Classification — whole vs part: identify the pair that does NOT show a whole–part relation.

Introduction / Context:Three pairs are whole–part mappings. One pair lists two separate items of furniture (co-hyponyms) rather than a whole and its part.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Tree : Branch → whole–part.
• Hand : Finger → whole–part.
• Room : Floor → whole–part (floor is a component of a room’s structure).
• Table : Chair → separate items; neither is a part of the other.

Concept / Approach:Check if removal of the right-hand term leaves the left-hand item incomplete (criterion for part). Only C fails this test.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:Structural diagrams of a room include a floor; tables do not include chairs as components.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:They keep the same relation.

Common Pitfalls:Assuming “set” implies part-of; a dining set is an association, not a part relation.

Final Answer:Table : Chair