Is the premise sufficiently strong to logically lead to the hypothesis? Premise: Bloomer (for `flower'), butter (for `ram'), or even flower (for `river') are recurrent examples, but solvers must always be on the alert for new traps of this  Hypothesis: These words typically don't rationally relate to one another. 
Bloomer (for `flower'), butter (for `ram'), or even flower (for `river') are recurrent examples, but solvers must always be on the alert for new traps of this ###These words typically don't rationally relate to one another. 