How would information about a dog's ability to identify over 200 specific toys with different names affect the argument regarding the so-called language of dogs? (RI.8)
A. It adds support to the argument/claim that dogs can understand the language of humans, showing that dogs can learn words.
B. It counters the argument/claim that dogs can understand what humans are saying, showing that it is just about memorization.
C. It provides pure anecdotal information about dogs that has no relevance to the argument that the author is presenting.
D. It demonstrates the use of fallacious reasoning because every statement by the author counters this evidence.
