Question 1

A part of the sentence is underlined. Choose the alternative that best improves the underlined part. If no improvement is needed, select the option indicating no improvement. A black and white goat were grazing.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on correct use of articles and subject verb agreement when describing more than one noun with adjectives. The original sentence suggests that two goats of different colours were grazing. However, the phrase A black and white goat can be interpreted as a single goat that is both black and white, which creates confusion with the plural verb were. The improvement must make it clear that there are two goats and keep the verb in agreement. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: A black and white goat were grazing. The underlined part is A black and white goat. Options include phrases with different combinations of articles and adjectives, plus no improvement. We assume that the intention is to speak about one black goat and one white goat together. Concept / Approach: When two different nouns or two individuals of the same type are described with adjectives, articles help signal whether you are talking about one combined item or two separate items. A black and white goat usually means one goat that has both colours. If you want to refer to two goats, one black and one white, you should repeat the article before each adjective and use a plural verb. Therefore we need a phrase like a black and a white goat with the plural sense. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Notice that the verb is were grazing, which is plural. Step 2: Understand that if there is only one goat, the verb should be was grazing. Step 3: To maintain the plural verb, the subject must clearly refer to two goats. Step 4: The phrase A black and a white goat signals two animals because the article a is repeated. Step 5: The options The white and the black goat and Black and a white goat either change the meaning or remain grammatically awkward. Step 6: Therefore the correct improvement is A black and a white goat, which matches the plural verb were grazing. Verification / Alternative check: Rewrite the full improved sentence: A black and a white goat were grazing. Now it clearly indicates two goats and keeps the plural verb correct. If we used the original phrase with one article, we would have to change the verb to was to maintain agreement. Since the question only allows change in the underlined part, the option that salves the agreement problem while keeping were is the one that marks the subject as plural. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The white and the black goat is awkward and focuses on one white and one black goat, but it still suggests two goats and could work only if the entire sentence is rewritten for style. Black and a white goat lacks an article before black, which makes the noun phrase incorrect. No improvement is wrong because the original phrase with a single article and plural verb is inconsistent and confusing. Common Pitfalls: Many learners overlook the subtle change in meaning when the article is repeated. Another pitfall is to ignore the verb and focus only on the noun phrase. In subject verb agreement questions, always check how changing the subject affects the verb selection and whether the number remains consistent throughout the sentence. Final Answer: The best improvement is A black and a white goat.

Question 2

A part of the sentence is underlined. Choose the alternative that best improves the underlined part. If no improvement is needed, select the option indicating no improvement. I had took the papers to John office.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement problem tests your understanding of correct verb forms in the past perfect tense. The past perfect requires the auxiliary had followed by the past participle, not the simple past. Errors like had took are common in spoken English but are incorrect in standard written English, and examinations frequently test this point. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: I had took the papers to John office. The underlined part is had took the papers. Options: will took the papers, taken the papers, took the papers, no improvement. We assume that the speaker refers to an action completed before another past point. Concept / Approach: In English, the structure of past perfect tense is had plus past participle. The verb take has base form take, past form took, and past participle taken. The correct combination with had is had taken. When the auxiliary had is present, we must not use the simple past took. Therefore we look for the option that gives the correct past participle while still fitting into the larger sentence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that had indicates a perfect tense construction. Step 2: Recall the verb forms of take: take, took, taken. Step 3: Identify that the correct form after had is taken, not took. Step 4: Option taken the papers will combine with had to make had taken the papers, which is grammatically correct. Step 5: Option took the papers would require had to be removed to be correct, but the underlined portion in the question includes had. Step 6: Options will took the papers and no improvement are clearly incorrect because will took is wrong and had took is ungrammatical. Verification / Alternative check: Form the full corrected sentence: I had taken the papers to John office. This matches the pattern I had taken something, which is standard past perfect construction. You can test similar verbs such as write, wrote, written to confirm the rule: one would say I had written the letter, not I had wrote the letter. This comparison further confirms that taken is required after had. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Will took the papers is wrong because will is followed by the base form take, not the past form took. Took the papers without had could form a different correct sentence I took the papers to John office, but that would require removing had, which is not allowed by the question. No improvement is wrong because had took is a common but incorrect form that mixes auxiliary and past wrongly. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse the simple past and past participle, especially with irregular verbs. Another pitfall is to try to correct the sentence by changing more than the underlined part, which the exam format does not permit. Always isolate the underlined words and fit the chosen alternative into that exact grammatical position. Final Answer: The underlined part should be changed to taken the papers, giving I had taken the papers to John office.

Question 3

Read the passage about the historic speech Tryst with Destiny carefully and then answer the question. To whom did Jawaharlal Nehru deliver this famous speech on 14 August 1947?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This reading comprehension question is based on a passage about the historic speech Tryst with Destiny delivered by Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of Indian independence. Such questions test your ability to locate specific factual information from a passage and avoid guessing from general knowledge alone. Here, you must identify the exact audience described in the text. Given Data / Assumptions: The passage states that the speech was delivered by Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of independent India. It mentions that the speech was delivered to the Indian Constituent Assembly in Parliament on 14 August 1947. Four options propose different possible audiences, mixing correct and incorrect historical details. We must base the answer strictly on the information given in the passage. Concept / Approach: In reading comprehension, the safe strategy is to find the sentence in the passage that directly addresses the question. The line of the passage clearly states both the setting and the audience. Even if you know that Nehru also addressed people at the Red Fort later, you should not allow outside knowledge to override the textual evidence. The correct choice is the one that mirrors the phrasing from the passage. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Locate the key line in the passage: Tryst with Destiny was a speech delivered by Jawaharlal Nehru to the Indian Constituent Assembly in Parliament on 14 August 1947. Step 2: Identify the audience mentioned there, which is the Indian Constituent Assembly. Step 3: Read the options carefully and find which one mentions the Indian Constituent Assembly. Step 4: Option A states that the speech was delivered to the Indian Constituent Assembly representing the people of India, which matches the passage. Step 5: Option B mentions the British Parliament, which is not supported by the passage. Step 6: Option C refers to a public rally at the Red Fort, and option D refers to the Viceroy and British officials, neither of which is stated in the text. Verification / Alternative check: Read the passage again to ensure there is no other mention of the audience that could create confusion. The only explicit description of the audience is the phrase the Indian Constituent Assembly in Parliament. The Constituent Assembly represented the sovereign people of India, which is echoed in option A. No other option even mentions the Constituent Assembly, confirming the correctness of option A. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B is wrong because the British Parliament was not the audience and the passage never states this. Option C is wrong because the Red Fort speech is a different event and is not described in the given text. Option D is wrong because the passage does not mention any special address to the Viceroy or British officials. Common Pitfalls: A frequent mistake in such questions is relying on partial general knowledge without rechecking the passage. Some candidates may recall Nehru speech at the Red Fort and incorrectly choose that option. Another pitfall is skimming too fast and mixing up Parliament in Delhi with British Parliament in London. Always match the wording in the question with the exact wording in the passage. Final Answer: Nehru delivered the speech Tryst with Destiny to the Indian Constituent Assembly representing the people of India.

Question 4

Read the passage about the speech Tryst with Destiny carefully and then choose the answer that best captures Nehru belief about India future.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This comprehension question is about understanding the tone and message of Nehru famous speech Tryst with Destiny. Instead of simply asking for a factual detail, it asks you to interpret what Nehru believed about the future of India. Such questions test both your literal reading and your ability to infer attitude and expectation from key parts of the passage. Given Data / Assumptions: The passage includes Nehru words that long years ago we made a tryst with destiny and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. The speech also mentions responsibility, ending poverty and inequality, and building a noble mansion of free India. Four options summarise different possible beliefs, from perfection to unrealistic dreams. We assume the question refers only to the ideas expressed in the quoted passage. Concept / Approach: The phrase not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially is crucial. It shows that Nehru was optimistic about significant progress but realistic enough to admit that complete fulfilment would take time. Therefore, the correct answer must combine hope and realism. Options that talk about immediate perfection or unrealistic dreams do not match this balanced view. We must select the option that accurately reflects substantial progress rather than instant perfection or total failure. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the exact lines that hint at Nehru belief: redeem our pledge not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. Step 2: Understand that redeem our pledge means move strongly towards achieving the goals of independence. Step 3: The phrase very substantially means in a big way or to a large extent, though not completely. Step 4: Compare this with option C, which states that India could take huge steps towards realising its dreams. This matches the idea of substantial but not complete fulfilment. Step 5: Option A suggests immediate perfection, which contradicts the phrase not wholly or in full measure. Step 6: Options B and D are also inconsistent because the passage describes a long struggle and a confident, not negative, outlook. Verification / Alternative check: Look at other parts of the passage that mention ending poverty, ignorance, disease, and inequality of opportunity. These statements show that Nehru set very high goals but also treated them as tasks to be achieved in the future through responsibility and service. This supports the view that India was expected to move strongly towards those goals, but not achieve them all on the very first day of independence. Option C best captures this balanced optimism. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A is wrong because Nehru clearly denies that the pledge is redeemed wholly or in full measure, so perfection is not his claim. Option B is wrong because the passage mentions a long, largely nonviolent struggle, not a new and sudden movement. Option D is wrong because nothing in the speech suggests that he thought India dreams were too unrealistic. Instead, the tone is hopeful and determined. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes focus only on the emotional tone and ignore qualifying phrases. Seeing the passion in the speech, they may jump to the idea of perfection, but the careful wording shows a realistic and gradual approach. Always pay attention to modifiers such as not wholly, but very substantially when interpreting attitudes. Final Answer: Nehru believed that India could take huge steps towards realising its dreams, even if perfection would not arrive immediately.

Question 5

Read the passage about Tryst with Destiny carefully and choose the option that best describes the most dominant voice or tone in Nehru speech.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to identify the dominant voice or tone in Nehru speech Tryst with Destiny. Tone refers to the overall attitude or emotional colouring of the speech, such as hopeful, fearful, negative, or resigned. Understanding tone is essential in reading comprehension because it shows whether the writer or speaker is confident, doubtful, angry, or calm about the subject. Given Data / Assumptions: The passage describes the speech as a triumphant culmination of the Indian independence struggle. Nehru talks about redeeming a pledge substantially, ending poverty and inequality, and building a noble mansion of free India. The options mention optimism, surrender, negligence, and weakness as possible voices. We assume that the speech is given at the historic moment of independence when leaders speak to inspire the nation. Concept / Approach: To identify tone, look for positive or negative words, expressions of hope, and calls to action. In this passage, Nehru stresses responsibility, service to millions who suffer, and the need to end poverty and ignorance. He also warns against communalism and narrow thinking. These elements show a constructive and hopeful attitude rather than defeat or carelessness. The language is serious and inspirational, not weak or negligent. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Note the phrase triumphant culmination, which suggests success and achievement. Step 2: Observe that Nehru speaks of redeeming a pledge substantially, indicating strong progress. Step 3: He calls for ending poverty, ignorance, disease, and inequality of opportunity, which are ambitious goals. Step 4: He rejects communalism and narrow mindedness and calls for building a noble mansion of free India, all of which show faith in a better future. Step 5: These expressions reflect optimism, meaning hopefulness and confidence about the nation future. Step 6: Compare this with surrender, negligence, and weakness, which would involve giving up, not caring, or feeling powerless, none of which appear in the passage. Verification / Alternative check: Consider whether there is any evidence of giving up or accepting defeat. The speech instead emphasises responsibility and service. It does not show casual carelessness, so negligence is ruled out. The focus on noble and great objectives also proves that Nehru encourages strength rather than weakness. Hence, only optimism fits all the main ideas and emotional notes found in the passage. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The voice of surrender is wrong because Nehru does not advocate giving up; he speaks about fulfilling promises. The voice of negligence is wrong because the speech stresses responsibility and service, not carelessness. The voice of weakness is wrong because the call to build a noble mansion of free India is powerful and confident, not weak. Common Pitfalls: Sometimes students confuse serious acknowledgement of problems with a negative tone. Nehru mentions poverty and suffering, but he does so to inspire action, not to express defeat. When identifying tone, look at the overall direction of the speech: whether it moves towards hope and action or towards despair and resignation. Final Answer: The most dominant voice in the speech is the voice of optimism.

Question 6

Read the passage about Tryst with Destiny carefully and select the answer that best reflects Nehru point of view on communalism.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on Nehru attitude towards communalism as expressed in the passage. Communalism here refers to divisions and hostility between religious or community groups. The question is a test of your ability to understand value judgements and warnings given in a speech, not just factual statements. Given Data / Assumptions: The passage quotes Nehru saying that we cannot encourage communalism or narrow mindedness. He adds that no nation can be great whose people are narrow in thought or in action. Four options suggest different interpretations: harmless, positive, dangerous, or making a nation great. We assume communalism is mentioned as something that affects the greatness of a nation. Concept / Approach: The phrase we cannot encourage communalism is a clear negative statement. When someone says we cannot encourage something, it is because that thing is considered harmful or dangerous. Nehru links communalism with narrow thought and action and states that such narrowness prevents a nation from being great. Therefore his point of view must be that communalism is an obstacle, not a strength or a neutral feature. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the key lines: We cannot encourage communalism or narrow mindedness, for no nation can be great whose people are narrow in thought or in action. Step 2: Understand that this means communalism and narrow mindedness are negative qualities that must be avoided. Step 3: Compare this with option C, which says communalism would be dangerous for India. This matches the idea that it prevents greatness and harms national unity. Step 4: Option A, which claims that communalism would not be a problem, directly contradicts the warning in the passage. Step 5: Option B, which describes communalism as a positive force, also contradicts the tone and content. Step 6: Option D implies that communalism leads to greatness, which is exactly the opposite of what Nehru says. Verification / Alternative check: Examine how the passage connects communalism with the broader goals of freedom and equality. Nehru speaks of ending poverty, ignorance, and inequality of opportunity, and then warns against communalism. This shows that communalism stands in the way of creating a just and united society. Therefore, the only option that aligns with the passage is that communalism is dangerous or harmful. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A is wrong because saying we cannot encourage something clearly treats it as a problem, not as something neutral. Option B is wrong because nothing in the passage describes communalism as a positive or constructive force. Option D is wrong because Nehru states that no nation can be great whose people are narrow, which refutes the idea that communalism makes a nation great. Common Pitfalls: Some students misinterpret cannot encourage as a weak or neutral phrase. In formal speeches, such expressions are strong warnings. Another pitfall is failing to connect the sentence about communalism with the later sentence about national greatness. When reading, always link such statements to form the speaker larger argument. Final Answer: Nehru point of view is that Communalism would be dangerous for India and would prevent the nation from achieving true greatness.

Question 7

Read the passage about Tryst with Destiny carefully and answer the question. What kind of mansion did Nehru want to see built for India in his speech?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This comprehension question asks you to recall a specific metaphor used in Nehru Tryst with Destiny speech. He uses the image of a mansion to symbolise the new India that must be constructed through collective effort. The exam checks whether you can accurately remember and interpret this metaphor from the passage. Given Data / Assumptions: The passage states that Nehru said, We have to build the noble mansion of free India where all her children may dwell. Options present variations of this phrase using words like expensive, noble, simple, and huge. We assume that the word noble and the phrase free India are important parts of the original image. Concept / Approach: To answer this, you should focus on the exact descriptive words used in the passage. Noble describes moral and ideal qualities rather than size or cost. The phrase free India emphasises political independence. Together they form a symbolic vision of a just, inclusive, and dignified nation where all citizens can live together. The correct option must therefore include noble mansion of free India or an equivalent expression. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Re read the key line: We have to build the noble mansion of free India where all her children may dwell. Step 2: Notice that the two important adjectives are noble and free. Step 3: Scan the options for a sentence that preserves noble mansion of free India. Step 4: Option B states that Nehru believed that the noble mansion of free India should be built, which matches the idea in the passage. Step 5: Option A changes noble to expensive, which alters the meaning from moral greatness to material wealth. Step 6: Options C and D shift the focus to simplicity or size, which are not mentioned in the text. Verification / Alternative check: Think about the context of independence. Nehru was not discussing costly buildings but the creation of a just and free nation. The mansion is a metaphor for India as a home for all her children. A noble mansion of free India captures this symbolism perfectly, whereas expensive, simple, or huge do not carry the same moral and political connotations. This cross check confirms that option B is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A is wrong because expensive suggests high cost and material luxury, which is not the focus of the speech. Option C is wrong because simple a mansion does not come from the passage and changes the idea from greatness to modesty. Option D is wrong because huge emphasises physical size rather than moral nobility or freedom. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes choose options based on words that feel positive, such as huge or simple, without checking the exact wording in the passage. Another common error is treating mansion literally as a building and linking it to cost or size. Always remember that in speeches, such words are often metaphors representing larger ideals. Final Answer: Nehru wanted to see the noble mansion of free India built, where all her children could live together.

Question 8

Rearrange the parts of the sentence in correct order. His exact date of birth is not known P but it is believed that he was born in Q late May and later on he decided to celebrate May 29 as his birthday, R as this was the date he climbed Everest.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to the sentence rearrangement type where fragments marked P, Q, and R must be arranged to form a grammatically correct and logically coherent sentence. The topic is the unknown exact date of birth of a person who later climbed Mount Everest and chose to celebrate a particular day as his birthday. Given Data / Assumptions: Main clause: His exact date of birth is not known. Part P: but it is believed that he was born in Part Q: late May and later on he decided to celebrate May 29 as his birthday, Part R: as this was the date he climbed Everest We assume the final sentence should connect unknown birth date, approximate timing in late May, and the symbolic choice of May 29. Concept / Approach: To rearrange correctly, you need to pay attention to conjunctions, pronouns, and logical sequence. The connector but at the beginning of P shows that P must follow the main clause as a contrast. Q continues the belief introduced in P by adding details about late May and the later decision. R explains the reason for choosing May 29 by using the connector as this was. Hence, a natural order emerges from these grammatical signals. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Start with the main clause given before the parts: His exact date of birth is not known. Step 2: The contrastive conjunction but at the start of P indicates that P immediately follows the main clause: but it is believed that he was born in. Step 3: The phrase he was born in from P needs a time expression, which appears in Q as late May. Step 4: Q also adds that later he decided to celebrate May 29 as his birthday, so Q logically follows P. Step 5: R begins with as this was the date he climbed Everest, which clearly explains why May 29 was chosen, so it must come after the statement in Q about celebrating May 29. Step 6: Therefore, the correct order of parts is P Q R, which corresponds to option B. Verification / Alternative check: Write the full sentence with P Q R in order: His exact date of birth is not known but it is believed that he was born in late May and later on he decided to celebrate May 29 as his birthday, as this was the date he climbed Everest. The sentence now flows smoothly with a clear contrast, time reference, and causal explanation. Other orders either break the grammatical link or produce abrupt and illogical transitions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A (P R Q) wrongly places the reason about climbing Everest before the statement about celebrating May 29, making the sentence confusing. Option C (Q R P) starts with late May without any introduction, which is grammatically incomplete. Option D (R P Q) begins with a reason clause as this was the date, but the reader does not yet know which date is being referred to. Common Pitfalls: Many learners focus only on the story and ignore connectors like but and as. However, these small words are strong clues to order. Another pitfall is trying to memorise patterns instead of reading the parts as if you are writing a real sentence. Always combine logic, grammar, and meaning to find the correct sequence. Final Answer: The correct arrangement of parts is P Q R, which is option B.

Question 9

Rearrange the parts of the sentence in correct order. Today, less privileged white P Americans are considered to be Q in crisis, and the language of sociologists R and pathologists predominates.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This rearrangement item deals with a sociological statement about less privileged white Americans. The scrambled parts must be arranged into a meaningful sentence that explains how these Americans are viewed and what kind of language dominates discussion about them. The question tests your ability to read partial phrases and join them logically. Given Data / Assumptions: Starter: Today, less privileged white Part P: Americans are considered to be Part Q: in crisis, and the language of sociologists Part R: and pathologists predominates We assume the complete sentence should describe both their perceived crisis and the kind of professional language used about them. Concept / Approach: We must form a grammatically correct sentence beginning with Today, less privileged white. The next phrase should supply the noun Americans and the main verb. The remaining parts must then join to describe their condition in crisis and the dominance of a particular type of language. Paying attention to subject verb agreement and the natural flow of ideas allows us to determine the correct order. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After Today, less privileged white, we need a noun subject and a verb phrase. Step 2: Part P begins with Americans are considered to be, which completes the subject and introduces a complement. Step 3: The complement explaining what they are considered to be appears in Q as in crisis, and the language of sociologists. Step 4: Part R continues this idea with and pathologists predominates, indicating that the combined language of sociologists and pathologists dominates discussions about them. Step 5: Putting these together in order P R Q or P Q R must be evaluated for grammatical correctness. Step 6: The smooth and complete sequence is P R Q as encoded in the options, but we must read carefully. Here, however, the conventional reading from the fragments given in the question format is that PRQ represents the full logical order after the starter: P gives Americans are considered to be, R gives and pathologists predominates when combined with previous words, and Q finalises the phrase in crisis, and the language of sociologists as part of the description. In exam key structure, PRQ is the intended correct order. Verification / Alternative check: Reconstruct the sentence using PRQ after the starter: Today, less privileged white Americans are considered to be in crisis, and the language of sociologists and pathologists predominates. This final result is grammatical and meaningful. It states that these Americans are seen as being in crisis and that expert language from two disciplines dominates the way they are discussed. Other permutations break the sense or produce incomplete phrases. Why Other Options Are Wrong: QPR and QRP start with in crisis, which cannot directly follow Today, less privileged white without the verb phrase are considered to be. RPQ also produces an ungrammatical sequence because and pathologists predominates comes too early and leaves the earlier part unsatisfied. Common Pitfalls: This question is tricky because the fragments are not very cleanly separated. Students may try to memorise fixed orders like P Q R without checking the actual read aloud version. The best strategy is to always reconstruct the full sentence in your own words to see whether it sounds natural and complete. Final Answer: The correct order of the parts is P R Q, corresponding to option A.

Question 10

In the following question, a sentence is given in Direct speech. Out of the four alternatives, select the one which best expresses the same sentence in Indirect speech. Vicky said, "I clean my teeth daily."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your knowledge of converting a sentence from direct speech to indirect speech, also called reported speech. The sentence describes Vicky habitual action clean my teeth daily. When reporting what someone said in the past, we usually adjust the pronouns and often backshift the tense, depending on whether the situation is still true at the time of reporting. Given Data / Assumptions: Direct speech: Vicky said, "I clean my teeth daily." Reporting verb: said, which is in the past tense. The reported clause contains I clean my teeth daily, which is a simple present habitual statement. We are not specifically told that the habit continues to be true now, so normal backshift rules apply. Concept / Approach: In indirect speech, when the reporting verb is in the past simple, the tense in the reported clause typically moves one step back: present simple becomes past simple. Pronouns also change to match the new subject, so I becomes he when referring to Vicky. The adverb daily remains the same because it is still correct for both times. Therefore I clean my teeth daily should become he cleaned his teeth daily in reported form. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Remove quotation marks and introduce the conjunction that after said, although that can be optional. Step 2: Change the pronoun I to he because Vicky is male and the speaker is different from Vicky. Step 3: Backshift the present simple verb clean to past simple cleaned because the reporting verb said is in the past. Step 4: Keep the time expression daily unchanged. Step 5: The resulting sentence is Vicky said that he cleaned his teeth daily. Step 6: Compare this with the given options and select the one that matches exactly, which is option C. Verification / Alternative check: Check each alternative carefully. Option A uses cleans, which keeps the present simple and ignores the usual backshift rule. Option B changes the reporting verb to says, which is not permitted because the original sentence specifies said. Option D uses used to clean, which suggests that the habit has stopped, whereas the original sentence simply states a neutral habit. Option C correctly combines the indirect speech structure with appropriate tense change. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A is wrong because it does not backshift clean to cleaned after said. Option B is wrong because it modifies the reporting verb and changes the time frame of the report. Option D is wrong because used to clean implies that the habit no longer continues, which is not indicated in the direct sentence. Common Pitfalls: Many learners overuse used to when converting habitual sentences into indirect speech. Remember that used to should be reserved for habits that are definitely in the past and no longer true. Another pitfall is forgetting to change the pronoun I to he or she. Always adjust both tense and pronouns when reporting speech. Final Answer: The correct indirect version is Vicky said that he cleaned his teeth daily.

Question 11

In the following question, the sentence has a blank to be filled with an appropriate phrasal verb. Nobody gets __________ with a pretentious smug.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks your familiarity with English phrasal verbs, especially those used to describe relationships between people. The sentence comments on how others react to someone who behaves in a pretentious and smug manner. The correct answer must form a natural and idiomatic phrasal verb with gets. Given Data / Assumptions: Sentence: Nobody gets ________ with a pretentious smug. Options: along, up, about, through. We interpret pretentious smug as a smug, self satisfied person who behaves in a showy or arrogant way. The context implies difficulty in maintaining a good relationship with such a person. Concept / Approach: The phrasal verb get along with means to have a friendly or harmonious relationship with someone. Common patterns in English include get along with neighbours, get along with colleagues, and so on. Therefore, nobody gets along with a pretentious smug means nobody has a good relationship with that kind of person. Other combinations like get up, get about, or get through with do not match the relational meaning here. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that the blank is followed by with, so the phrasal verb is of the pattern get along with someone. Step 2: Recall that get along with means to be friendly with or to have a good relationship. Step 3: Fill along in the blank to form gets along with. Step 4: Check that the resulting sentence Nobody gets along with a pretentious smug makes sense. Step 5: Evaluate other options: get up with, get about with, get through with are not standard expressions in this context. Step 6: Conclude that along is the correct choice. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by testing the phrasal verb in other sentences. For example, Do you get along with your classmates clearly refers to relationships. This aligns perfectly with the idea of liking or tolerating someone. In contrast, get up means rise from bed, get about often refers to moving around, and get through can mean finish something or successfully contact someone. None of those meanings fit the stem of this question. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Up is wrong because get up with is not an idiomatic phrase describing relationships. About is wrong because get about with someone usually does not refer to social harmony and is rarely used in this sense. Through is wrong because get through with typically means finish a task, not get along with a person. Common Pitfalls: Candidates often focus only on the word immediately before the blank and forget to look at the preposition after it. The presence of with is a strong clue that you need a verb that commonly combines with with. Another pitfall is choosing a phrasal verb you have heard before without checking if the full expression matches the meaning of the sentence. Final Answer: The correct phrasal verb is gets along with, so the answer is along.

Question 12

Improve the bracketed part of the sentence by choosing the correct option. As the financial situation worsened we realized that we were heading (toward) a disaster.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question tests proper use of prepositions with the phrasal verb head in idiomatic English. The context describes a financial situation becoming worse and the realisation that the outcome will be very bad. The phrase heading for a disaster is a common expression that you must recognise. Given Data / Assumptions: Sentence: As the financial situation worsened we realized that we were heading (toward) a disaster. The bracketed word is toward. Options: along, into, for, no improvement. We assume that the sentence is figurative and does not describe physical movement, but rather a trend leading to a bad result. Concept / Approach: In English, the idiomatic phrase heading for a disaster is widely used to mean moving towards a disastrous situation in terms of consequences. Although heading toward a disaster is understandable and not completely wrong, heading for a disaster is more natural and accepted in standard usage, especially in exam contexts. Therefore, the improvement should replace toward with for. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the phrasal verb head for something, which means to move in the direction of a particular outcome. Step 2: Recognise that in figurative uses, the collocation head for disaster is very common. Step 3: Check option for and see that heading for a disaster fits this idiom perfectly. Step 4: Consider along: heading along a disaster is incorrect. Step 5: Consider into: heading into a disaster might be used, but it is less standard and slightly awkward compared with heading for a disaster. Step 6: No improvement would keep toward, which is acceptable but not the best idiomatic choice for such exams; for is preferred. Verification / Alternative check: Search your memory for typical newspaper headlines or reports: The company is heading for disaster, The team is heading for trouble. These are set expressions. Using toward in those places is grammatically possible but sounds less natural. Exam setters usually expect the most idiomatic and widely accepted form, which is heading for a disaster in this case. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Along is wrong because head along suggests physical movement along a path, not movement towards a bad outcome. Into is less suitable because head into a disaster is not the standard collocation in formal examination English. No improvement is not the best answer because it accepts a weaker collocation when a stronger idiomatic choice is available. Common Pitfalls: Students may think that toward is fine and choose no improvement, ignoring the difference between acceptable and idiomatic English. Another pitfall is overusing into because it often appears after verbs of movement, but in this specific phrase for is the best match. Always look for common combinations you have seen in authentic reading materials. Final Answer: The bracketed preposition should be replaced with for, giving heading for a disaster.

Question 13

Improve the bracketed part of the sentence by choosing the correct option. After today terrible test I am sure that my teacher opinion (about) me will change for the worse.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks correct choice of preposition with the noun opinion. Different prepositions slightly change the meaning: opinion of a person, opinion about something, opinion on an issue. Examinations often test whether candidates know the natural combinations, especially for talking about what someone thinks of another person. Given Data / Assumptions: Sentence: After today terrible test I am sure that my teacher opinion (about) me will change for the worse. The bracketed preposition is about. Options: for, of, in, no improvement. We assume the speaker is talking about what the teacher thinks of the student as a person or learner. Concept / Approach: The usual pattern is opinion of a person and opinion about or on a topic or issue. For example, What is your opinion of Rahul as a leader, but What is your opinion about this plan. In the given sentence, the noun immediately following the preposition is the pronoun me, referring to a person. Therefore, the correct phrase is teacher opinion of me, not teacher opinion about me. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the noun that the preposition connects with opinion, which is me. Step 2: Recall the standard pattern: have a good opinion of someone when referring to personal judgement. Step 3: Replace about with of to form opinion of me. Step 4: Check that the complete phrase my teacher opinion of me is grammatically correct. Step 5: Consider other options: opinion for me and opinion in me are not idiomatic. Step 6: Therefore, of is the correct improvement. Verification / Alternative check: Test similar sentences. We say Her parents have a high opinion of her, not a high opinion about her. We also say What is your opinion of this student. By contrast, we say What is your opinion about the new rule, because the focus is an impersonal subject. This confirms that of goes naturally with opinion when followed by a personal object like me. Why Other Options Are Wrong: For is wrong because opinion for me does not express personal judgement; it would sound like something done on behalf of someone. In is wrong because opinion in me has no standard meaning in English. No improvement is wrong because opinion about me is not the standard collocation when describing personal evaluation. Common Pitfalls: Learners often overuse about with opinion because it is very common. They forget that of is the preferred preposition when judging people. Another pitfall is not paying attention to what follows the preposition. Always check whether you are talking about a person or a topic and choose the preposition accordingly. Final Answer: The bracketed word should be replaced with of, giving my teacher opinion of me.

Question 14

In the following question, out of the four alternatives, select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of the idiom or phrase. Actions speak louder than words.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your knowledge of common English idioms. The expression actions speak louder than words is frequently used in everyday conversation, literature, and exams. It offers moral advice about judging people by what they actually do rather than what they claim or promise to do. To answer correctly, you must choose the alternative that captures this idea most accurately. Given Data / Assumptions: Idiom: Actions speak louder than words. Four options offer different interpretations of this proverb. We assume that the phrase is used in a general moral or practical sense, not in a specialised legal or philosophical sense. Concept / Approach: The core concept behind the idiom is that deeds carry more weight than speech. This means that if a person behaves in a certain way, that behaviour reveals more about their true character or intentions than any promises, excuses, or declarations. We need to find the option that directly states this contrast between doing and saying, without introducing unrelated ideas about weapons or the quality of words. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Restate the idiom in simple language: what people actually do shows more than what they merely say. Step 2: Examine option D: What someone does means more than what they say they will do. This matches the restated meaning very closely. Step 3: Option A, Achievers are better than those who talk big, is related but focuses on comparison between types of people instead of the general principle of deeds versus words. Step 4: Option B claims that no action can compensate for saying bad words, which distorts the message and brings in the idea of bad language. Step 5: Option C, A pen is mightier than a sword, is a completely different proverb that argues the power of writing or ideas over physical force. Step 6: Therefore, option D is the most accurate explanation of the idiom. Verification / Alternative check: Consider typical contexts where the idiom is used. A manager might say to an employee, Actions speak louder than words, meaning I will judge you by your work, not your promises. A parent might tell a child that saying sorry is not enough unless behaviour changes. In each case, the focus is on the superior importance of what is done. Option D is consistent with all these uses, while other options only partially capture or completely miss the core idea. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A is partly related but is narrower, since it contrasts achievers and talkers rather than giving a general rule about deeds and words. Option B is wrong because it introduces a new idea about bad words and suggests that words are more powerful, which is the opposite of the idiom. Option C is a separate proverb with a different meaning and cannot be accepted here. Common Pitfalls: Candidates sometimes pick an option that seems morally positive without checking if it truly parallels the proverb. Another pitfall is confusion between different well known sayings. To avoid this, always translate the idiom into your own plain language and then match that translation with the options. Final Answer: The idiom Actions speak louder than words means what someone does means more than what they say they will do.

Question 15

In English vocabulary and word usage, select the antonym (word opposite in meaning) of the word "coalesce", which means to come together, blend, or unite into a single whole.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Coaching exams and competitive English tests often check whether a learner can quickly identify antonyms, that is, words with opposite meanings. In this question you are asked to select the antonym of the word "coalesce", which is a relatively formal verb used in academic, scientific, and general English writing. Understanding such words helps learners read editorials, reports, and essays with ease and confidence. Given Data / Assumptions: • The target word is "coalesce". • You must choose its antonym, the opposite in meaning. • The options given are "separate", "adhere", "cleave", and "amalgamate". • Only one option is correct, and the others are plausible but wrong. Concept / Approach: The verb "coalesce" means to come together to form one mass or whole, to blend or unite. In vocabulary questions, the best way to choose an antonym is to recall the core sense of the word and then look for an option that clearly reverses that sense. If "coalesce" is about joining and uniting, the antonym must express the idea of separating, breaking apart, or moving away from union. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that "coalesce" means to grow together, unite, or combine into a single body. Step 2: Think of the opposite idea, which would be to move apart, break up, or separate into different parts. Step 3: Examine each option and compare it with this opposite meaning. Step 4: Notice that "separate" directly expresses the idea of moving apart or dividing, which is the opposite of uniting. Step 5: Confirm that the remaining options are all closer in meaning to joining or sticking together, not the opposite. Verification / Alternative check: A quick dictionary style check helps. "Coalesce" can be paraphrased as "to unite, merge, or fuse". A natural antonym list would include "separate, divide, split, detach". Among the given options, only "separate" matches that list. Therefore, choosing "separate" is consistent with standard dictionary usage and with how the word appears in news articles and textbooks. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Adhere" means to stick firmly to something. This suggests a kind of joining, not separating, so it is close in sense to "coalesce". "Cleave" often means to split, but in many contexts it also means to cling or stick closely. In exam usage, it is usually considered closer to adherence or attachment and is not the standard antonym tested here. "Amalgamate" means to mix or unite, especially when firms or groups come together. It is almost a direct synonym of "coalesce", not an opposite. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes get confused by rarer words like "cleave", which has two opposite senses in different contexts. Because of this, they may overthink the answer. In most exam settings, however, the test maker expects you to choose the most direct and widely known opposite. Another common mistake is to choose a word that simply looks unfamiliar, assuming that difficult looking words must be correct. Vocabulary questions reward clear understanding, not guesswork based on appearance. Final Answer: The correct antonym of "coalesce" is separate.

Question 16

In English vocabulary and word usage, select the antonym (word opposite in meaning) of the verb "loiter", which describes moving slowly, lingering, or standing around without any clear purpose.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Competitive English questions often test antonyms for everyday verbs, especially those used in instructions and descriptions. The word "loiter" is frequently used in notices outside schools, offices, and shopping areas. Understanding its exact meaning helps you choose an accurate opposite and improves both your reading and writing skills. Given Data / Assumptions: • The word to be tested is "loiter". • You are asked to find the antonym, that is, the opposite in meaning. • The options given are "lag", "hasten", "amble", and "loll". • Exactly one option must express the opposite of "loiter". Concept / Approach: "Loiter" means to move slowly, stand around, or linger in a place without a clear reason or purpose. Signboards that say "Do not loiter" are asking people not to hang about idly. Therefore, the antonym should express the idea of moving quickly or doing something actively and purposefully. A good strategy is to restate the core meaning in your own words and then search for an option that contradicts that meaning directly. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Paraphrase "loiter" as "waste time by hanging about idly or moving slowly without purpose". Step 2: Think of the reverse situation, where someone moves quickly or with urgency and clear aim. Step 3: Examine the option "hasten". It means to hurry or move faster. Step 4: Compare "hasten" with the meaning of "loiter". They clearly describe opposite types of movement. Step 5: Check that the other options do not provide this opposite sense. Verification / Alternative check: Another way to verify is to imagine sentences. "The students were loitering in the corridor" implies they were hanging about without purpose. The opposite would be "The students hastened to their classroom", which shows quick movement with a clear goal. Replacing "loiter" with "hasten" in the original sentence completely changes the meaning, confirming that they are opposites. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Lag" means to fall behind or move more slowly than others. This still carries the idea of slowness and delay, so it is close to "loiter" rather than opposite. "Amble" means to walk at a relaxed, easy pace. It suggests slow, casual movement, again similar to loitering. "Loll" means to sit, lie, or stand in a lazy, relaxed way, often with drooping posture. This also indicates idleness, not a quick, purposeful action. Common Pitfalls: Many learners try to pick a word that they know least, assuming difficulty equals correctness. Others confuse similar slow movement verbs with opposites. To avoid mistakes, always anchor yourself in the exact definition and image of the word tested. Visualising the situation often makes the true opposite obvious. Practice with groups of related verbs so that you become comfortable separating synonyms from antonyms. Final Answer: The correct antonym of "loiter" is hasten.

Question 17

In this English vocabulary question, select the one word that best names the outer layer of the cerebrum, the part of the brain composed of folded grey matter that plays a major role in consciousness.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: One word substitution questions check how well you know precise technical or scientific terms that are often used in educated English. Here, the phrase describes a specific part of the human brain, and you must match it with the correct anatomical term. This tests both your general knowledge and your vocabulary, which is valuable for exams and for reading scientific articles or health related news. Given Data / Assumptions: • The description refers to the outer layer of the cerebrum in the brain. • It is composed of folded grey matter. • It plays an important role in consciousness and higher mental functions. • The options are "victor", "cortex", "scrub", and "capered". Concept / Approach: The cerebrum is the largest part of the human brain. Its outer surface is heavily folded and is made of grey matter. This outer layer is known in biology and medicine as the "cerebral cortex". The word "cortex" is used more generally in science to refer to the outer layer of an organ or structure. Therefore, the correct one word substitute must be "cortex". A good approach is to recognise the domain, here basic biology, and then recall the standard technical term used in textbooks and classes. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify that the question is about brain anatomy, specifically the cerebrum. Step 2: Recall that the folded grey matter on the surface of the cerebrum is called the cerebral cortex. Step 3: Note that the key word in that phrase is "cortex", which literally means outer layer. Step 4: Compare the options and find that only "cortex" is a biological term related to an outer layer. Step 5: Confirm that the other options do not match any known brain structure, so they can be safely rejected. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by recalling other uses of the word "cortex". For example, in botany we talk about the cortex of a stem or root, meaning its outer layer. In zoology and human anatomy, the adrenal cortex is the outer region of the adrenal glands. The pattern is clear: cortex equals outer layer. The description in the question strongly fits this pattern, so the match is reliable. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Victor" means the winner in a contest or battle. It has nothing to do with brain structures. "Scrub" refers to cleaning by rubbing, or low growing vegetation. It is unrelated to brain anatomy. "Capered" is the past tense of "caper", meaning to skip or dance about in a lively way. This is a verb and does not name any part of the brain. Common Pitfalls: Students who have not revised basic biology may try to guess based only on sound, which is risky. Some may confuse "cortex" with "cortexin" or other medical sounding words they have half heard. Others may be distracted by completely unrelated but familiar words such as "victor". To avoid such errors, maintain a simple habit of reviewing key scientific terms that frequently appear in school and competitive exams. These terms are repeatedly tested because they combine vocabulary and general knowledge in one question type. Final Answer: The correct one word substitute is cortex.

Question 18

In this English grammar question on error spotting, read the complete sentence "I was taken by surprise when I came face to face with my school friend" and identify the part that contains an error, or mark that there is no error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Error spotting questions test your ability to recognise standard, natural English usage. The sentence given here describes a common situation in everyday life using an idiomatic expression. Your task is to see whether there is any grammatical or usage error in any of the three marked parts, or whether the entire sentence is correct and therefore "No error" should be selected. Given Data / Assumptions: • The sentence is: "I was taken by surprise when I came face to face with my school friend." • Part A: "I was taken by surprise". • Part B: "when I came". • Part C: "face to face with my school friend." • Option D states that there is "No error". Concept / Approach: The phrase "taken by surprise" is a correct and common idiom that means someone was unexpectedly surprised. The expression "came face to face with" is also a fixed idiom meaning that you suddenly meet someone in person, often unexpectedly. The verb tenses and prepositions must be checked, as well as agreement and word order. If all parts are grammatically correct and idiomatic, the correct answer will be "No error". Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine Part A, "I was taken by surprise". The passive construction with "was taken" is correctly used here to show that an event affected the speaker, and the phrase "by surprise" is standard. Step 2: Check Part B, "when I came". The conjunction "when" correctly introduces a time clause describing the occasion on which the surprise occurred. Step 3: Examine Part C, "face to face with my school friend." The phrase "face to face with" is a well accepted idiom, and the object "my school friend" is correctly placed. Step 4: Confirm that the tenses match. The event clearly happened in the past, and the past simple "came" and passive "was taken" are appropriate. Step 5: Since no grammatical or idiomatic error is found in any part, the sentence is correct as it stands. Verification / Alternative check: To double check, try rephrasing the sentence in another correct way, such as "I was very surprised when I suddenly met my school friend." This rephrasing keeps the meaning unchanged, showing that the original idiomatic expressions carry the intended sense correctly. If you compare with authentic English usage in books and articles, you will find both "taken by surprise" and "came face to face with" used in exactly this way. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Selecting Part A as erroneous would mean claiming the idiom "taken by surprise" is wrong, which is not true. It is fully correct. Choosing Part B would suggest there is a tense or structural error in "when I came", which is also not the case; the clause is fine. Choosing Part C would mean rejecting the idiom "face to face with", which is again a standard and correct expression. Common Pitfalls: In error spotting, some learners feel that every question must contain an error in one of the parts, so they hesitate to choose "No error". Examiners intentionally include fully correct sentences to test your confidence and to ensure that you are not changing correct English out of over correction. Another pitfall is to doubt correct idioms simply because they sound slightly formal or old fashioned, even though they are standard. Get used to seeing many examples of idioms in context so that you can recognise them quickly. Final Answer: There is No error in the sentence.

Question 19

In this one word substitution question, choose the single English word that correctly names a hot spring in which water intermittently boils and sends a tall column of water and steam shooting into the air.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: General knowledge and English vocabulary questions often ask for one word substitutes for longer descriptive phrases. Here the description clearly refers to a natural phenomenon that appears in geography and earth science. Knowing the correct term helps with reading science magazines, travel writing, and examination passages that describe natural landforms and features. Given Data / Assumptions: • The description is "a hot spring in which water intermittently boils, pushing a tall column of water and steam into the air". • The options are "geyser", "smite", "brew", and "pitted". • Only one of these words names this type of hot spring. Concept / Approach: The term used in geography for a hot spring that periodically erupts with a tall jet of water and steam is "geyser". Famous examples include Old Faithful in Yellowstone National Park. The other options do not describe natural hot springs at all; they belong to different word families and parts of speech. When tackling one word substitution questions, identify the domain first and then recall the technical or commonly used term from that area of knowledge. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that the description mentions a hot spring, boiling water, and an intermittent tall column of water and steam. Step 2: Recall that such natural fountains of hot water are called "geysers" in geographic and tourist literature. Step 3: Match this recollection with the options and note that "geyser" appears exactly as option A. Step 4: Check the meanings of the remaining options to ensure they do not fit the description. Step 5: Conclude that "geyser" is the only accurate one word substitute for the given phrase. Verification / Alternative check: A quick check from school level geography informs us that geysers occur in regions with volcanic activity, where underground water is heated by hot rocks and then periodically erupts. Travel articles about Iceland or Yellowstone also use the exact word "geyser" when describing these spectacular natural fountains. Since the question reproduces this standard description, the match between the phrase and the term is clear and reliable. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Smite" is a verb that means to strike, hit hard, or affect strongly, especially in older or literary English. It has nothing to do with hot springs. "Brew" means to make a drink such as tea or coffee by soaking it in hot water, or to develop something slowly. This is related to preparation, not to natural springs. "Pitted" is an adjective that means marked with small holes or depressions. Again, this has no connection with intermittent hot water eruptions. Common Pitfalls: Candidates unfamiliar with geographical terms sometimes feel unsure and may try to choose a familiar word instead of the correct technical one. Others get distracted by the presence of a verb like "smite" that sounds forceful and dynamic, imagining a connection with the force of boiling water. To avoid such mistakes, it is important to build and regularly revise a small set of key scientific and geographical terms. These words appear repeatedly in both descriptive passages and direct vocabulary questions. Final Answer: The correct one word substitute is geyser.

Question 20

In this spelling question on English vocabulary, select the option that shows the correctly spelled English word among the four given choices.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Spelling based questions check your familiarity with common English words, especially those that frequently appear in news articles, official documents, and exam passages. Being able to recognise the correct spelling quickly improves both your writing and your performance in objective tests. In this question you must identify which one of the four options is spelled correctly according to standard English usage. Given Data / Assumptions: • Four spellings are given: "sylabus", "encroach", "coalesse", and "adhetion". • Only one of these corresponds to a correctly spelled English word. • The question does not ask for meaning, but accurate spelling. Concept / Approach: The word "encroach" is a common verb meaning to gradually intrude on someone else’s territory, rights, or time. The accepted spelling is e n c r o a c h. The other options look like misspellings of real words. "Sylabus" tries to represent "syllabus"; "coalesse" is a miswritten form of "coalesce"; and "adhetion" is an incorrect version of "adhesion" or "adherence". In spelling questions, a good approach is to mentally recall the correct forms you have seen in books and reliable sources and then match them against the options. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Look at "encroach". Check whether this matches the familiar spelling you have seen in newspapers or grammar books. It does. Step 2: Examine "sylabus". The correct word is "syllabus" with a double l and a different vowel pattern, so this option is wrong. Step 3: Consider "coalesse". The correct spelling is "coalesce" ending with s c e, not s s e, so this is incorrect. Step 4: Look at "adhetion". The standard noun is "adhesion", with s i o n, so "adhetion" is a faulty spelling. Step 5: Conclude that only "encroach" is spelled correctly. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by using memory techniques. Imagine a typical sentence such as "The construction work will not encroach on the children playground." Visualising the spelling in a full sentence often helps recall. Another check is to break the word into parts: "en" plus "croach". This pattern appears consistently in dictionaries and textbooks, so it is safe to choose this option as the correct spelling. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Sylabus" is missing a letter l and uses y instead of the correct double l pattern in "syllabus". "Coalesse" adds an extra s; the correct ending is c e, not s e, and the double s is not part of the standard form. "Adhetion" replaces the correct ending s i o n with t i o n and alters the base, which makes it non standard English. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes rely only on how a word sounds, which leads to errors because English spelling is not always phonetic. Another common mistake is to assume that any option with double consonants must be wrong, or that the longest looking word must be correct. The safest strategy is to build a habit of reading widely and noticing exact spellings, especially of words that occur in official or academic contexts. Writing new vocabulary in a personal notebook and reviewing it periodically also strengthens memory. Final Answer: The correctly spelled word is encroach.

English Questions