressive or attractive.
Step 2: Therefore, it is fully justified to conclude that Limay's watch is attractive. So Conclusion I is a direct and logical consequence of the statement.
Step 3: Now consider Nita's follow-up question: 'Where did you buy it from?' Typically, when someone admires an object and then asks where it was bought, they want this information because they are interested in buying a similar item for themselves or for someone else.
Step 4: The question about the place of purchase is not random. It strongly indicates that Nita wants to know how to obtain the same or a similar watch. Thus, Conclusion II is also logically supported by the statement.
Step 5: Therefore, both conclusions are reasonable and directly follow from the given statement under normal conversational interpretation.
Verification / Alternative check:
It is hard to imagine a normal context where Nita calls the watch 'awesome' but does not actually find it attractive. The word itself is a strong positive evaluation.
Similarly, it is rare for someone to ask 'Where did you buy it from?' without any interest in the place of purchase. This question practically implies curiosity about the shop or brand so that one can potentially buy it.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B (Conclusion II alone follows) is wrong because it ignores the clear implication that 'awesome' means the watch is attractive, so Conclusion I must also follow.
Option C (Neither conclusion follows) is wrong because it denies both obvious implications of admiration and inquiry about purchase location.
Option D (Conclusion I alone follows) is wrong because asking where it was bought strongly supports Conclusion II as well.
Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake is to be over-cautious and reject reasonable conclusions by insisting on only literal meanings, ignoring normal conversational context.
Another pitfall is to treat logical reasoning questions as if nothing beyond the exact words can ever be inferred, which is not how such verbal inference questions are designed.
Final Answer:
Since Nita's comment shows that she finds the watch impressive and her question indicates interest in where to purchase such a watch, both Conclusion I and Conclusion II logically follow.
Discussion & Comments