Answer: I believe the right answer to be the third option, letter C. hyperbole and inductive reasoning.
Explanation:
The statement presents inductive reasoning, not a deductive one. Inductive reasoning starts from specific examples and facts and then moves on to a generalized conclusion. The speaker moves from observing specific Boxers to concluding that all Boxers (generalization) behave in the same manner. Deductive reasoning would do the opposite, moving from general principles to a specific conclusion. Thus, we can eliminate options B and D.
A hyperbole is a figure of speech in which exaggeration is used to give emphasis to the message the speaker wants to convey. In this case, the exaggeration comes from comparing the dogs to tornados. The speaker's intention is to have the reader visualize the mess a Boxer dog is able to leave behind it by having the reader picture the mess left by a tornado. Of course, what the dog can do is not nearly as catastrophic as what the tornado can. Therefore, a hyperbole is used.
