Some languages are difficult to learn. Sanskrit is a language. Therefore, Sanskrit is difficult to learn. 'This involves the fallacy of

The middle term here is 'language'. A categorical syllogism is valid only if the middle term is distributed at least once across the premises. In the first premise, 'Some languages are difficult to learn' is a particular proposition, so 'languages' is undistributed. In the second premise, 'Sanskrit is a language' is affirmative, so its predicate 'language' is undistributed too. The middle term is never distributed, so the conclusion does not follow. This is the fallacy of the undistributed middle.

Why the other options fail:

• Composition means assuming that what is true of each part must hold for the whole collection. This argument makes no part-whole move.
• Division is the reverse: assuming that what is true of the whole must hold for each member. That is not happening here.
• None of the above is wrong because option A names the defect.

Core concept: a syllogism needs the middle term distributed in at least one premise. This is the basic rule of categorical logic, and it helps in Mains answer-writing and ethics, where separating 'some' claims from 'all' claims prevents unjustified generalisations.

Trap: Many aspirants see the same phrase 'difficult to learn' in the premise and conclusion and label it composition or division. Check the middle term first.