According to the classical Indian school of logic (Nyaya), which fallacy is committed in the following argument: 'Anything that is thinkable is nameable because it is thinkable'?

The reason is asadharana, an uncommon middle term found only in the subject.

'Thinkable' is offered to prove that a thing is nameable.

But being thinkable belongs to the subject alone and to nothing outside it.

A reason absent from all similar and dissimilar cases yields no invariable concomitance.

Such a too-narrow, inconclusive reason is the asadharana anaikantika hetu.