Q12

[gplaya123]

Please help me with this question!

[tommywallach]

Hey Gplaya,

Happy to help. However, in the future, I'd really like it if you could go a bit further with your question. For example, explain where you looked in the passage for the answer, what you found, and why it led you to the wrong answer. On test day, you're going to end up picking SOMETHING, so don't let yourself off the hook when you're practicing! Always pick an answer, and explain why!

This question asks us about Mill's view, which is mentioned up top and at the bottom: "J.S. Mill's formulation that "proper names are meaningless marks set upon...persons to distinguish them from one another." In the final paragraph, the author says that "This view of Hopi names [that they individual persons, indicate social relationships, and are poetic] is thus opposed...to Mill's claim that personal names are without inherent meaning..."

(A) This seems fair. Mill thought names couldn't have any meaning, but the passage shows that they definitely can.

(B) This is totally wrong. Mill already believed that. What he missed was that they could describe actual things and that they could be poetic.

(C) While the author says that scholars DO neglect how names are used outside Europe, this is never blamed on Mill.

(D) Mill and Levi-Strauss are described as equally wrong in the last paragraph. They are never compared in terms of their accuracy.

(E) Again, the two of them are never compared directly.

So the answer is (A). Let me know if that makes sense!

-t

[dontmesswmeow]

I want to elaborate on why (A) is correct since the explanation out there is simply indicating 'it is fair.'

At first I chose (C) but now I get why (A) is correct -

I think in this question it is helpful to use 'Wrong to right' method since the correct answer is written in quite an abstract way and also inferential.

In author's view, Mill's characterization of the function of names is just 'identification' of individuals, which is stated as 'narrow' in (A). It is narrow because it only contains one of the several meanings that Hopi (This sample society) names possess.

Also, as seen from the reason why Mill's characterization is narrow, not applied to other societies such as Hopi, it is not universally applicable.

Hope this helps!

[bswise2]

I'm a bit confused as to why E is wrong.

My reasoning for E is that, in lines 14-15, the passage tells us that names in the Hopi community are used to "place individuals within a society..." I took this to mean that names were used for social characterization to some degree, but that's not the primary reason (as Levi-Strauss would contend). I took the author to be saying that Mill's characterization of naming as "meaningless" is way off, by Levi-Strauss' is wildly incomplete.

Further evidence (in my opinion) can be found in lines 53-56. The passage says "This view of Hopi names is thus opposed not only to Mill's claim that personal names are without inherent meaning but also to Levi-Strauss's purely functional characterization." Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the tone here seems to convey that: "Not only is Mill totally off, but Levi-Strauss's emphasis is also off." It seems like Mill is way wrong, and Levi-Strauss is mostly wrong.

That's why I chose E. I didn't like A because I never got the impression that the author felt like Mill's view was applicable anywhere--not that it was merely just too narrow to fit everywhere. If anything, I think the author would describe Levi-Strauss's argument with A rather than Mill's.

Thanks in advance!

[AJ412]

I believe your reference to lines 14-15 is incorrect, as the phrase "to confer an identity" is consistent with Mill's approach of using names to distinguish between people. But your reference to 53-56 I think is correct. It's a really fine tuned inference but it's there nonetheless. If A wouldn't be there I'd go with it but given that A is there it's a bit of better answer because it's a more straightforward inference from the passage.