S2: Across the world tennis is more popular than hockey.
The second sentence :
Analyzing the Relationship Between Sentences S1 and S2
The question asks us to determine the relationship between two sentences, S1 and S2. Let's break down each sentence and then analyze how they relate to each other.
Understanding Statement S1: General Popularity Trend
Sentence S1 states: "Field games are generally more popular than individual sports."
- This is a general statement comparing the popularity of two broad categories of sports: 'field games' and 'individual sports'.
- It suggests a trend where games played on a field (like football, hockey, cricket) tend to have a larger audience or following than sports played by individuals (like tennis, athletics, swimming).
Understanding Statement S2: Specific Sports Comparison
Sentence S2 states: "Across the world tennis is more popular than hockey."
- This is a specific comparison between two particular sports: tennis and hockey.
- It makes a claim about their relative worldwide popularity.
Analyzing the Relationship: Contradiction Identified
To see how S2 relates to S1, we need to categorize 'tennis' and 'hockey' based on the terms used in S1.
- Tennis is predominantly recognized as an individual sport (though doubles exist, the core identity is individual).
- Hockey (both field hockey and ice hockey) is typically classified as a field game or a team sport played on a field/ice.
Now, let's substitute these categories back into the statements:
- S1 suggests: Popularity(Field Games) > Popularity(Individual Sports)
- S2 states: Popularity(Tennis) > Popularity(Hockey)
- Substituting categories: Popularity(Individual Sport) > Popularity(Field Game)
The relationship derived from S2 (Popularity(Individual) > Popularity(Field Game)) is the direct opposite of the general trend stated in S1 (Popularity(Field Game) > Popularity(Individual)). Therefore, the specific example in S2 goes against the general rule presented in S1.
Conclusion on Sentence Relationship
Because the specific comparison made in S2 directly opposes the general trend mentioned in S1, the second sentence contradicts the first.
- It doesn't simply restate S1 (reiterate).
- It doesn't offer a different perspective on the same idea (contrast).
- It doesn't provide evidence supporting S1 (reinforce).
- It directly opposes the assertion made in S1.
Thus, the most appropriate relationship is that S2 contradicts S1.
Important Questions from Statement and Conclusions
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
All cats are bills.
No snakes are bills.
All snakes are dolls.
Conclusions:
(I) Some dolls are not cats.
(II) No bills are dolls.- Statement: Resilience supports recovery from setbacks, but without learning from mistakes, progress may stall.
Conclusion I: Resilience alone may not ensure progress.
Conclusion II: Learning from mistakes guarantees recovery.
Which conclusion follows? - Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statement: "Government should provide free education to all children up to the age of 14."
Conclusions:
I. Education is a basic right of every child.
II. A large number of children are deprived of basic education. - Statement: Ethical behavior fosters trust, but profitability often relies on operational efficiency as well.
Conclusion I: Ethical behavior is not sufficient for profitability.
Conclusion II: Operational efficiency is required for trust.
Which conclusion follows? - Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statement: "Online learning has increased student participation."
Conclusions:
I. Students did not participate in physical classes.
II. Technology helps in engaging students.
