Question 1

In the following question on reported speech, convert the direct question asked by the mother into indirect speech: Mother said, "Will you tell me what it means, Pritam?"

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This problem tests knowledge of changing direct speech into indirect or reported speech, especially when the direct speech is a question. The original sentence shows a mother asking Pritam a question about whether he will explain something to her. The candidate must transform this into a grammatically correct reported question in indirect speech. Given Data / Assumptions: - Reporting clause: “Mother said”. - Direct question: “Will you tell me what it means, Pritam?” - The question is of the yes or no type, introduced with “Will you ... ?”. - Standard rules of backshifting tenses and pronouns apply in reported speech. Concept / Approach: When converting a direct yes or no question into indirect speech, the auxiliary “will” usually changes to “would” because the reporting verb “said” is in a past tense. The interrogative word order changes back to a normal declarative order. The conjunction “if” or “whether” introduces the reported question. Pronouns and possessive adjectives must be adjusted to reflect the new point of view: “you” becomes “he”, and “me” becomes “her”, referring to the mother. The phrase “what it means” is also typically shifted to “what it meant” to match the backshift in tense. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Change the reporting verb phrase from “said” to a form that introduces a question. We keep “said” but add “asked” for clarity: “Mother asked Pritam ...”. Step 2: Introduce the reported question with “if” or “whether”, since it is a yes or no question: “Mother asked Pritam if ...”. Step 3: Adjust the subject pronoun. “You” in the direct speech refers to Pritam, so it becomes “he”. Step 4: Backshift the auxiliary “will” to “would” because the reporting verb is in the past: “he would tell”. Step 5: Replace “me” with “her”, referring to the mother, and keep the embedded clause “what it means”, but with backshift to “what it meant”. Step 6: Combine the elements to get: “Mother asked Pritam if he would tell her what it meant.” Step 7: Match this construction with the options and choose the one that is identical. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, mentally reverse the process. From the reported sentence “Mother asked Pritam if he would tell her what it meant”, we can reconstruct the direct question: “Mother said, ‘Will you tell me what it means, Pritam?’” This back-conversion restores “will” and the pronouns “you” and “me”, which confirms that the reported version is accurate. Also, the option correctly uses “if” to introduce a yes or no question and maintains the inner clause “what it meant” as an object of “tell”. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: Uses “will” instead of “would”, ignoring the need for backshift with a past reporting verb. Option B: Uses “that” instead of “if” and produces a clause that does not sound like a reported question. Option D: Again uses “that” and “will”, which is not appropriate after a past reporting verb. Option E: Retains “will” and “what it means”, which do not fully comply with the usual rules of backshifting in reported speech. Common Pitfalls: Learners often forget to change “will” to “would” and “can” to “could” when reporting in the past. They may also confuse when to use “that” and when to use “if” or “whether”. Remember that “if” and “whether” introduce reported yes or no questions, while “that” typically introduces reported statements. Another frequent mistake is failing to adjust pronouns from the perspective of the original speaker to that of the reporter. Final Answer: The correct indirect speech form is Mother asked Pritam if he would tell her what it meant.

Question 2

Read the following passage about prebiotics and then answer the question that follows: Prebiotics are the lesser-known gut-health promoters which serve as food for good bacteria inside the gut. "We found that dietary prebiotics can improve non-REM (…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This reading comprehension question assesses careful reading of a scientific-style passage about prebiotics and their effects on sleep. The key skill is to identify exactly how the passage defines the term “prebiotics” rather than rely on vague prior knowledge. The passage explains what prebiotics are, where they are found, and how they influence gut bacteria and sleep patterns in experimental rats. Given Data / Assumptions: - Prebiotics are described in the passage as “gut-health promoters which serve as food for good bacteria inside the gut”. - Later, the passage states that prebiotics “are dietary fibres found naturally in foods like artichokes, raw garlic, leeks and onions”. - The question asks directly: “What are prebiotics?” - The options include dietary fibres, bacteria, specific foods, and related concepts. Concept / Approach: In reading comprehension, many questions test recognition of definition sentences. When a passage contains expressions like “Prebiotics are ...” followed by a clear description, that sentence usually holds the precise answer. The candidate should locate and quote the definition rather than interpret the word according to external knowledge. Here, the crucial line is “Prebiotics are dietary fibres found naturally in foods like artichokes, raw garlic, leeks and onions.” This line tells us the category to which prebiotics belong. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Scan the passage for sentences that begin with the word “Prebiotics” and a linking verb like “are”. Step 2: Identify the sentence: “Prebiotics are dietary fibres found naturally in foods like artichokes, raw garlic, leeks and onions.” Step 3: Note that in this sentence, “dietary fibres” is the general noun that defines what prebiotics are. The list of foods is only an example of where these fibres occur. Step 4: Compare this with option A, which says “Dietary fibres”. This exactly matches the key phrase in the definition. Step 5: Evaluate other options. Option B, “Bacteria”, describes the good organisms that consume prebiotics, not the prebiotics themselves. Option C, “Foods like artichokes”, lists food sources, not the substance. Option D, “Gut microbiota”, refers to the community of microorganisms in the gut. Option E, “Digestive enzymes”, are chemicals that break down food and are not mentioned as prebiotics. Step 6: Conclude that the precise answer is option A. Verification / Alternative check: A different way to verify is to rephrase the relevant line: “Prebiotics are dietary fibres that act as food for beneficial bacteria.” None of the other options can be substituted into this sentence without changing its meaning. For instance, “Prebiotics are bacteria” would confuse the bacteria with their food. Similarly, “Prebiotics are artichokes” clearly fails, because artichokes are only an example of a food containing such fibres. This confirms that only “dietary fibres” fits all parts of the passage. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Bacteria: The passage states that prebiotics serve as food for beneficial bacteria; they are not themselves bacteria. Foods like artichokes: These are sources of prebiotic fibres and are not identical to prebiotics as a category. Gut microbiota: This term refers to the community of microorganisms in the digestive tract, which benefit from prebiotics. Digestive enzymes: These are substances that assist in breaking down food, but the passage does not equate them with prebiotics. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes rush through the passage and confuse “food for bacteria” with “bacteria” themselves. They may also pick examples, such as artichokes, instead of the general class. In scientific passages, it is important to distinguish between the substance being defined, its sources, and the organisms that use it. Careful reading and attention to definition sentences help avoid these errors. Final Answer: According to the passage, prebiotics are dietary fibres.

Question 3

Read the passage about prebiotics and sleep carefully and then answer the question: Prebiotics are the lesser-known gut-health promoters which serve as food for good bacteria inside the gut. "We found that dietary prebiotics can improve non-REM (ran…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This reading comprehension item focuses on identifying a specific detail in the passage about sleep and prebiotics. The passage contrasts two types of sleep, non-rapid-eye-movement (NREM) sleep and rapid-eye-movement (REM) sleep, and explains an experiment conducted on rats. The question asks which type of sleep is described as “restful and restorative”. Given Data / Assumptions: - The passage states that rats on a prebiotic diet spent more time in non-rapid-eye-movement (NREM) sleep. - It adds that this type of sleep is “restful and restorative”. - REM sleep is mentioned as another sleep phase but is not described with those same words. - EEG is the monitoring technique, and ECG is not even mentioned in the original text. Concept / Approach: This is a straightforward factual detail question. The correct approach is to locate the sentence in which the phrase “restful and restorative” appears and read which term it directly qualifies. While general knowledge may suggest that both NREM and REM play roles in health, the exam expects an answer based strictly on the wording of the passage. Careful attention to the exact phrase allows the candidate to identify the correct type of sleep without confusion. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Re-read the part of the passage that describes the findings of the experiment. Step 2: Identify the key sentence: “Findings revealed that the rats on the prebiotic diet spent more time in non-rapid-eye-movement (NREM) sleep, which is restful and restorative, than those on the non-prebiotic diet.” Step 3: Note that the relative clause “which is restful and restorative” directly follows “non-rapid-eye-movement (NREM) sleep”. This indicates that the description refers to NREM sleep. Step 4: Confirm that REM sleep is mentioned but not given this particular description in the quoted sentence. Step 5: Check that EEG and ECG are not types of sleep but rather medical tests; daytime naps are not discussed in the passage at all. Step 6: Conclude that NREM is the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, substitute each option into the phrase from the passage. Only “NREM” fits logically and grammatically into “NREM sleep, which is restful and restorative”. Substituting REM or EEG would mismatch the original wording. The passage clearly differentiates between the research technique (EEG), the sleep phases (NREM and REM), and the outcome measures. This direct textual evidence confirms NREM as the correct choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: REM: The passage mentions REM sleep but does not describe it as “restful and restorative” in the key sentence. EEG: This is an electroencephalogram, a brain activity test used to monitor sleep-wake cycles, not a type of sleep. ECG: This is a heart monitoring test (electrocardiogram) and is not even part of the passage. Daytime naps: The passage does not refer to naps; it focuses on sleep stages in laboratory rats. Common Pitfalls: A frequent error is relying on real-world knowledge instead of the passage itself. Some students may think of REM as important for dreaming and mental restoration and thus may be tempted to choose it. However, the exam expects answers based on explicit information in the text. Another pitfall is confusing technical terms such as NREM, REM, and EEG. Reading slowly and linking each term to its function as described in the passage prevents such confusion. Final Answer: The type of sleep described in the passage as “restful and restorative” is NREM sleep.

Question 4

Read the passage about prebiotics carefully and answer the following question: Prebiotics are the lesser-known gut-health promoters which serve as food for good bacteria inside the gut. "We found that dietary prebiotics can improve non-REM (random e…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question again tests careful reading of a specific factual detail from the passage about prebiotics and gut health. In the text, the author explains what happens when beneficial gut bacteria consume prebiotic fibre. Understanding the sequence of events is important: digestion of fibre, multiplication of bacteria, improvement in gut health, and release of metabolic by-products. Given Data / Assumptions: - The passage clearly states that when beneficial bacteria digest prebiotic fibre, they multiply and release metabolic by-products. - Prebiotic fibre is identified as dietary fibre found in certain foods. - Sleep improvement and stress are also discussed, but they form a different part of the findings. - The question specifically asks about the condition under which metabolic by-products are released. Concept / Approach: To answer detail-oriented questions, the candidate should find and quote the part of the passage that describes the process. The relevant sentence links digestion of prebiotic fibre by good bacteria with two results: multiplication of bacteria and release of metabolic by-products. The option that best restates this cause-and-effect relationship is the correct one. It is essential to avoid options that mix this process with the later discussion about sleep and stress, because the passage separates gut events from behavioural outcomes. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Locate the sentence discussing metabolic by-products. It reads: “When beneficial bacteria digest prebiotic fibre, they not only multiply, improving overall gut health, but they also release metabolic by-products.” Step 2: Identify the condition or action: “When beneficial bacteria digest prebiotic fibre.” Step 3: Note the result: the bacteria release metabolic by-products as part of this digestion process. Step 4: Recognise that prebiotic fibre has already been described as dietary fibre, so “digest dietary fibres” is a natural restatement. Step 5: Compare with option B: “When good bacteria digest dietary fibres.” This closely matches the text, with “good bacteria” equivalent to “beneficial bacteria” and “dietary fibres” equivalent to “prebiotic fibre”. Step 6: Evaluate other options, which do not match the specific wording of the passage. Verification / Alternative check: Consider whether any other option can be supported by the passage. Option A, “When good bacteria help sleep”, is too vague and misplaces the causal link, since the text does not say that helping sleep directly releases by-products. Option C, “When the gut becomes rich in nutrients”, is not specifically stated. Option D, “After recovery from stress due to sleep”, confuses the sequence of events in the study. Option E, “When rats are under experimental stress”, is also not indicated as the cause of by-product release. Only option B is explicitly backed by the passage. Why Other Options Are Wrong: When good bacteria help sleep: The passage links by-product release to digestion of fibre, not directly to effects on sleep. When the gut becomes rich in nutrients: This is an inference not directly stated in the text and does not mention digestion of prebiotic fibre. After recovery from stress due to sleep: The study does mention sleep changes after stress but does not say this causes metabolic by-products. When rats are under experimental stress: Stress is part of the design, but the release of by-products is directly tied to digestion of fibre. Common Pitfalls: Many students misinterpret cause and effect when several scientific events are described together. It is easy to link metabolic by-products to improvements in sleep or to stress, even though the passage associates them clearly with digestion of fibre. To avoid such confusion, always identify which clause is the cause and which is the effect. Paying attention to words like “when” and “because” helps keep track of causal relationships. Final Answer: According to the passage, metabolic by-products are released when good bacteria digest dietary fibres.

Question 5

Read the passage about prebiotics, rats and sleep carefully and answer the question: Prebiotics are the lesser-known gut-health promoters which serve as food for good bacteria inside the gut. "We found that dietary prebiotics can improve non-REM (ra…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This comprehension question focuses on understanding the research method described in the passage. The scientists did not simply observe the rats visually but used a specific technical tool to monitor sleep-wake cycles and brain activity over time. The candidate must recall which instrument is mentioned and how it is used in the context of the study. Given Data / Assumptions: - The passage states that the researchers monitored body temperature, gut bacteria, and sleep-wake cycles. - It explains that they did this “using electroencephalogram (EEG), or brain activity testing over time”. - NREM and REM sleep are types of sleep described, but they are outcomes rather than tools. - The question asks specifically “How can sleep-wake cycles be monitored in this study?” Concept / Approach: The correct approach is to identify the explicit mention of a scientific instrument used for measuring sleep. An electroencephalogram (EEG) records electrical activity of the brain and is a standard tool in sleep research. The passage clearly links EEG to monitoring sleep-wake cycles. Options that describe general conditions or other measures such as body temperature do not directly answer the “how” of monitoring the cycles. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Revisit the part of the passage that describes the researchers actions after feeding the rats. Step 2: Note the sentence: “They then monitored the rats body temperature, gut bacteria and sleep-wake cycles using electroencephalogram (EEG), or brain activity testing over time.” Step 3: Identify that EEG is explicitly mentioned as the method used to monitor sleep-wake cycles. Step 4: Recognise that the phrase “brain activity testing over time” further clarifies the function of EEG in the experiment. Step 5: Match this with option C, “By using EEG”. Step 6: Confirm that other options either misinterpret or do not fully capture the monitoring method. Verification / Alternative check: Option A, “By testing brain power”, is vague and does not refer to a specific instrument. Option B, “By allowing REM and NREM sleep”, describes what happens to the rats but not how researchers measure it. Option D, “By recording body temperature”, captures only one parameter and is not identified as the main measure of sleep-wake cycles. Option E, “By checking only eye movements”, is incomplete and not supported by the passage. Therefore, only option C correctly represents the method described. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Testing brain power: The passage mentions brain activity testing with EEG, but “brain power” is an imprecise term and not the method used. Allowing REM and NREM sleep: This describes the occurrence of sleep stages, not the monitoring technique. Recording body temperature: This is one of the research measurements but does not directly equate to tracking sleep-wake cycles. Checking only eye movements: The text does not say that eye movements alone were used as an index; it emphasises EEG instead. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes overlook technical terms in a passage or feel intimidated by them. As a result, they may skip over “electroencephalogram (EEG)” and choose a more familiar-sounding but incorrect option. In scientific reading passages, it is important to pay attention to such terms, because exam questions often focus exactly on these details. Underline or mentally note any specialised instrument names when reading. Final Answer: In this study, sleep-wake cycles are monitored by using EEG, that is, electroencephalogram recordings of brain activity over time.

Question 6

Read the passage about prebiotics and rats carefully and answer this vocabulary question: Prebiotics are the lesser-known gut-health promoters which serve as food for good bacteria inside the gut. "We found that dietary prebiotics can improve non-RE…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question evaluates understanding of vocabulary in context. The word “chow” can have several informal meanings in English, but here it appears within a scientific description of feeding rats. The reader must infer its meaning from the surrounding text, rather than rely solely on everyday usage. Given Data / Assumptions: - The passage states that researchers “fed three-week-old male rats a diet of either standard chow or chow that included prebiotics”. - The rats are part of an experiment involving different diets. - One diet is labelled “standard chow”, the other is chow supplemented with prebiotics. - The question asks: “What is chow?” Concept / Approach: Words in scientific passages are often used in specialised or semi-technical ways. In laboratory animal research, “chow” commonly refers to the prepared food mixture or feed given to animals. By examining how the word is used in the sentence, the reader can deduce that “chow” represents the basic food that can be modified by adding prebiotics. It is not the fibre itself, nor a nutrient class, nor a device. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Look at the entire sentence: “Researchers fed three-week-old male rats a diet of either standard chow or chow that included prebiotics.” Step 2: Recognise that this sentence contrasts two types of diet given to rats in the experiment. Step 3: “Standard chow” implies a normal, basic food, while “chow that included prebiotics” is a modified version of that food. Step 4: Therefore, “chow” must be something that can be eaten, and specifically, it is the food mixture for the rats. Step 5: Option C, “Rat food”, captures this sense directly and concisely. Step 6: Other options describe fibres, nutrient classes, sleep aids, or tests, which do not fit the way “chow” is used in the sentence. Verification / Alternative check: Try to substitute each option into the sentence: “Researchers fed three-week-old male rats a diet of either standard rat food or rat food that included prebiotics” fits naturally. In contrast, “standard type of dietary fibre” or “standard sleep enhancer” do not logically describe a full diet. The context of feeding animals in a controlled experimental setting strongly supports “chow” meaning animal feed. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Type of dietary fibre: The passage earlier states that prebiotics are dietary fibres, but “chow” is the entire diet, not just the fibre component. A class of nutrients: This would not be modified with prebiotics in the way described; instead, the whole food is altered. Sleep enhancer: The passage links prebiotics to changes in sleep but does not refer to chow as a direct enhancer. A medical test: Tests such as EEG are used to monitor the rats; “chow” is clearly something fed, not a diagnostic tool. Common Pitfalls: Candidates sometimes overthink simple contextual clues and assume every scientific word is highly technical. In fact, many scientific texts use ordinary or colloquial words in slightly specialised ways. Another mistake is to confuse “chow” with “chew” or with specific nutrient terms. The best strategy is to examine how the word functions in the sentence and what role it plays in the described process. Final Answer: In this passage, “chow” refers to rat food, that is, the basic feed given to the animals in the experiment.

Question 7

In the following sentence improvement question, identify the part of the sentence that contains an error and select the correct option. If there is no error, select "No Error". Sentence: Water was dripping of the trees, and the grass was wet.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to the category of error spotting in English grammar. The sentence describes a scene after rainfall or dew, where water is dripping and the grass is wet. The candidate must examine each underlined or numbered part to find the grammatical or idiomatic error. Such questions focus on correct preposition use, subject–verb agreement, tense, and standard idiomatic expressions in English. Given Data / Assumptions: - The sentence is divided into three parts plus a “No Error” option. - Full sentence: “Water was dripping of the trees, and the grass was wet.” - Part 1: “Water was dripping” - Part 2: “of the trees, and” - Part 3: “the grass was wet.” - Standard English prepositions and verb patterns are assumed. Concept / Approach: The key concept here is the correct use of prepositions with the verb “drip”. In natural English, one says “water was dripping from the trees” or “water was dripping off the trees”. The use of “of” is incorrect in this context. The rest of the sentence uses a past continuous form plus a simple past clause joined by “and”, which is grammatically acceptable. Therefore, attention must be directed to the preposition in part 2. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Analyse part 1, “Water was dripping”. This is grammatically correct past continuous tense, describing ongoing action in the past. Step 2: Examine part 2, “of the trees, and”. Here, the verb “dripping” is followed by the preposition “of”, which sounds unnatural and wrong in standard English usage. Step 3: Recall the correct prepositional phrase. We normally say “dripping from the trees” or “dripping off the trees”. Both “from” and “off” express source or origin of the dripping water. The preposition “of” does not fit this meaning. Step 4: Check part 3, “the grass was wet.” This is a simple, correct past tense clause with no grammatical problem. Step 5: Since the only faulty element is the preposition “of” in part 2, we identify part 2 as the segment containing the error. Verification / Alternative check: Rewrite the sentence with the correction: “Water was dripping from the trees, and the grass was wet.” This version sounds natural and grammatically correct. No further changes are needed in parts 1 and 3. If we test the “No Error” option, we see that at least one edit is necessary, so “No Error” cannot be the right answer. The diagnosis that only part 2 is wrong therefore stands. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Part 1: “Water was dripping” correctly uses the past continuous to describe an ongoing action. Part 3: “the grass was wet” is a standard simple past clause and agrees with the context. Part 4 (No Error): Selecting this would ignore the incorrect preposition “of”. Error cannot be determined: This is incorrect because the grammatical issue is clearly identifiable. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to read quickly and accept unusual preposition use as possibly regional or stylistic. However, examination questions typically expect standard international usage. Another pitfall is overanalyzing parts 1 and 3 and imagining tense problems where none exist. Systematically checking each part and focusing on collocations like “drip from” or “drip off” helps avoid such confusion. Final Answer: The error lies in Part 2: of the trees, and, where the preposition “of” should be replaced by “from” or “off”.

Question 8

In the following error spotting question, identify the part of the sentence that contains an error and select the correct option. If there is no error, select "No Error". Sentence: Pravin sat up on the sofa, with his legs tucked down him.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This item is another error spotting question dealing with prepositions and idiomatic usage. The sentence describes how Pravin sits on a sofa with his legs in a particular position. The goal is to identify which underlined part is ungrammatical or unnatural in standard English usage and therefore needs correction. Given Data / Assumptions: - Full sentence: “Pravin sat up on the sofa, with his legs tucked down him.” - Part 1: “Pravin sat up on the” - Part 2: “sofa, with his legs” - Part 3: “tucked down him.” - Part 4: “No Error” - The phrase “tucked down him” is not standard English. Concept / Approach: The phrase “tucked down him” attempts to describe a posture but uses the wrong preposition. The common and idiomatic expression is “tucked under him” when referring to legs folded close to the body while sitting. Parts 1 and 2 appear structurally sound, while part 3 contains the incorrect preposition “down”. Correcting the preposition fixes the sentence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine part 1: “Pravin sat up on the”. This is grammatically acceptable as it begins a normal sentence about sitting up on a piece of furniture. Step 2: Examine part 2: “sofa, with his legs”. This continues correctly, specifying where he sat and the introduction of the detail about his legs. Step 3: Examine part 3: “tucked down him.” This construction is unidiomatic. The preposition “down” does not collocate with “tucked” in this context. Step 4: Recall the standard English phrase. We usually say “tucked under him” when legs are folded under the body while sitting. The correct sentence should read: “Pravin sat up on the sofa, with his legs tucked under him.” Step 5: Since only part 3 requires correction, it is identified as the erroneous segment. Verification / Alternative check: After correction, the full sentence reads: “Pravin sat up on the sofa, with his legs tucked under him.” This version sounds natural and grammatically correct. No modifications are needed in parts 1 and 2. If we tried to keep “down”, the phrase would remain awkward and would not reflect accepted usage. Therefore, “No Error” cannot be chosen, and the error cannot be said to be indeterminate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Part 1: “Pravin sat up on the” introduces the subject and part of the predicate correctly. Part 2: “sofa, with his legs” is a correct continuation, specifying location and beginning a descriptive clause. Part 4 (No Error): This is incorrect because the phrase “tucked down him” clearly needs correction. Error cannot be identified: This is wrong because the faulty preposition “down” is identifiable. Common Pitfalls: Many learners are unsure about fixed expressions with prepositions, especially when several prepositions seem possible in casual speech. Relying on literal translation from another language can also lead to phrases like “tucked down him”, which do not exist in standard English. To avoid this, it is helpful to memorise common collocations such as “tucked under”, “sat on”, and “sat up” in real reading contexts. Final Answer: The error is in Part 3: tucked down him., where “down” should be replaced by “under”.

Question 9

In the following sentence completion question, choose the most appropriate word to fill in the blank: At night, the hungry orphan would sneak into the kitchen and __________ tiny amounts of food.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks vocabulary and the ability to choose a verb that fits both the meaning and the tone of the sentence. The sentence describes a hungry orphan sneaking into the kitchen at night to take small amounts of food. The context suggests secretive, possibly dishonest taking of food in small quantities, not simply choosing or storing food. Given Data / Assumptions: - Subject: “the hungry orphan”. - Action: “would sneak into the kitchen”. - Object: “tiny amounts of food”. - The missing verb must express secretly taking small quantities. Concept / Approach: The key word in the sentence is “sneak”, which implies secrecy and possibly theft. Therefore, the verb chosen for the blank must align with this idea. The English verb “pilfer” means to steal small quantities, especially things that are not very valuable. This matches the situation perfectly. The other options either describe unrelated actions or do not function as verbs in the required sense. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Interpret the scene: a hungry orphan, late at night, entering the kitchen secretly. This implies taking food without permission. Step 2: Recall the meaning of “pilfer”, which is to steal items, usually of small value, in small amounts and often in a sneaky manner. Step 3: Fit “pilfer” into the sentence: “At night, the hungry orphan would sneak into the kitchen and pilfer tiny amounts of food.” The sentence now reads smoothly and logically. Step 4: Consider “prefer”. This means to like one thing more than another and does not describe stealing food. Step 5: Consider “lifter”. This is a noun, not a verb, and therefore does not grammatically fit the blank. Step 6: Consider “differ”. This verb means to be unlike or to disagree and does not match the context. Step 7: Consider “hoard”. This means to store or accumulate items, often secretly, but it usually suggests keeping things over time, not the act of stealthily taking small amounts in a single action. The stronger and more precise word here is “pilfer”. Verification / Alternative check: Re-read the completed sentence: “At night, the hungry orphan would sneak into the kitchen and pilfer tiny amounts of food.” The imagery is clear: secret, repeated, small-scale theft. If we substitute “hoard”, the sentence becomes less precise, because hoarding relates to accumulation rather than the act of taking. The presence of “sneak” further supports a verb that clearly denotes stealing. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Prefer: Expresses choice, not stealing or taking food. Lifter: A noun that could refer to a weightlifting person or tool, not a verb fitting the blank. Differ: Means to be different or disagree, unrelated to taking food. Hoard: Suggests storing or accumulating goods, not specifically the act of stealthily stealing small portions in this context. Common Pitfalls: Students may be tempted by “hoard” because of its connection with secretive behaviour. However, the action here is taking food from the kitchen, not building up a large private store over time. Understanding fine distinctions among synonym-like words is crucial for success in vocabulary-based questions. Regular reading and using new words in sentences can help fix their precise meanings in memory. Final Answer: The most appropriate verb to complete the sentence is pilfer.

Question 10

In the following sentence completion question, choose the most appropriate word to fill in the blank: As the only ________ person in the wacky family, the sensible girl felt like the odd woman out.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests the ability to choose the correct adjective that fits logically and semantically into a sentence. The sentence contrasts the sensible girl with the rest of her “wacky family”. The blank must be filled with a word that emphasises her mental stability and reasonableness in contrast to the others. Given Data / Assumptions: - The family is described as “wacky”, suggesting they behave in an odd or eccentric way. - The girl is described as “sensible”. - The blank is followed by “person in the wacky family”. - The phrase “odd woman out” implies that she is different from everyone else in a particular respect. Concept / Approach: The context strongly suggests a contrast between the girl and the rest of the family. The rest of the family is wacky, so she must be normal, reasonable, or mentally sound. In English, the adjective “sane” means mentally sound, sensible, or reasonable. Therefore, “sane person” is the natural counterpart to a “wacky family”. Other options either have negative meanings or do not match the context. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the key contrast: “wacky family” versus “sensible girl”. The girl is being contrasted with the family in terms of mental behaviour. Step 2: Note that the blank describes the girl: “As the only ________ person in the wacky family ...”. The adjective must match “sensible”. Step 3: Consider “sane”. This means mentally sound or reasonable. “Only sane person” fits with “sensible girl” and naturally contrasts with “wacky family”. Step 4: Consider “insane”. This means mentally unsound or crazy, which would not match “sensible girl”. Step 5: Consider “vain”. This refers to excessive pride in one's appearance or achievements, which is unrelated to being sensible or wacky. Step 6: Consider “main”. This is an adjective meaning primary or chief, which does not fit well with “odd woman out”. Step 7: Consider “plain”. This means simple or not beautiful, which again does not capture the contrast in mental behaviour implied by “wacky” and “sensible”. Verification / Alternative check: Insert each option into the sentence and read it aloud. “As the only sane person in the wacky family, the sensible girl felt like the odd woman out” sounds natural and coherent. The other combinations either contradict the idea of her being sensible or introduce unrelated qualities. This confirms that “sane” is the only choice that properly expresses the intended contrast. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Insane: Opposite of “sane” and contradicts the description “sensible girl”. Vain: Refers to vanity, not mental stability or reasonableness. Main: Means primary or most important, but does not explain why she feels like the odd woman out. Plain: Refers to appearance or style, not to mental balance or behaviour. Common Pitfalls: Sometimes students pick words based loosely on sound or familiarity rather than precise meaning. For example, they may select “plain” because it seems to suit “odd woman out” superficially. To avoid such errors, focus on the exact nature of the contrast in the sentence. Here the contrast is between wacky behaviour and sensible behaviour, which clearly points to “sane”. Final Answer: The correct word to complete the sentence is sane.

Question 11

In the following vocabulary question, out of the four alternatives, select the word similar in meaning to the given word: Piquancy.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of English vocabulary, specifically the ability to identify a synonym for the noun “piquancy”. The word is often used in reference to food, but it can also refer to an interesting, exciting, or stimulating quality in conversation or writing. The aim is to select the option that best captures the idea of a pleasantly sharp or appetising quality. Given Data / Assumptions: - Target word: “Piquancy”. - Options include words that describe tastelessness or boredom as well as a more general word for adding taste. - The question demands a word with similar meaning, not an opposite. Concept / Approach: “Piquancy” in culinary usage refers to a pleasantly sharp, tangy, or spicy taste that stimulates the palate. In a more abstract sense, it can refer to a lively or exciting quality in ideas or remarks. Therefore, we must avoid words that indicate lack of taste or interest and look for a term that suggests the presence of taste or interest. Among the options, “flavouring” comes closest, since it refers to something that adds taste or savour to food. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the primary meaning of “piquancy”. It suggests sharp, stimulating taste or a pleasantly pungent quality. Step 2: Consider option “Flavouring”. This refers to a substance or quality that gives or enhances flavour, which aligns with the idea of adding a distinctive and sometimes sharp taste. Step 3: Consider “Bland”. This describes food that lacks strong flavour and is the opposite of what “piquancy” implies. Step 4: Consider “Insipid”. This word also means lacking in flavour, zest, or interest and is strongly opposed to “piquant”. Step 5: Consider “Tedious”. This applies to something boring or long-winded, which again contrasts with a stimulating or lively quality. Step 6: Consider “Dullness”. This indicates lack of brightness, sharpness, or interest and does not match the stimulating nature of “piquancy”. Step 7: Therefore, the only option that reflects the idea of adding taste and stimulus is “Flavouring”. Verification / Alternative check: Place the options into a sample sentence: “The piquancy of the sauce made the dish memorable.” If we replace “piquancy” with “flavouring”, we get “The flavouring of the sauce made the dish memorable.” While not perfect, it still conveys the idea that something in the sauce added taste. Replacements with “bland”, “insipid”, “tedious”, or “dullness” clearly spoil the meaning and contradict the positive tone. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Bland: Means mild to the point of being tasteless, which is the opposite of a sharp and stimulating flavour. Insipid: Means lacking taste, zest, or interest, again the opposite of “piquant”. Tedious: Describes something dull and boring in length or content, unrelated to taste. Dullness: Refers to lack of brightness or excitement, the reverse of the stimulating quality implied by “piquancy”. Common Pitfalls: Some students may confuse “piquant” with “pique” meaning to irritate or offend and thus misinterpret “piquancy” as annoyance. Although there is a shared root, in modern usage “piquant” usually refers to pleasantly sharp taste or stimulating interest. Another pitfall is to choose words that sound sophisticated but do not match the meaning. Always focus on precise dictionary definitions rather than impressions based on sound. Final Answer: The word similar in meaning to “Piquancy” is Flavouring, which captures the idea of adding a sharp or distinctive taste.

Question 12

In the following vocabulary question, out of the four alternatives, select the word similar in meaning to the given phrasal verb: To Confront.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question assesses understanding of the verb “to confront” and asks for a word similar in meaning. In English, “to confront” means to face someone or something boldly, especially when there is conflict or difficulty. The options include verbs that mean the opposite, such as avoiding or backing away, as well as one verb that describes approaching someone boldly. Given Data / Assumptions: - Target verb: “To confront”. - Context: Facing a person or problem directly, often in a challenging manner. - Options: several verbs describing different behaviours, including avoiding, dodging, yielding, accosting, and retreating. Concept / Approach: “To confront” usually implies moving toward a person or problem, addressing it directly, and not avoiding it. The closest synonym among the options is “to accost”, which means to approach and often speak to someone boldly or aggressively. The other options describe actions that involve avoiding or giving way, which are opposite to confronting. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the meaning of “to confront”: to face somebody or something, often in a direct, sometimes challenging way. Step 2: Examine “To Accost”. This verb means to approach and often stop someone in a bold or aggressive manner, usually for conversation, questions, or confrontation. It therefore shares a sense of directness and bold approach. Step 3: Examine “To Avoid”. This means to stay away from something or someone, which is the reverse of confronting. Step 4: Examine “To Dodge”. This verb means to evade or move aside in order to avoid something, again opposite to confronting. Step 5: Examine “To Yield”. This means to give way or surrender, which describes a retreat rather than a direct approach. Step 6: Examine “To Retreat”. This clearly means to move back or withdraw, which is the exact opposite of moving forward to confront. Step 7: Since only “To Accost” shares the idea of boldly approaching someone, it is the correct synonym in this set. Verification / Alternative check: Consider a sample context: “The citizen decided to confront the corrupt official about the issue.” Replacing “confront” with “accost” gives “The citizen decided to accost the corrupt official about the issue.” This retains the idea of approaching and speaking directly. If we use any of the other verbs, the meaning reverses or becomes distorted: “avoid the official”, “dodge the issue”, “yield to the official”, or “retreat from the confrontation” all suggest not facing the problem. Why Other Options Are Wrong: To Avoid: Means to stay away from something, which is the opposite of facing it. To Dodge: Implies moving to avoid something, not confronting it. To Yield: Means to give up or give way, indicating surrender rather than confrontation. To Retreat: Means to withdraw, again opposite to moving toward a person or issue. Common Pitfalls: Learners may confuse “confront” with general notions of conflict and mistakenly think it always implies physical fighting. In reality, it often refers to direct discussion or challenge. They may also focus only on emotional tone (aggressive versus mild) rather than direction of action (toward or away from the issue). Keeping both meaning and direction in mind helps correctly identify “accost” as the closest synonym. Final Answer: The word similar in meaning to “To Confront” is To Accost, as both describe directly approaching or facing someone, often in a challenging way.

Question 13

In the following vocabulary question, out of the four alternatives, select the word opposite in meaning to the given word: Savant.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of antonyms, that is, words with opposite meanings. The target word “savant” refers to a person who is learned, highly knowledgeable, or an expert in a particular field. The task is to choose the word that most clearly expresses the opposite idea, namely someone who is not skilled or experienced. Given Data / Assumptions: - Word given: “Savant”. - Usual meaning: a learned person or scholar, often with deep knowledge in a specialised area. - Options include words that suggest expertise and a word that suggests inexperience. Concept / Approach: To find an antonym, first be clear about the meaning of the original word. A “savant” is similar to an expert, scholar, or pundit. Therefore, the opposite should be someone who lacks expertise, skill, or experience. The English word “amateur” typically refers to a person who engages in an activity as a hobby or without professional skill. That makes “amateur” the best opposite among the given options. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Define “savant”. It refers to a person of great learning or knowledge, often a scholar or specialist. Step 2: Identify synonyms among the options. “Academic”, “Pundit”, and “Egghead” all suggest someone who is learned or intellectual. Step 3: Recognise “Expert” as another synonym for someone who has high-level knowledge or skill. Step 4: Look at “Amateur”. This word indicates a person who is not a professional or expert, often someone with limited experience. Step 5: Since the question asks for the opposite in meaning, the correct choice must be “Amateur”. Verification / Alternative check: Think of a pair in a sentence: “In the discussion, the savant easily outargued the amateur.” Here, “savant” and “amateur” clearly oppose each other in level of knowledge. If we try to use “savant” opposite “academic” or “pundit”, the contrast disappears, because they refer to similar levels of learning. This supports the conclusion that “amateur” is the correct antonym. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Academic: Describes someone educated or scholarly, which is very close to “savant”. Pundit: Means a learned person or expert, especially in a particular topic, which again is similar to “savant”. Egghead: Informal term for an intellectual or very studious person, not an opposite. Expert: Direct synonym for someone highly skilled or knowledgeable. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes misinterpret the instruction for antonyms and choose a synonym instead, especially when the words are more familiar. Another pitfall is to focus on stylistic differences (formal versus informal) rather than meaning. “Egghead” may sound different from “savant” but has a similar meaning. Always compare the core idea of the words rather than their tone. Final Answer: The word opposite in meaning to “Savant” is Amateur.

Question 14

In the following vocabulary question, out of the four alternatives, select the word opposite in meaning to the given phrasal verb: To Indict.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests legal vocabulary and antonyms. The verb “to indict” is used mainly in legal contexts and means to formally accuse or charge someone with a crime, usually through a grand jury or similar process. The task is to select the option that expresses the opposite idea, namely clearing someone of blame or guilt. Given Data / Assumptions: - Word given: “To indict”. - Meaning: to formally accuse someone of a serious crime. - Options include verbs related to accusation and one verb related to clearing someone of blame. Concept / Approach: Since “to indict” is associated with bringing charges against a person, its antonym must represent the act of freeing someone from blame or declaring them not guilty. The verb “to exonerate” means to officially clear someone of blame, suspicion, or guilt. Other options such as “to arraign”, “to censure”, “to impeach”, and “to charge” describe forms of accusation or criticism and are therefore similar in direction to “indict”, not opposite. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Define “to indict” clearly: to formally charge a person with a crime, often as part of a legal proceeding. Step 2: Examine “To Exonerate”. This verb means to declare someone free from blame or responsibility, especially after investigation. Step 3: Recognise that exoneration usually occurs after accusations, and it negates or cancels those accusations. Step 4: Examine “To Arraign”. This means to call someone before a court to answer a criminal charge, which is closely related to accusing, not clearing. Step 5: Examine “To Censure”. This means to criticise or condemn, again aligned with blaming rather than clearing. Step 6: Examine “To Impeach”. This describes formally accusing a public official of misconduct, another form of putting someone on trial. Step 7: Examine “To Charge”. This also means to accuse someone formally, often in criminal law. Step 8: Since “To Exonerate” alone represents the act of freeing someone from blame, it is the correct antonym. Verification / Alternative check: Consider a simple scenario: a person is first indicted for a crime, then later evidence shows they are innocent. The court then exonerates that person. Here, “indict” and “exonerate” describe opposite stages in the legal process: accusation versus clearing of accusation. None of the other options fit this pattern of opposites; they all involve either starting or continuing a form of blame or charge. Why Other Options Are Wrong: To Arraign: Involves bringing a person to court to hear charges, which is similar to indicting rather than opposite. To Censure: Means to criticise or condemn, which also involves blame, not clearance. To Impeach: Means to accuse a public official formally, again a form of indictment. To Charge: Means to accuse, especially with a crime, almost a direct synonym of “indict”. Common Pitfalls: Because many of the options are legal terms, students may feel unsure and pick at random. Some may think that “arraign” or “impeach” are opposites simply because they are unfamiliar. Remember that all these processes involve accusation. Only “exonerate” clearly expresses release from blame. Building a small mental map of legal verbs and their relationships helps greatly in such questions. Final Answer: The word opposite in meaning to “To Indict” is To Exonerate.

Question 15

In English idioms and phrases, what does the expression "to have bitten off more than you can chew" most clearly describe in everyday life situations?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The idiom "to have bitten off more than you can chew" is a very common expression in English that appears in conversations, competitive exams, and reading comprehension passages. This question tests your understanding of idiomatic language, which is very important for exams because idioms often do not give their meaning directly from the individual words. Instead, you must understand the figurative meaning that native speakers use in real life situations. Given Data / Assumptions: The idiom in focus is "to have bitten off more than you can chew". The setting is general English usage and idioms. We assume the person has taken up some task, responsibility, or promise. We need the meaning that best matches common usage in standard English. Concept / Approach: The literal image in the idiom is of a person biting a piece of food that is larger than what the mouth can comfortably chew. From this picture, English extends a figurative meaning. The figurative meaning is not about eating but about taking on a task or responsibility that is too large or too difficult for a person to handle. Therefore, we must search among the options for the one that talks about attempting something beyond one's capacity or resources rather than something about food, elders, or missed opportunities. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Read the idiom and imagine the literal scene of someone biting a very large piece of food.Step 2: Recognise that idioms usually carry a figurative meaning related to that scene, not the direct physical meaning.Step 3: Think of common exam explanations: the idiom usually means taking on a task that is too big or difficult.Step 4: Compare this understanding with each option and identify which one expresses the idea of accepting a task beyond one's ability or resources.Step 5: Confirm that option C clearly states "to try to do something that is too difficult", which matches the standard dictionary meaning. Verification / Alternative check: If you check standard English dictionaries or idiom guides, you will find definitions such as "to try to do something that is too difficult" or "to take on more responsibility than one can manage". This confirms that the correct answer must highlight overambitious effort rather than overeating, disrespectful behaviour, or a missed opportunity. Therefore, option C matches this verified meaning perfectly. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A talks about eating quickly and falling sick, which keeps the meaning at a purely literal eating level and ignores the figurative sense of responsibility. Option B deals with bad behaviour towards elders and later regret, which is about manners, not about capacity or workload. Option D talks about missing a golden opportunity and then wanting to work harder, which relates to regret and recovery, not to taking on too much at the start. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes focus too strongly on the visual word "chew" and select an option related to eating. Others confuse this idiom with phrases about regret or missed chances. In idiom questions, it is important not to translate word by word but to recall the fixed figurative meaning that is commonly taught in English courses and seen in reading passages. Final Answer: The idiom "to have bitten off more than you can chew" means to try to do something that is too difficult for your ability, time, or resources.

Question 16

In English publishing terminology, what does the idiom "out of print" mean when it is used to describe a book?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The expression "out of print" is a standard phrase used in the world of books and publishing. Competitive exams frequently test such fixed phrases because they combine general knowledge with precise vocabulary. Understanding terms from real life domains like publishing helps you tackle reading comprehension, cloze tests, and vocabulary-based questions with more confidence. Given Data / Assumptions: The phrase under discussion is "out of print". The context is book publishing and availability of titles. We are looking for the meaning that matches the standard industry usage. The options talk about printing problems, deliberate omission, and refusal to publish. Concept / Approach: In publishing, "print" refers to copies of a book that are produced and kept in stock. When a book is "in print", it means the publisher still produces copies and keeps it available for sale. When a book is "out of print", the publisher has stopped producing it and it is no longer supplied through normal channels. The phrase does not talk about physical shortage of paper, nor about censorship, nor about all publishers refusing a manuscript. Therefore we must choose the option that reflects the idea that the title is no longer being produced or distributed by the original publisher. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that "in print" means currently available from the publisher.Step 2: Understand that "out of print" logically means the opposite state, that is, not available from the publisher anymore.Step 3: Examine option B, which states that a book is no longer available from the publisher, which fits this meaning exactly.Step 4: Compare with options A, C, and D, and see that each introduces extra ideas about paper shortage, omission of items, or refusal of publishers which are not part of the standard phrase.Step 5: Conclude that option B is the only option that correctly captures the fixed publishing meaning of "out of print". Verification / Alternative check: Standard dictionaries and publishing glossaries define "out of print" as "no longer being printed or published" or "no longer available from the publisher". Many classic works go out of print when demand falls. Sometimes they come back into print through a new edition. This confirms that the correct answer must mention the stoppage of supply from the publisher, which is exactly what option B describes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A describes a temporary shortage of paper, which is a physical production problem, not the technical status of a title. Option C talks about intentionally not mentioning some items in an article or book, which relates more to omission or censorship than to availability. Option D suggests that all publishers refuse to publish your book, which is about failed attempts to publish, not about the status of an already published book. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse "out of print" with "out of stock". "Out of stock" can be temporary at a particular shop, while "out of print" is a more permanent condition where the publisher has stopped printing the book. Mixing up these two phrases can lead to incorrect answers in vocabulary and reading comprehension questions. Final Answer: In publishing, the phrase "out of print" means a book that is no longer available from the publisher for sale.

Question 17

In the following sentence improvement question, choose the correct form to replace the bracketed part: "I am (having to) too much fun."

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to the sentence improvement type in English grammar. Such questions usually test your understanding of tense, aspect, and subject verb agreement. Here the focus is on the correct progressive form of the verb "have" when it is used to talk about an experience, such as enjoying yourself or having fun. Correct control over these patterns is essential for error spotting and writing tasks in examinations. Given Data / Assumptions: The sentence is "I am (having to) too much fun." The verb phrase inside brackets needs improvement. The subject is "I". The intended meaning is that the speaker is currently enjoying life or an activity a lot. Concept / Approach: In English, when we describe an action happening right now, we often use the present continuous tense: subject + am or is or are + verb in ing form. For example, "I am reading", "She is working", "They are playing". For experiences like entertainment, we say "I am having fun" or "I am having a good time". The phrase "having to" normally expresses obligation, as in "I am having to work late", which means "I am forced to work late". In this question, there is no sense of obligation. The person is simply enjoying something. Therefore, the correct verb phrase should be "having" without "to". Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the tense. The helping verb "am" shows that we are in the present continuous form.Step 2: Decide which verb pattern fits the meaning of enjoyment. The natural expression is "I am having fun".Step 3: Notice that "having to" would introduce a completely different meaning of obligation, which does not match the context of fun.Step 4: Compare the options and see that option A "having" fits the structure "am having".Step 5: Check whether the original phrase "having to" can be retained through "no improvement". It clearly cannot, because it changes the meaning. Verification / Alternative check: We can test other options in the sentence. "I am had too much fun" is grammatically wrong because "had" cannot follow "am" in that way. "I am has too much fun" is also wrong because "has" does not agree with "I" and does not form a continuous tense here. Only "I am having too much fun" is natural, common, and grammatically correct in standard English usage. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B "had" creates the phrase "am had", which is incorrect grammar. Option C "has" creates "am has", which again is not a valid combination in English. Option D "no improvement" keeps "having to" and changes the meaning to obligation, which does not suit the idea of fun or enjoyment. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes mix up "having to" and "having". The first one deals with compulsion, while the second simply expresses an experience. The presence of "am" before the main verb should signal a continuous action or state, not a structure of obligation in this sentence. Always match the verb phrase with the intended meaning of the sentence rather than just the form of the verb. Final Answer: The correct improvement is "I am having too much fun.", so the correct option is "having".

Question 18

In this sentence improvement item, choose the correct form to replace the bracketed part: "What would the cavalry (doing) out here?"

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your understanding of verb forms used with modal verbs in English. The sentence "What would the cavalry doing out here?" sounds awkward because the verb form after the modal "would" is not correct. Exams often present such slightly incorrect sentences and ask you to replace a bracketed part with a grammatically accurate alternative that still preserves the intended meaning. Given Data / Assumptions: The original sentence is "What would the cavalry (doing) out here?" The subject is "the cavalry", which is treated as a singular collective noun in this context. The modal auxiliary is "would". The speaker is probably expressing surprise about the possible activity of the cavalry at some place. Concept / Approach: With modal auxiliaries like "would", "could", "might", and "should", the standard pattern is modal + be + present participle when we want to talk about a continuous action. For example, "What would they be doing?", "Where could she be going?", or "Why might he be waiting?" In our sentence, the correct pattern is "would be doing". The given bracketed word "doing" alone is not enough; it must be combined with "be" to form the appropriate progressive construction after the modal verb. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the modal verb "would" in the sentence.Step 2: Recall the structure for progressive aspect with modals: would + be + verb in ing form.Step 3: Recognise that the intended meaning is to ask what activity the cavalry might be engaged in at that location.Step 4: Among the options, pick the one that completes this pattern, namely "be doing".Step 5: Rebuild the full sentence as "What would the cavalry be doing out here?" and confirm that it now sounds natural and grammatically correct. Verification / Alternative check: Test the other options in the full sentence. "What would the cavalry be done out here?" is wrong because "be done" is passive and does not fit the sense of cavalry performing an action. "What would the cavalry done out here?" is ungrammatical. Leaving the sentence as "What would the cavalry doing out here?" is also not acceptable in standard English. In contrast, "What would the cavalry be doing out here?" matches patterns found in native usage and grammar references. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B "be done" would produce a passive construction that is not suitable when the cavalry is the agent performing an action. Option C "done" alone cannot follow the modal verb "would" in this context; we need either the base form or a continuous structure. Option D "no improvement" keeps the incorrect pattern "would the cavalry doing", which is ungrammatical. Common Pitfalls: Many learners forget that modals like "would" are followed by a bare infinitive such as "do" or by "be doing" when describing a continuous action. Mixing the ing form directly with a modal without "be" creates errors. Whenever you see a modal plus an ing form, check whether "be" is missing from the structure. Final Answer: The correct improvement is "What would the cavalry be doing out here?", so the best replacement is "be doing".

Question 19

In English vocabulary, which single word best substitutes the phrase "in exactly the same words as were used originally"?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: One word substitution questions test your ability to match a longer descriptive phrase with a single precise English word. These are very common in competitive exams, especially in general English sections. Here the phrase is "in exactly the same words as were used originally", which refers to repeating or reporting something without changing the wording at all. Recognising the correct term helps in understanding reading passages, legal language, and academic writing. Given Data / Assumptions: The descriptive phrase is "in exactly the same words as were used originally". We must select one word that captures this meaning. The options given include "Verbatim", "Offbeat", "Divergent", and "Contrary". We assume standard modern English usage. Concept / Approach: In English, the word that is used when you quote or repeat something without any change is "verbatim". For example, "The witness repeated the statement verbatim" means the witness repeated the statement word for word without alteration. The other options either refer to something unusual, different, or opposite, which do not fit the meaning of exact repetition. Therefore we must identify and select the word that is regularly used in contexts of exact wording, reporting, and quoting. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the key idea in the phrase, which is "exactly the same words".Step 2: Recall common exam vocabulary: "verbatim" is strongly associated with "word for word" repetition.Step 3: Compare this with the meanings of the other options, which involve being unusual, different, or opposite.Step 4: Match the phrase "in exactly the same words as were used originally" to the technical word "verbatim".Step 5: Confirm that no other option fits the sense of exact, unchanged wording. Verification / Alternative check: Dictionaries define "verbatim" as "in exactly the same words as were used originally" or "word for word". This almost directly duplicates the wording of the question stem, which makes the match very clear. In contrast, "offbeat" is defined as unconventional or unusual, "divergent" means differing from a standard or norm, and "contrary" means opposite. None of these mention wording or repetition. This confirms that "verbatim" is the only correct answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B "Offbeat" refers to something unusual or not conventional. It has no connection with exact repetition or wording. Option C "Divergent" means moving or extending in different directions from a common point, or differing from a standard. It again focuses on difference, not sameness. Option D "Contrary" means opposite in nature or direction, which is the opposite of what we need because our phrase talks about exact similarity. Common Pitfalls: Some students may confuse "verbatim" with "verbal" because both relate to words. However, "verbal" simply means relating to words or speech, while "verbatim" specifically means repeating words exactly. It is important to memorise this distinction to avoid confusion in exam situations that focus on fine differences in vocabulary. Final Answer: The correct one word substitute for "in exactly the same words as were used originally" is "Verbatim".

Question 20

In English vocabulary, which single word best describes "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions"?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to the one word substitution category. It checks whether you can identify a concise term for a person who does not simply accept beliefs or opinions blindly, but instead questions or doubts them. Such vocabulary is valuable in discussions about science, philosophy, religion, and social issues, where attitudes toward accepted views play a central role. Given Data / Assumptions: The descriptive phrase is "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions". We must pick the best matching word from "Adherent", "Sceptic", "Zealot", and "Disciple". We assume standard British spelling, where "sceptic" is commonly used. The context is general English vocabulary for competitive exams. Concept / Approach: A person who questions or doubts accepted opinions, especially in religion or in science, is called a "sceptic" or "skeptic". This word stresses doubt and critical thinking. The other options all describe people who follow or strongly support beliefs, rather than questioning them. Therefore the correct approach is to contrast the idea of doubt with the idea of loyalty or enthusiasm and choose the word that clearly represents doubt. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the key idea in the phrase, which is the tendency to question and doubt accepted views.Step 2: Recall that "sceptic" refers to someone who is not easily convinced and requires evidence before accepting claims.Step 3: Examine the other options and see that "Adherent" and "Disciple" relate to following, while "Zealot" refers to extreme enthusiasm.Step 4: Match the phrase with "sceptic" because it is the only word focused on doubt.Step 5: Confirm with dictionary style meanings to make sure there is no ambiguity. Verification / Alternative check: Dictionaries define "sceptic" as "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions" or "a person who doubts the truth of religion, particularly Christianity, or of important widely held beliefs". "Adherent" is defined as someone who supports or sticks to a particular party, person, or set of ideas. "Zealot" is a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals. "Disciple" is a follower or student of a teacher or leader. This shows clearly that only "sceptic" matches the phrase exactly. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A "Adherent" describes someone who strongly supports a belief or leader, so it implies loyalty, not doubt. Option C "Zealot" refers to an excessively enthusiastic supporter, again the opposite of a doubter. Option D "Disciple" is a follower or student who learns from and usually accepts the teachings of a master, not someone who questions them. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse "sceptic" with "cynic". A sceptic simply doubts and asks for evidence, while a cynic often believes that people are motivated purely by self interest and may have a negative or suspicious view of human motives. For exam purposes, it is important to keep these distinct definitions in mind so that you do not pick the wrong word when very similar descriptions are given. Final Answer: The one word substitute for "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions" is "Sceptic".

English Questions