The man reasoned that there ought to be a limit to sycophancy

Step 1: Analyze the question The sentence is: "The man reasoned that there ought to be a limit to sycophancy." We need the option that best restates its meaning.

Step 2: Explain the key concept A sycophant is someone who flatters powerful or rich people excessively to gain favour. Sycophancy is that behaviour: excessive flattery or fawning.

"There ought to be a limit to" means "it should not go beyond a certain point."

So the sentence means: flattery should not be unlimited, so there should be a point where people stop it.

Step 3: Test each option

• A. there can be no favour beyond a reasonable point. This is about favours, not flattery. It misses the idea of sycophancy.
• B. sycophants need not talk all the time. This is about how much sycophants talk, not about limiting the flattery. It is not the meaning.
• C. people should know when not to use flattery. This matches. A limit to sycophancy means people should recognise when flattery is no longer appropriate and stop.
• D. sycophants should know when to grant people requests. Sycophants seek favours. They do not grant requests, so this is wrong.

Step 4: Answer

Tip: In "best explains the information" questions, first define the difficult word (here, sycophancy = flattery). Then replace it in the sentence and match the result with the option. Words like favour or requests in options are often distractors that sound related but change the meaning.