Question 1

In the following question, choose the option that best expresses the meaning of the idiom "To steal someone's thunder".

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This idiom based question asks for the meaning of the expression "To steal someone's thunder". Idioms like this appear frequently in spoken English, newspapers, and competitive exams. Understanding them requires familiarity with how native speakers use these phrases in typical real life situations, rather than a literal interpretation of the words. Given Data / Assumptions: Idiom: "To steal someone's thunder". Options describe different possible interpretations of that idiom. The context involves praise, credit, and timing of actions. Concept / Approach: "To steal someone's thunder" means to take attention, credit, or praise away from someone else, usually by using their idea or by acting before they have a chance to do so. It has a strong element of pre empting someone and receiving recognition that they were expecting. The correct option must convey both the idea of acting earlier and taking credit away. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the typical scenario: Person A plans to announce something or present an idea, but Person B reveals it first and gets the praise. We say that B "stole A's thunder". Step 2: Examine option (A): "To share the secret of a person just before that person was supposed to receive praise." This partially captures the timing but focuses on revealing a secret, not on doing the same job or using the same idea. Step 3: Examine option (B): "To defuse the ego of an egoistic person." This is unrelated to pre empting someone's success or credit. Step 4: Examine option (C): "To plagiarize work done by others." Plagiarism is copying work without permission, but the idiom specifically involves acting first and capturing the attention, which may or may not involve formal plagiarism. Step 5: Examine option (D): "To do a job before another person can do it and take away the credit." This best describes the situation where someone pre empts another's opportunity and captures the praise meant for that person. Step 6: Conclude that option (D) is the most accurate explanation of the idiom. Verification / Alternative check: Consider an example: Anita was going to propose a new idea at the meeting, but Raj presented the same idea first. People praised Raj, and Anita felt that Raj had "stolen her thunder". Option (D) fits this story perfectly because Raj acted first and took the credit. Options (A) and (C) miss this combination of timing and recognition, and option (B) is irrelevant, confirming that option (D) is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (A) focuses on revealing a secret rather than performing an action or presenting an idea ahead of someone else. Option (B) talks about reducing ego and is not connected to the idea of capturing someone else's praise. Option (C) refers to copying work but does not necessarily imply acting first or taking praise that was expected for another person. Common Pitfalls: Students often confuse this idiom with general cheating or plagiarism, but the key element is pre emption and the diversion of attention or praise. Another pitfall is over focusing on the word "thunder" and imagining anger or noise. In idioms, literal images often have little to do with the actual meaning. Instead, remember concrete examples where one person announces another's idea or achievement first and thus "steals" the moment. Final Answer: "To steal someone's thunder" means to do a job before another person can do it and take away the credit.

Question 2

In the following sentence, one part may contain an error. Identify the part that has the error or choose "No error" if the sentence is correct: "We are pleased that (A) / our daughter is married with (B) / such a nice man. (C) / No error (D)".

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is an error spotting question that tests your knowledge of prepositions used with the verb "marry" and the adjective "married". It is important to know the standard prepositional patterns in English, because incorrect prepositions are one of the most frequent errors in competitive exams and spoken language. Given Data / Assumptions: Full sentence: "We are pleased that our daughter is married with such a nice man." Part (A): "We are pleased that" Part (B): "our daughter is married with" Part (C): "such a nice man." Part (D): "No error" Context: expressing happiness about a daughter's marriage. Concept / Approach: In English, we use the preposition "to" after "married" when we mention the person one is married to. The correct expression is "married to someone". The phrase "married with" is used only when we mention children, for example "married with two children". Therefore, we must identify the incorrect prepositional usage and recognise the correct pattern for this context. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Read the sentence for meaning: the parents are happy that their daughter is married to a particular man. Step 2: Examine part (A) "We are pleased that". This is a standard introductory clause and is grammatically correct. Step 3: Examine part (B) "our daughter is married with". This is suspicious because the usual pattern is "married to someone", not "married with someone". Step 4: Examine part (C) "such a nice man." This is grammatically fine and describes the husband. Step 5: Because only part (B) uses the wrong preposition, part (D) "No error" cannot be correct. Step 6: The corrected sentence should read: "We are pleased that our daughter is married to such a nice man." Verification / Alternative check: Compare two examples: Example 1: "She is married to a doctor." (correct usage when referring to the spouse) Example 2: "She is married with two children." (correct usage when mentioning children, not the spouse) The sentence in the question clearly falls under Example 1, where the focus is on the spouse, so "to" is the only acceptable preposition. This confirms that part (B) is erroneous. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Part (A) is correct because "We are pleased that" is a standard way to introduce a subordinate clause expressing a situation. Part (C) is correct as it simply specifies "such a nice man" and completes the idea. Part (D) is wrong because the sentence definitely contains an error in part (B). Common Pitfalls: Learners often directly translate from their first language and use "married with" where English requires "married to". Another pitfall is memorising only one pattern and using it everywhere, for example using "married to children", which is wrong. Remember the distinction: "married to someone" (spouse) and "married with children" (family details). This small prepositional difference is frequently tested, so keeping these patterns clear will help you avoid repeated mistakes. Final Answer: The error is in Part (B) – "our daughter is married with", which should be "our daughter is married to such a nice man".

Question 3

Rearrange the parts of the sentence in the correct order: "Thus, P - a developing economy also needs, Q - to have some notion of external balance, R - at the very least." Choose the correct sequence.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your sentence rearrangement skills, which are vital for understanding complex economic and analytical writing. You are given three fragments marked P, Q, and R, along with the word "Thus" at the beginning, and you must choose the order that produces a grammatically correct and logically coherent sentence about a developing economy and external balance. Given Data / Assumptions: Introductory word: "Thus," P: "a developing economy also needs" Q: "to have some notion of external balance" R: "at the very least," The sentence must make economic sense and flow naturally. Concept / Approach: Sentence rearrangement questions require you to identify logical connectors, subject verb placement, and natural word order. Here, "Thus" indicates a conclusion or summary. The phrase "at the very least" is usually a limiting or qualifying expression and often appears before the main clause. We must decide where this phrase fits best in relation to the subject "a developing economy". Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider the overall meaning: The sentence is likely to say that, as a minimum requirement, a developing economy needs some understanding of external balance. Step 2: R is "at the very least," which is a common phrase used early in the sentence to set a minimum expectation. It fits naturally immediately after "Thus," as "Thus, at the very least,". Step 3: After this qualifier, the subject should follow. P "a developing economy also needs" clearly introduces the subject and verb phrase. Step 4: Q "to have some notion of external balance" functions as the object or complement of "needs". So it should logically come after P. Step 5: Putting this together, the sentence becomes: "Thus, at the very least, a developing economy also needs to have some notion of external balance." This is grammatically correct and meaningful. Step 6: Therefore, the correct sequence is R P Q, which corresponds to option "RPQ". Verification / Alternative check: Check other sequences quickly: Sequence P Q R: "Thus, a developing economy also needs to have some notion of external balance at the very least," sounds possible but places the phrase "at the very least" awkwardly at the end, making it sound less natural than placing it earlier. Sequence R Q P: "Thus, at the very least, to have some notion of external balance a developing economy also needs" is ungrammatical because the infinitive phrase precedes the subject in an unnatural way. Sequence Q P R: "Thus, to have some notion of external balance a developing economy also needs at the very least," is also structurally awkward and unclear. This confirms that RPQ is the best order. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (B) RQP produces incorrect word order and breaks the link between "needs" and its object. Option (C) PQR pushes "at the very least" to the end, which is less natural and stylistically weaker than placing it early. Option (D) QPR begins with an infinitive phrase, creating an imbalanced, unclear sentence structure. Common Pitfalls: Students may try to keep the object phrase "to have some notion of external balance" close to the beginning, thinking it is the key idea. However, you must respect basic English sentence structure: subject and verb should appear in a clear order, with qualifiers such as "at the very least" placed in natural positions. A helpful strategy is to mentally read the sentence aloud and choose the order that sounds most fluent and logical. Final Answer: The correct arrangement is RPQ, giving: "Thus, at the very least, a developing economy also needs to have some notion of external balance."

Question 4

Convert the following sentence from Active to Passive voice by selecting the correct option: "When did Rohit return my bike?"

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question assesses your understanding of voice change between Active and Passive forms in English, especially in interrogative (question) sentences. Transforming a question from Active to Passive voice requires careful attention to auxiliary verbs, tense, subject object reversal, and word order, while preserving the original meaning and time reference. Given Data / Assumptions: Active sentence: "When did Rohit return my bike?" Subject in active: Rohit. Object in active: my bike. Tense: simple past (did return). Question word: "When". Options show possible passive and alternative structures. Concept / Approach: To convert an active sentence in simple past to passive voice, we use the structure: object + was / were + past participle + by + subject. For questions, the auxiliary verb comes before the subject. We must also keep the question word "When" at the beginning. The meaning should remain: asking about the time at which Rohit returned the bike. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify object and subject. Object: "my bike". Subject: "Rohit". Verb: "returned". Step 2: Choose the passive auxiliary for simple past. Since "bike" is singular, we use "was". Step 3: Form the passive core: "my bike was returned by Rohit". Step 4: Turn the statement into a question with "When". In passive interrogatives, "was" comes before the subject: "When was my bike returned by Rohit?" Step 5: Compare this structure with the given options and match it exactly. Verification / Alternative check: Check each option: Option (A): "When was my bike returned by Rohit?" fits the passive structure perfectly and preserves the time question. Option (B): "When was it that Rohit returned my bike?" remains active because "Rohit" is still the subject of "returned". It is not a passive transformation. Option (C): "Rohit returned my bike when?" sounds informal and is still active voice. Option (D): "When did my bike come back from Rohit?" changes both the verb and structure. It is not a direct passive transformation; it paraphrases the meaning instead. Therefore, only option (A) is a correct passive voice transformation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (B) does not reverse the roles of subject and object. It keeps "Rohit" as the subject, so it is still in active voice. Option (C) simply reorders the words but still uses the active structure, with "Rohit" as the subject and "returned" as the active verb. Option (D) uses "come back" instead of "returned" and omits "by Rohit". It changes the focus of the sentence and is not a strict voice change. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake in voice change questions is to accept any option that seems to carry a similar meaning, even if it does not follow the formal passive structure. Examinations usually expect a precise grammatical transformation, not just a loose paraphrase. Students also forget that in passive questions the auxiliary verb comes before the subject, and the original object becomes the new subject. Always systematically identify subject, verb, and object before transforming the sentence. Final Answer: The correct passive voice transformation is "When was my bike returned by Rohit?".

Question 5

Improve the bracketed part of the sentence by choosing the correct option: "Both the families were invited but neither (had accepted) our invitation."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a sentence improvement question that focuses on subject verb agreement and tense usage with the word "neither". The sentence describes a past completed action related to two families who were invited but did not respond positively. You must choose the verb form that best completes the sentence in standard English. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: "Both the families were invited but neither had accepted our invitation." Part in brackets: "had accepted". Options: accepted, did accept, has accepted, no improvement. Context: past event of invitation and non acceptance. Concept / Approach: The main clause "Both the families were invited" uses simple past tense ("were invited"). The contrasting clause introduced by "but" should also be in simple past tense to maintain consistency, unless there is a strong reason to emphasise a prior past action with past perfect ("had accepted"). Here, there is no earlier past event that requires past perfect. Therefore, simple past "accepted" is the appropriate choice. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the tense of the first part: "were invited" is simple past. Step 2: Notice the connector "but neither" which introduces a contrasting action that took place in the same time frame. Step 3: Examine "had accepted" (past perfect). Past perfect is normally used when one past action happened before another past action. In this sentence, there is no clear sequence of two different past times; we only know that they did not accept. Step 4: Consider "accepted" (simple past). "Neither accepted our invitation" matches the time frame of "were invited" and is straightforward. Step 5: Consider "did accept". This form is usually used for emphasis or questions, such as "Did they accept?" or "They did accept our invitation." It sounds unnatural in this negative contrast. Step 6: Consider "has accepted" (present perfect). This tense connects past actions to the present, which does not fit a narrative that is clearly about a completed past event. Step 7: Conclude that "accepted" is the best replacement, giving: "Both the families were invited but neither accepted our invitation." Verification / Alternative check: Compare two versions: Incorrect: "Both the families were invited but neither had accepted our invitation." Correct: "Both the families were invited but neither accepted our invitation." The correct version sounds natural and consistent in tense. The incorrect version uses past perfect unnecessarily, which exam setters often treat as an error in such contexts. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (B) "did accept" seems forced and would be more appropriate if we were emphasising acceptance rather than non acceptance. Option (C) "has accepted" would be used if the acceptance had relevance to the present, which is not indicated. Option (D) "no improvement" fails because the original "had accepted" does not suit the context. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes overuse past perfect ("had" plus past participle) in any sentence referring to the past, without checking whether two distinct past time points are involved. In exam questions, simple narratives about one past event usually stay in simple past. Another pitfall is ignoring the influence of contrast words such as "but" that link actions in the same time frame. Always match tenses logically instead of choosing the most complicated form. Final Answer: The bracketed phrase should be replaced with "accepted", so the sentence reads: "Both the families were invited but neither accepted our invitation."

Question 6

Select the word with the correct spelling from the given options.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks your spelling skills by asking you to identify the correctly spelt word among four options. Correct spelling is a fundamental part of written communication and is often tested directly in competitive examinations through such simple but tricky questions. Given Data / Assumptions: Options: "sentreis", "surgeons", "sibblings", "imolate". You must select the only word that is correctly spelt in standard English. Concept / Approach: The key is to recognise common English words and their standard spellings. Among the given options, "surgeons" is a frequently used noun referring to medical doctors who perform operations. The others are either invented forms or misspellings of real words. Familiarity with common patterns in English spelling helps quickly eliminate incorrect forms. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine "sentreis". This appears to be a misspelling of "centres" or "sentries", but it does not match the standard spelling of any known common word. Step 2: Examine "surgeons". This is the correct plural form of "surgeon", the specialist doctor who performs surgery. Step 3: Examine "sibblings". This looks like an incorrect spelling of "siblings". The correct spelling has only one "b" in the middle. Step 4: Examine "imolate". This seems to be a misspelling of "immolate", which has a double "m". Step 5: Since "surgeons" is a recognised correct word and each of the other options contains a spelling error, "surgeons" must be the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by recalling the base words: "surgeon" + plural "s" = "surgeons". "sibling" + plural "s" should be "siblings", not "sibblings". "immolate" is the standard spelling, not "imolate". No dictionary form exists for "sentreis", which confirms that "surgeons" is the only correct spelling among the options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "sentreis" does not correspond to a standard English word and seems to mix letters incorrectly. "sibblings" adds an extra "b" and therefore deviates from the correct spelling "siblings". "imolate" lacks the double "m" required in "immolate". Common Pitfalls: Candidates sometimes over rely on how a word sounds and ignore common spelling rules such as doubling consonants or preserving standard patterns. Words like "immolate" and "sibling" are often misspelt in everyday writing, so exam setters deliberately include such near misses to confuse you. A good strategy is to read widely and pay attention to how common words are written in authentic texts, which gradually builds a mental dictionary of correct spellings. Final Answer: The correctly spelt word is "surgeons".

Question 7

Select the synonym (word closest in meaning) of "rot".

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This vocabulary question asks you to select the synonym of the verb or noun "rot". Knowing a range of words for similar concepts helps you understand descriptive passages, science texts, and everyday language where processes of spoiling and decomposition are discussed. Given Data / Assumptions: Target word: "rot". Options: mature, stagnate, smell, decay. You must choose the word with the closest meaning to "rot". Concept / Approach: "Rot" refers to the process of decomposing or spoiling, especially organic matter such as fruit, wood, or flesh. It can be used both as a noun ("the rot") and as a verb ("to rot"). Therefore, the correct synonym should point to a similar process of decomposition or deterioration, not just any negative process. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that "rot" suggests breaking down of material due to bacteria, fungi, or time, leading to spoilage. Step 2: Examine "mature". This means to become fully developed or ripe. It is often a positive process, especially with fruits and people. Step 3: Examine "stagnate". This means to stop flowing or developing, for example, water that stops moving or a career that does not progress. It does not specifically mean to decay physically. Step 4: Examine "smell". While things that rot often smell bad, "smell" describes the sensation or odour itself, not the process of decaying. Step 5: Examine "decay". "Decay" means to gradually decompose or break down, which matches the meaning of "rot" closely. Step 6: Conclude that "decay" is the best synonym. Verification / Alternative check: Consider example sentences: "The fruit began to rot in the basket." → "The fruit began to decay in the basket." The substitution works naturally and keeps the meaning. However, substituting other options yields unnatural sentences such as "began to mature" or "began to stagnate", which change the meaning. This confirms that "decay" is the closest synonym. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Mature" refers to growth towards full development or ripeness, often before any rot or decay sets in. "Stagnate" is about stillness and lack of progress rather than physical decomposition. "Smell" describes the sensation of odour, which may be a result of rot, but it is not the same as the process of rotting. Common Pitfalls: A common trap is to pick a word associated with negative situations, such as "stagnate", without checking whether it refers to physical decomposition. Exam setters may include words from the same general context, but only one will match the precise meaning. Learning words in groups, such as rot, decay, decompose, and spoil, helps you recognise true synonyms quickly and avoid confusion. Final Answer: The synonym of "rot" is "decay".

Question 8

Choose the antonym (opposite in meaning) of the word "fatigue".

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This vocabulary question asks you to identify the antonym of "fatigue". Antonym questions test your understanding of both the given word and its logical opposite. The word "fatigue" is often used in everyday conversation, health topics, and exam texts, so knowing its opposite is practically useful as well. Given Data / Assumptions: Word given: "fatigue". Options: restive, slouch, vigour, tire. You must choose the word that is opposite in meaning to "fatigue". Concept / Approach: "Fatigue" means extreme tiredness, exhaustion, or weariness, whether physical or mental. The antonym should therefore refer to energy, strength, or liveliness. Some options may be related to tiredness or laziness, which are similar to "fatigue" rather than opposite. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that "fatigue" refers to a state of being very tired or lacking energy. Step 2: Examine "restive". This word usually means restless or unable to stay still, especially due to impatience or boredom. It is not the opposite of tiredness; it describes behaviour more than energy level. Step 3: Examine "slouch". This normally means to stand, sit, or move in a lazy, drooping way. It describes posture or manner, often associated with laziness, which is closer to tiredness than to energy. Step 4: Examine "vigour". "Vigour" refers to physical strength, energy, or enthusiasm, which is the clear opposite of fatigue. Step 5: Examine "tire". "To tire" is the verb form related to becoming tired, which is similar in meaning to "fatigue". Step 6: Conclude that "vigour" is the correct antonym. Verification / Alternative check: Think of a pair of sentences: "After hours of work, he felt fatigue." "After a good rest, he was full of vigour." These two sentences clearly show opposite states: exhausted versus full of energy. Substituting any of the other options does not create such a clear contrast, confirming that "vigour" is the right choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Restive" does not indicate high energy in a healthy way; it suggests impatience or inability to remain calm. "Slouch" indicates poor posture or lazy movement, which is closer in tone to fatigue than its opposite. "Tire" is closely associated with becoming fatigued and clearly not an antonym. Common Pitfalls: Exam takers sometimes pick a word that merely sounds "active" or negative without carefully considering whether it is truly opposite. For instance, "restive" may seem energetic, but it does not represent the positive energy and strength that contrasts with exhaustion. Building mental maps of opposites, such as fatigue versus vigour, helps you respond quickly in such questions. Final Answer: The antonym of "fatigue" is "vigour".

Question 9

Improve the bracketed part of the sentence by choosing the correct option: "You are what you (have eaten)."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question is based on a well known English proverb used in health and lifestyle contexts. The proverb is typically used in the simple present tense, and the question tests whether you recognise the standard form or accept an awkward variation such as "have eaten". Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: "You are what you have eaten." Bracketed phrase: "have eaten". Options: will eat, eat, shall eat, no improvement. The sentence expresses a general truth about how food influences a person. Concept / Approach: General truths, proverbs, and habitual facts in English are usually expressed in the simple present tense. The accepted proverb is "You are what you eat", meaning that your health and body reflect the food you regularly consume. Using present perfect ("have eaten") would shift the focus to completed past actions rather than an ongoing general principle, which is less natural here. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that the sentence resembles a proverb about diet and health. Step 2: Recall the standard form: "You are what you eat." Step 3: Analyse "have eaten". Present perfect tense suggests actions completed before now, which may be relevant in some contexts but sounds awkward in a proverb that expresses a universal idea. Step 4: Examine option (B) "eat". Simple present tense indicates general, habitual action, which fits proverbs well. Step 5: Consider "will eat" and "shall eat". These future forms change the meaning to refer to what a person will eat later, not the general truth. Step 6: Conclude that "eat" is the best replacement and that "no improvement" is incorrect. Verification / Alternative check: Compare: Correct: "You are what you eat." (general principle about diet and identity) Incorrect: "You are what you have eaten." (clumsy and not the standard proverb) The first version is widely recognised, sounds natural, and is commonly quoted in health advice. This confirms that the bracketed part should be "eat". Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (A) "will eat" shifts the focus to future meals, which does not match the timeless, general nature of the proverb. Option (C) "shall eat" is similarly future oriented and sounds formal, which is not suitable here. Option (D) "no improvement" is incorrect because the given phrase "have eaten" does not reflect the standard proverb and is stylistically weak. Common Pitfalls: Some candidates may overthink the grammar and accept present perfect because it sounds more complicated, assuming that exam setters always prefer complex tenses. However, simplicity is often appropriate, especially with proverbs and general statements. When a sentence resembles a known saying, recall the exact form of the saying before choosing an option. Final Answer: The bracketed phrase should be replaced with "eat", yielding the natural proverb: "You are what you eat."

Question 10

Select the best single word that can substitute the phrase "To regard with disgust and hatred."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This one word substitution question asks you to choose the word that best matches the phrase "To regard with disgust and hatred." Such questions test your knowledge of precise verbs that capture strong emotional attitudes, which is useful for both expressive writing and accurate reading comprehension. Given Data / Assumptions: Phrase: "To regard with disgust and hatred." Options: tease, abhor, ridicule, sneer. You must pick the word whose meaning matches the phrase most closely. Concept / Approach: The phrase includes two strong emotions: disgust and hatred. The correct word should therefore imply a deep, intense dislike, not just mild mockery or joking behaviour. While several options describe negative behaviours, only one of them indicates a deep emotional reaction rather than an outward expression of mockery. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine "tease". This means to make fun of someone, often in a playful or slightly irritating way, but it does not necessarily include hatred or strong disgust. Step 2: Examine "abhor". "To abhor" means to hate something deeply, to view it with extreme dislike and repulsion. This directly matches the idea of disgust and hatred. Step 3: Examine "ridicule". This means to mock or make fun of someone in a scornful way. It focuses on outward behaviour, not the inner feeling of disgust and hatred. Step 4: Examine "sneer". "To sneer" means to smile or speak in a contemptuous or mocking way, again referring to external expression rather than deep hatred. Step 5: Conclude that "abhor" is the only word that captures the strong internal feeling described in the phrase. Verification / Alternative check: Substitute each option into an example sentence: "Many people abhor cruelty to animals." This means they regard it with disgust and hatred, matching the phrase exactly. "Many people ridicule cruelty to animals." This sounds odd because ridicule is directed at people, not actions, and it suggests mockery rather than deep loathing. "Many people sneer at cruelty to animals." Again, this does not communicate intense hatred. Therefore, "abhor" fits best. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Tease" is usually light or playful and may involve friendly joking, which is far weaker than hatred. "Ridicule" focuses on scornful laughter or speech, not necessarily strong disgust. "Sneer" refers to a facial expression or tone of voice indicating contempt, which is not the same as deep hatred and disgust. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse expressive actions like mocking, sneering, or teasing with inner feelings like hatred and disgust. Exam questions often include such distractors. To avoid mistakes, focus on whether the word refers to behaviour (what you do) or emotion (what you feel). "Abhor" clearly describes an internal emotional reaction, which aligns perfectly with the phrase given. Final Answer: The correct one word substitute is "abhor".

Question 11

In the following sentence, choose the correct word to fill in the blank: "The investigations revealed a ____________ lack of efficiency in the functioning of the airlines."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This blank filling question assesses your vocabulary and your ability to pick a word that collocates naturally with "lack of efficiency" in a formal investigative context. The sentence talks about investigations into airline functioning, suggesting that the deficiency was clear and noticeable rather than hidden. Given Data / Assumptions: Sentence: "The investigations revealed a ____________ lack of efficiency in the functioning of the airlines." Options: plain, obscure, conspicuous, concealed. The investigations bring something to light. Concept / Approach: The key word here is "revealed", which suggests that the investigation uncovered something evident or obvious once examined. A "conspicuous lack" is a standard collocation meaning a very noticeable deficiency. We must choose a word that both fits logically and is commonly used in such formal reports. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Understand that the investigation uncovered or highlighted the lack of efficiency. Step 2: Examine "plain". "Plain lack of efficiency" is possible, but the more common collocation is "plain fact" or "plain truth", not "plain lack". It is weaker than required. Step 3: Examine "obscure". An "obscure lack of efficiency" would mean a hidden or not easily noticed lack, which clashes with the idea of being revealed clearly. Step 4: Examine "conspicuous". "Conspicuous" means easily seen or clearly noticeable. A "conspicuous lack of efficiency" matches the idea that inefficiency stood out once investigated. Step 5: Examine "concealed". "Concealed lack of efficiency" would mean hidden, but investigations revealing something usually make what was hidden become conspicuous, not stay concealed. Step 6: Conclude that "conspicuous" is the best fit. Verification / Alternative check: Insert "conspicuous" into the sentence: "The investigations revealed a conspicuous lack of efficiency in the functioning of the airlines." This sounds like typical formal reporting language. Substituting "obscure" or "concealed" makes the sentence contradictory, because something that has been revealed is no longer obscure or concealed. "Plain" is grammatically possible but far less idiomatic than "conspicuous lack". Why Other Options Are Wrong: "Plain" is not wrong in meaning, but it does not form as strong and natural a collocation as "conspicuous lack" in formal English. "Obscure" means unclear or difficult to understand, which conflicts with the outcome of an investigation that clarifies issues. "Concealed" refers to something hidden, which again conflicts with "revealed". Common Pitfalls: Candidates may be tempted by words like "concealed" or "obscure" because they match the idea that problems are often hidden before an investigation. However, the sentence focuses on what the investigation revealed, not on what remained hidden. Also, examining common collocations such as "conspicuous lack", "conspicuous absence", and "conspicuous failure" can guide you to the correct answer quickly in vocabulary questions. Final Answer: The correct word to complete the sentence is "conspicuous", giving "a conspicuous lack of efficiency".

Question 12

Select the word with the correct spelling from the following options.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This spelling question requires you to identify which one of the given options is spelt correctly. Spelling accuracy is important for effective written communication, and examiners often use familiar words with tricky consonant doubling patterns to test attention to detail. Given Data / Assumptions: Options: "wrapping", "bargundy", "streses", "stenchhes". You must pick the correctly spelt English word. Concept / Approach: Among these options, "wrapping" is a common word meaning the paper or material used to cover something, especially gifts. The other options appear to be misspellings of "burgundy", "stresses", and "stenches". Recognising the base words and their standard spellings helps you quickly identify the correct one. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine "wrapping". This is the correct present participle or gerund of "wrap", formed by doubling the consonant "p" before adding "ing". It is a standard English word. Step 2: Examine "bargundy". This appears to be a misspelling of "burgundy", the name of a colour and a wine producing region in France. The correct spelling begins with "bur", not "bar". Step 3: Examine "streses". This seems to be a misspelling of "stresses" (plural of "stress"), which should contain a double "s" after "stres". Step 4: Examine "stenchhes". This is likely a mistaken form of "stenches", the plural of "stench". The correct spelling does not have "hh". Step 5: Conclude that "wrapping" is the only correctly spelt word. Verification / Alternative check: Check with base forms: "wrap" + "ing" = "wrapping". Doubling the consonant "p" is correct according to English spelling rules for short vowel plus consonant patterns. "burgundy" is the correct form of the colour and wine region, not "bargundy". "stresses" is the correct plural, not "streses". "stenches" is the correct plural, not "stenchhes". This verification confirms that "wrapping" is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: "bargundy" misplaces the vowel after "b" and fails to match any standard dictionary word. "streses" lacks one "s" and is not the accepted plural of "stress". "stenchhes" incorrectly doubles the "h" and does not correspond to any standard plural form. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes hesitate over doubled consonants or unusual combinations of letters and may feel that "wrapping" looks wrong because of the double "p". However, in many English verbs with a short vowel followed by a single consonant, that consonant is doubled before adding "ing" or "ed" (for example, "stop" to "stopping"). Knowing this pattern helps you trust that "wrapping" is correct despite the double letter. Final Answer: The correctly spelt word is "wrapping".

Question 13

Convert the following exclamatory sentence into Indirect speech by choosing the correct option: The coach said, "Bravo! Puneet, you have done well."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your ability to change an exclamatory sentence from Direct to Indirect speech. The original sentence involves praise expressed through the exclamation "Bravo" and a statement about Puneet's performance. Indirect speech must capture both the act of praising and the content of what was said, while obeying rules of tense change and pronoun adjustment. Given Data / Assumptions: Direct speech: The coach said, "Bravo! Puneet, you have done well." Speaker: the coach. Listener: Puneet. Message: praise plus a statement about Puneet having done well. Reporting verb: "said" in the original. Concept / Approach: To convert an exclamation like "Bravo!" into indirect speech, we usually replace it with a reporting verb that captures the feeling, such as "applauded" or "praised". The present perfect "have done" in direct speech typically changes to past perfect "had done" in reported speech when the reporting verb is in the past. We also change "you" to "he" because the coach is talking about Puneet in indirect narration. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the emotion: "Bravo!" expresses admiration and applause for Puneet's performance. Step 2: Choose an appropriate reporting verb that conveys praise, such as "applauded" or "congratulated". Step 3: Change the second person pronoun "you" to the third person "he", because the reference is to Puneet. Step 4: Change the tense from present perfect "have done" to past perfect "had done" because the reporting verb "said" is in simple past. Step 5: Combine these changes into a grammatically correct indirect speech sentence. Verification / Alternative check: Evaluate the options: Option (A): "The coach applauded Puneet saying that he had done well." This correctly conveys praise (applauded), uses "he" for Puneet, and uses past perfect "had done" for the reported clause. Option (B): "The coach said to Puneet Bravo, he had done well." This retains the exclamation "Bravo" directly and does not convert the sentence into proper indirect speech. Option (C): "The coach congratulated Puneet, saying he did well." This captures the praise but keeps the tense in simple past "did well", not the preferred "had done well". It is less precise. Option (D): "The coach said to Puneet, that he did well." This changes to indirect speech but ignores the exclamatory tone and still uses simple past. Only option (A) fully satisfies the rules of reported speech for exclamations. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (B) remains too close to direct speech and does not use an appropriate reporting verb for the emotion. Option (C) uses "congratulated" which is acceptable, but the tense "did well" is less accurate than "had done well" as a reported form of "have done well". Option (D) neither reflects the praise clearly nor adjusts the tense correctly, and the comma before "that" is awkward. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes forget to choose a specific reporting verb that matches the original exclamation, instead relying on "said". In exclamatory sentences, however, verbs like "exclaimed", "applauded", or "congratulated" often give a much clearer sense of the speaker's emotion. Another common mistake is to neglect tense change, especially between present perfect in direct speech and past perfect in indirect speech when the reporting verb is in the past. Final Answer: The correct indirect speech is "The coach applauded Puneet saying that he had done well."

Question 14

Rearrange the parts of the sentence in the correct order: "Gone are the days P - about foreign trade and payments, Q - and not really worried, R - when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy." Choose the correct sequence.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence rearrangement question deals with economic terminology and logical flow. The sentence contrasts past and present attitudes towards foreign trade and payments, starting with the phrase "Gone are the days". Your task is to choose the order of the parts P, Q, and R that produces a grammatically correct and meaningful sentence. Given Data / Assumptions: Starter: "Gone are the days" P: "about foreign trade and payments" Q: "and not really worried" R: "when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy" The sentence must describe a period when the country considered itself a closed economy and paid little attention to foreign trade. Concept / Approach: We need to construct a logical clause that follows "Gone are the days". The phrase "when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy" clearly introduces the time reference for those days. After that, the sentence should mention our attitude, "and not really worried", and then the object of that attitude, "about foreign trade and payments". We must preserve natural word order and connectives like "and" correctly. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the part that best follows "Gone are the days". The phrase "when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy" (R) fits naturally because it describes what those days were like. Step 2: After R, we expect a description of the accompanying attitude, which is "and not really worried" (Q). It connects logically with the preceding clause. Step 3: Finally, we need to specify what we were not worried about, which is "about foreign trade and payments" (P). Step 4: Combine them: "Gone are the days when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy and not really worried about foreign trade and payments." Step 5: This corresponds to the sequence R Q P, which is option (B) RQP. Verification / Alternative check: Check the alternative sequences: P R Q: "Gone are the days about foreign trade and payments when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy and not really worried" is grammatically incorrect because "Gone are the days about foreign trade" is not a natural phrase. Q R P: "Gone are the days and not really worried when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy about foreign trade and payments" is disjointed and misuses "and". P Q R or Q P R create similar structural problems and do not read smoothly. Only R Q P yields a coherent statement about earlier closed economy thinking and lack of concern over foreign trade. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (A) QRP begins with "and not really worried", which cannot directly follow "Gone are the days". Option (C) PRQ makes "Gone are the days about foreign trade and payments", a phrase that is not idiomatic English. Option (D) PQR has the same flaw by starting with the prepositional phrase "about foreign trade and payments" in the wrong place. Common Pitfalls: Candidates sometimes focus only on local grammatical correctness between two adjacent fragments and ignore the overall sentence. It helps to first choose the fragment that naturally follows the starter phrase "Gone are the days". Phrase R clearly introduces the time clause starting with "when", which is commonly used in such constructions. Once you place R correctly, it becomes easier to see that Q expresses a mental state and P finishes the idea by specifying the object of that state. Final Answer: The correct sequence is RQP, giving: "Gone are the days when we could think of ourselves as a closed economy and not really worried about foreign trade and payments."

Question 15

In the following question, you are given a short definition: “unable to be destroyed or removed”. Choose the most appropriate single English word which expresses this meaning clearly and precisely from the options given.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This verbal ability question tests your knowledge of precise English vocabulary and single-word substitutes. Competitive examinations in English often present a short definition such as “unable to be destroyed or removed” and ask you to select the one word that conveys this idea exactly. Understanding subtle differences between similar looking words is very important for building strong language skills and for scoring well in general-knowledge and English sections of exams. Given Data / Assumptions: The given definition is “unable to be destroyed or removed”. We must choose one correct word from the options. The answer should match the meaning closely and naturally in standard English usage. The context is general English vocabulary, not a specialised scientific term. Concept / Approach: The key idea in the definition is permanence. Something that is “unable to be destroyed or removed” continues to exist even when it is attacked, criticised, or when attempts are made to erase it. The English adjective “ineradicable” is commonly used to describe such things as ineradicable stains, ineradicable beliefs, or ineradicable memories. The other options do not express this specific idea of something that cannot be destroyed or removed, so we must compare each option with the definition carefully. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the core meaning of the definition: complete resistance to destruction or removal. Step 2: Consider “ineradicable”. The root “eradicate” means to destroy completely or to pull out by the roots. Adding the negative prefix “in-” gives “ineradicable”, which means that something cannot be eradicated, destroyed, or removed. Step 3: Check “habit”. A habit can sometimes be hard to give up, but the word itself does not intrinsically mean “impossible to destroy or remove”; many habits can be changed. Step 4: Check “worn”. This describes something that has been used so much that it is damaged or thin. It suggests being weakened, not being impossible to destroy. Step 5: Check “fixed”. This can mean attached, stable, or decided, but it does not naturally mean that something can never be destroyed or removed. Step 6: Conclude that “ineradicable” is the only option that accurately and completely fits the definition. Verification / Alternative check: A quick dictionary style restatement confirms that “ineradicable” means “impossible to eradicate” and is typically glossed as “unable to be destroyed or removed”. The other words are common in English but are used in very different senses. There is no natural context in which “habit”, “worn”, or “fixed” alone can be used as exact synonyms for the given definition, so the match with “ineradicable” is strong and unambiguous. Why Other Options Are Wrong: habit: A habit can be persistent, but people can still change or overcome habits, so it does not inherently mean “impossible to destroy or remove”. worn: This describes a condition of being used or damaged, which is almost the opposite nuance of something that is indestructible. fixed: This can mean firmly in place or unchanging, but it does not directly convey that something cannot be destroyed or removed. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes pick words that feel vaguely related to permanence or stability without checking whether the meaning truly includes “cannot be destroyed or removed”. Another common error is to choose the word that they have seen more often in everyday life, rather than the one that is technically correct in vocabulary questions. It is important to break the word into roots and prefixes, as with “eradicate” and “ineradicable”, to understand meaning accurately. Final Answer: The word that means “unable to be destroyed or removed” is ineradicable.

Question 16

Read the passage carefully and choose the correct word to fill in the blank so that the sentence becomes grammatically and logically correct: “An ideal policeman is a myth. You come ________ him only in crime fiction.” Select the most appropriate pr…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is based on a short passage that discusses the idea of an ideal policeman as a myth. The blank focuses on a common English expression that uses the verb “come” plus a preposition. Mastering such verb–preposition combinations, also called phrasal verbs or fixed collocations, is essential in English grammar and for success in competitive examinations that test reading comprehension and cloze passages. Given Data / Assumptions: The key sentence is “You come ________ him only in crime fiction.” The options are “over”, “cross”, “across”, and “to”. The meaning intended by the writer is that you only “encounter” or “meet” such an ideal policeman in fictional stories. The question tests knowledge of the correct preposition to use with the verb “come”. Concept / Approach: In English, “come across” is a very common phrasal verb that means “to meet or find by chance” or “to encounter”. When the author says that an ideal policeman is a myth, and that you come “something” him only in crime fiction, the sentence clearly requires the meaning “you only encounter such a character in crime fiction.” Among the given options, only “across” forms the correct phrasal verb “come across” with this sense. The other prepositions do not produce a natural or correct expression here. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Replace the blank with each option and read the sentence aloud for meaning and grammar. Step 2: “You come over him only in crime fiction.” The phrase “come over him” is not correct in this context. “Come over” has other meanings, such as visiting someone or a feeling coming over a person. Step 3: “You come cross him only in crime fiction.” This is incorrect because “come cross” is not a standard phrasal verb in English. Step 4: “You come across him only in crime fiction.” This is correct. “Come across” means to encounter or meet, which fits the idea that such an ideal policeman exists only in stories. Step 5: “You come to him only in crime fiction.” Although grammatically possible, it changes the meaning to “approach him” or “go to him”, which is not what the passage intends. The stress in the passage is on the rarity and mythical nature of the ideal policeman, not on physically going to him. Step 6: Conclude that “across” is the only option that maintains both grammatical correctness and the intended meaning of the sentence. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by consulting a standard dictionary or grammar reference. “Come across someone or something” is defined as “to meet or find someone or something by chance”. This matches the idea in the passage that one only meets such an ideal policeman within crime fiction. None of the other combinations with “come” listed in the options are accepted expressions with the intended sense of “encounter”. Why Other Options Are Wrong: over: “Come over” usually means to visit a place or to be overcome by a feeling, so it does not fit the idea of meeting a mythical character in fiction. cross: “Come cross” is not an idiomatic English expression, so it is grammatically and stylistically incorrect here. to: “Come to him” means to go towards him or approach him physically or emotionally, which does not match the idea of only encountering such a person in stories. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes choose prepositions by guessing, especially when multiple prepositions seem grammatically possible. However, collocations in English often rely on fixed, idiomatic combinations. It is therefore important to learn common phrasal verbs such as “come across”, “run into”, and “bump into” for the sense of “meet by chance”, instead of trying to construct them logically in the examination hall. Final Answer: The correct preposition that completes the expression is across, giving the phrase “You come across him only in crime fiction.”

Question 17

Read the passage carefully and then choose the correct word to fill the blank in the sentence: “__________ elusive is ‘good policing’, an idea that even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define.” Select the alternative th…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is based on a passage about the concept of an ideal policeman and the difficulty of defining “good policing”. The blank tests your understanding of adverbs that modify adjectives and entire ideas, and your ability to recognise an idiomatic, natural sounding phrase in English. The exam expects you to select the word that correctly compares the elusiveness of “good policing” with something mentioned earlier, namely the mythical ideal policeman. Given Data / Assumptions: The sentence is “__________ elusive is ‘good policing’, an idea that even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define.” The options are “Fairly”, “Justly”, “Equally”, and “Uniformly”. In the earlier line, the passage states that an ideal policeman is a myth. The writer now wants to say that “good policing” is just as elusive as the mythical ideal policeman. Concept / Approach: The structure “Equally + adjective” is commonly used in English to express that two things share the same quality to the same degree. Here, the quality is “elusive”. The passage contrasts myth and reality and stresses that defining “good policing” is as difficult as encountering an ideal policeman. Therefore, the adverb that maintains this parallel and comparative sense is “Equally”. The other adverbs do not correctly convey that comparison and sound awkward in this particular sentence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Note that “elusive” is an adjective that needs an adverb to show degree or comparison. Step 2: “Fairly elusive is ‘good policing’” is grammatically possible, but “fairly” means “moderately”, which weakens the strong point being made by the author. Step 3: “Justly elusive is ‘good policing’” is awkward. “Justly” means “in a fair or morally right manner”, which does not logically modify “elusive”. Step 4: “Equally elusive is ‘good policing’” fits perfectly. It suggests that good policing is elusive to the same extent as the mythical ideal policeman mentioned in the previous sentence. Step 5: “Uniformly elusive is ‘good policing’” means “elusive in the same way everywhere”, which does not align with the intended comparison to the earlier idea. Step 6: Based on both grammar and meaning, select “Equally” as the best fit. Verification / Alternative check: Rewriting the sentence in a more linear fashion can help: “Good policing is equally elusive, an idea that even the best criminal justice thinkers find difficult to define.” This clearly shows the comparison between “good policing” and the ideal policeman earlier. The adverb “equally” naturally introduces this comparative relationship and is widely used in formal and informal English in this way. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Fairly: Indicates moderate degree, which weakens the emphasis on difficulty and does not capture the comparison with the earlier mythical policeman. Justly: Refers to fairness or moral rightness, and does not sensibly modify “elusive”. Something cannot be “justly elusive” in standard usage. Uniformly: Means “in the same way everywhere” and does not express similarity in degree between two specific ideas; it changes the nuance of the sentence. Common Pitfalls: Many candidates are tempted by words like “fairly” because they are familiar, or by “uniformly” because it sounds formal. However, cloze tests often hinge on the specific relationship between sentences. Here the key relationship is comparison, so an adverb that explicitly expresses equality of degree is required. Ignoring this link to the previous sentence can easily lead to a wrong answer. Final Answer: The correct word to complete the sentence is Equally, giving “Equally elusive is ‘good policing’, an idea that even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define.”

Question 18

In the given passage about an ideal policeman and “good policing”, choose the correct relative word to fill the blank in the sentence: “an idea _________ even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define.” Select the option t…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your understanding of relative pronouns in English grammar. The sentence is taken from a passage that describes “good policing” as an idea that is difficult to define. To connect the noun “idea” with the clause “even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define”, you must choose the most appropriate relative word. This is a common pattern in English language questions in many competitive exams. Given Data / Assumptions: The phrase to complete is “an idea _________ even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define”. The options are “that”, “which”, “whom”, and “who”. The noun being described is “idea”, which refers to the concept of “good policing”. The relative clause describes what the thinkers have found difficult to define. Concept / Approach: Relative pronouns connect a noun to an additional clause that gives more information about that noun. For things and abstract concepts like “idea”, English commonly uses “that” or “which”. The pronouns “who” and “whom” are normally used for people. In restrictive or defining relative clauses, where the clause is essential to the meaning of the sentence, “that” is particularly common in modern English. Here, the clause about criminal justice thinkers is essential, so “that” is the most natural choice. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the noun being described: the word “idea”. It is an abstract thing, not a person. Step 2: Immediately rule out “whom” and “who”, because those pronouns are used for people, such as “the person who helped me”. Step 3: Consider “which”. The sentence “an idea which even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define” is grammatically possible, and some styles of English do use “which” for things. Step 4: Consider “that”. The sentence “an idea that even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define” is very natural and is the typical structure in modern restrictive relative clauses, especially in exam patterns. Step 5: Since the clause is essential, exam setters usually prefer “that” as the most appropriate answer. Step 6: Select “that” as the best and most exam-friendly choice. Verification / Alternative check: Read the complete sentence with the chosen word: “An ideal policeman is a myth. You come across him only in crime fiction. Equally elusive is ‘good policing’, an idea that even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define.” The sentence flows smoothly and clearly. The use of “that” links the noun “idea” directly to the defining description, which is exactly the function of a restrictive relative clause. Why Other Options Are Wrong: which: While not always grammatically wrong, exam patterns for restrictive clauses with abstract nouns like “idea” usually favour “that”. Between two viable options, the test expects the more standard restrictive choice. whom: Used for objects of verbs or prepositions referring to people, for example “the man whom I met”. It cannot refer to an “idea”. who: Used for subjects referring to people, as in “the teacher who explained the lesson”. It is not correct for non-human abstract nouns like “idea”. Common Pitfalls: One common error is to treat “which” and “that” as completely interchangeable and pick randomly. Another is to overlook the basic rule that “who” and “whom” generally refer to persons, not to things or ideas. When dealing with relative clauses in examinations, always check (a) what noun is being described and (b) whether the clause is essential to the meaning. This quickly narrows the correct choice. Final Answer: The correct relative word is that, giving “an idea that even the best of criminal justice thinkers have found difficult to define.”

Question 19

In the passage about an ideal policeman and “good policing”, choose the correct verb to complete the expression: “we have to reluctantly _________ for an imperfect policeman”. Select the option that gives a natural and idiomatic phrasal verb in this…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question comes from a cloze passage that discusses the idea that “good policing” and an ideal policeman are difficult to find in the real world. The sentence says that in a chaotic world we have to reluctantly accept something less than ideal. The blank tests your understanding of phrasal verbs and natural English collocations, especially the common phrase “settle for” when we unwillingly accept something that is not perfect. Given Data / Assumptions: The key part of the sentence is “we have to reluctantly _________ for an imperfect policeman”. The options are “decide”, “pay”, “adjust”, and “settle”. The adverb “reluctantly” indicates that we accept something with hesitation, not gladly. The context suggests accepting something less than ideal or second best. Concept / Approach: In English, the phrasal verb “settle for” is used when a person chooses or accepts something that is not their first choice because a better option is not available. It naturally follows an object that is less than ideal. Other verbs like “decide”, “pay”, or “adjust” need different prepositions or structures to be correct and do not match the fixed phrase “settle for”. Therefore, recognising this collocation is the key to solving the problem correctly. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Read the whole phrase with each option and pay attention to whether a standard English expression is formed. Step 2: “Reluctantly decide for an imperfect policeman” is not idiomatic; one usually decides “on something” or “to do something”, not “decide for” in this sense. Step 3: “Reluctantly pay for an imperfect policeman” changes the meaning to a financial one, which does not match the conceptual discussion in the passage. Step 4: “Reluctantly adjust for an imperfect policeman” is ungrammatical in this usage; “adjust” is usually followed by “to” or “with” rather than “for” when referring to people or conditions. Step 5: “Reluctantly settle for an imperfect policeman” is a very common and natural phrase that means to accept an imperfect policeman since the ideal does not exist. Step 6: Conclude that “settle” is the only verb that combines correctly with “for” to express reluctant acceptance. Verification / Alternative check: If we rewrite the sentence plainly, we get: “This is why, in a chaotic world, we have to reluctantly settle for an imperfect policeman and an inadequate system.” This matches everyday English in news articles, opinion pieces, and general writing. You can also check in dictionaries where “settle for” is defined as “to accept or agree to something that is not exactly what you want”. Why Other Options Are Wrong: decide: Normally used as “decide on something” or “decide to do something”. “Decide for an imperfect policeman” is not correct and does not capture the idea of reluctant acceptance. pay: This introduces an idea of payment or cost and is not used to indicate accepting a lesser quality person or system. adjust: Commonly used as “adjust to conditions” or “adjust with people”. It does not create the fixed expression needed here. Common Pitfalls: Many students focus only on the individual verb and ignore the preposition that follows, leading them to choose a verb that seems vaguely connected to compromise or change. However, competitive exams often test fixed phrasal verbs and collocations. To avoid mistakes, always read the verb together with its preposition and ask whether it forms a recognised expression in English, such as “settle for”. Final Answer: The correct completion is settle, giving the idiomatic expression “reluctantly settle for an imperfect policeman”.

Question 20

In the same passage about an ideal policeman, choose the correct article or determiner to complete the final phrase: “and ________ inadequate system”. Select the alternative that makes the noun phrase grammatically correct in standard English.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on the correct use of articles in English. The passage talks about having to accept “an imperfect policeman and ________ inadequate system” in a chaotic world. To fill the blank, you must choose the correct word that fits both grammatically and logically. Article usage, especially “a” versus “an”, is a frequent topic in English grammar questions in competitive examinations. Given Data / Assumptions: The phrase to complete is “and ________ inadequate system”. The options are “a”, “an”, “this”, and “our”. The noun is “system”, which is being qualified by the adjective “inadequate”. The structure “an imperfect policeman and an inadequate system” suggests parallelism. Concept / Approach: In English, the choice between “a” and “an” depends on the initial sound of the following word, not simply on the letter. “An” is used before words that begin with a vowel sound. The adjective “inadequate” begins with a vowel sound, so the correct article before it is “an”. Additionally, the sentence is describing a general type of system, not a specific one, so a simple indefinite article is most appropriate rather than “this” or “our”. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on pronunciation. “Inadequate” begins with the sound “i”, which is a vowel sound. Step 2: Rule out “a” because we normally say “an inadequate system”, not “a inadequate system”. Step 3: Consider “this inadequate system”. Although grammatically possible, this would suddenly make the reference very specific, which breaks the general and abstract style of the passage. Step 4: Consider “our inadequate system”. This again introduces specificity, suggesting a particular national or institutional system, which the passage does not explicitly define. Step 5: Notice the parallel structure: “an imperfect policeman and an inadequate system”. The repetition of “an” gives good rhythm and makes the sentence balanced. Step 6: Therefore, the best choice that respects both grammar and style is “an”. Verification / Alternative check: Read the full combined sentence: “This is why, in what is a chaotic world, we have to reluctantly settle for an imperfect policeman and an inadequate system.” This sounds natural and is consistent with common usage found in newspapers, essays, and exam passages. In comparison, “this inadequate system” or “our inadequate system” would unnecessarily narrow the meaning, while “a inadequate system” is clearly incorrect pronunciation-wise. Why Other Options Are Wrong: a: Incorrect before a vowel sound, and “a inadequate system” does not follow the standard rule for article usage. this: Changes the sense to a specific system which has already been identified, whereas the passage is speaking in a more general, abstract manner. our: Refers to a specific group’s system, again adding a layer of specificity that is not present in the original passage. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes apply a simple “a before consonant, an before vowel” rule based only on letters, and then become confused by words like “university” or “hour”. The correct rule is based on sound. Here, “inadequate” clearly begins with a vowel sound, so “an” is required. Another pitfall is ignoring the parallel structure of paired noun phrases in a sentence. Recognising such patterns can often guide you to the correct article quickly. Final Answer: The correct completion is an, giving the phrase “an inadequate system”.

English Questions