Question

Which of the following is a possible sentence if no grammar rule is violated?

• A. Grumbs harrumphs ihavitoo lovitoo metoo.
• B. Grumbs harrumphs ihavitoo jingongo lovitoo.
• C. Harrumphs ihavitoo jingongo lovitoo metoo.
• D. Grumbs ihavitoo koolodo metoo nana.

Hint:

When verifying sentences, check the type-count rule first (2 Bingoes, 1 Cingo, 2 Dingoes), then check special word rules like “Koolodo requires Lovitoo”.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

We test each option against the rules:
Option (A): Bingoes = Grumbs, Harrumphs; Cingo = Ihavitoo; Dingoes = Lovitoo, Metoo.
Grumbs $\Rightarrow$ Ihavitoo present — satisfied. No Koolodo present, so no Lovitoo requirement issue. All slots filled — valid.
Option (B): Bingoes = Grumbs, Harrumphs; Cingo = Ihavitoo and Jingongo — 2 Cingoes present, violating the “exactly 1 Cingo” rule.
Option (C): Bingoes = Harrumphs, Ihavitoo (but Ihavitoo also a Cingo) — creates classification conflict unless Ihavitoo counted in one category, but here also Jingongo as Cingo means Ihavitoo wrongly in Bingoes.
Option (D): Bingoes = Grumbs, Ihavitoo; Cingo = Koolodo; Koolodo requires Lovitoo — but Lovitoo is absent, so violation.
Thus, only (A) is possible.
\(\boxed{\text{Correct Answer: (A)}}\)