Efficiency and redundancy are contradictory characteristics of linguistic systems: however, they can be used together to achieve usefulness and reliability in communication. If a spoken language is completely efficient, then every possible permutation of its basic language sounds can be an understandable word. However, if the human auditory system is an imperfect receptor of sounds, then it is not true that every possible permutation of a spoken language’s basic language sounds can be an understandable word.

If all of the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true?

(A) Efficiency causes a spoken language to be useful and redundancy causes it to be reliable.

(B) Neither efficiency nor redundancy can be completely achieved in spoken language.

(C) If a spoken language were completely redundant, then it could not be useful.

(D) If the human auditory system were a perfect receptor of sounds, then every permutation of language sounds would be an understandable word.

(E) If the human auditory system is an imperfect receptor of sounds, then a spoken language cannot be completely efficient.

(D) If the human auditory system were a perfect receptor of sounds, then every permutation of language sounds would be an understandable word.  

Explanation:

From the question, it is stated that if the human auditory system is an imperfect receptor of sounds, then it is not true that every possible permutation of a spoken language’s basic language sounds can be an understandable word.

Hence, this also means that if the human auditory system is a perfect receptor of sounds, then it is also true that every permutation of language sounds would be an understandable word.

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.

answer; ha,ha,ha, corn on the cop;