Question 1

In the following item, a biographical passage about Helen Keller is jumbled. The first and sixth sentences, S1 and S6, are fixed. The four middle sentences labelled P, Q, R and S are given in a mixed order. Read the passage about Helen's graduation,…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to arrange sentences in a jumbled biographical passage about Helen Keller. The passage starts with her graduation in 1904 and ends with a description of the crowd's behaviour on Helen Keller Day. The middle sentences trace her age, the flow of requests, and an important invitation. Correctly ordering the sentences requires attention to chronology and cause and effect. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: Helen graduated in 1904 with special honours in English. S6: Her dress was torn and roses were snatched from her hat, describing the result of unruly crowds. P: She was twenty four years old. S: Requests were already flowing in for appearances and magazine articles. Q: She was invited to the St. Louis Exposition in 1904 to arouse worldwide interest in the education of the deaf blind. R: On Helen Keller Day the crowds got out of hand. We assume the passage proceeds from graduation to recognition, then to invitations and finally to an uncontrolled crowd scene. Concept / Approach: To identify the correct sequence: Place age information close to the graduation event to give personal context. Follow with general recognition in the form of requests for appearances. Then mention a specific important invitation to the exposition. Finally, show the consequence of this fame when the crowds get out of hand, before S6. Chronological order and the progression from recognition to mass popularity help you reconstruct the passage. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After S1, which gives the year and her achievement, a natural sentence to follow is P: “She was twenty four years old.” This adds a simple biographical detail that fits directly after graduation. Step 2: After noting her age at graduation, it is logical to show that her achievement brought recognition. Sentence S tells us that requests for appearances and magazine articles were already flowing in. Thus, S follows P. Step 3: Once general interest in her work is established, we can mention a specific, notable invitation. Sentence Q states that she was invited to the St. Louis Exposition in 1904 to awaken worldwide interest in the education of the deaf blind. This fits naturally after the general mention of requests in S. Step 4: Sentence R then introduces the dramatic scene that resulted from her popularity: “But on Helen Keller Day the crowds got out of hand.” This is a natural lead in to S6, which describes her torn dress and the roses being snatched from her hat. Step 5: The resulting sequence of the middle sentences is P S Q R, which completes the story from graduation to public acclaim and then to the unruly crowds. Verification / Alternative check: If you read the passage with P S Q R between S1 and S6, you get a coherent narrative: graduation, age, growing demand, formal invitation, crowd enthusiasm turning into chaos, and then the physical result of that chaos. Each sentence flows into the next without forcing any time jumps or unexplained events. This verifies that the order P S Q R is consistent and logical. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Q P S R: Here, the exposition invitation is mentioned immediately after graduation, before telling us her age or her growing general popularity, which weakens the narrative sequence. S P R Q: Placing S directly after S1 before P breaks the natural pattern of giving age information immediately after graduation. Also, R appearing before Q makes the crowds get out of hand before the key exposition invitation is even introduced. S Q R P or similar mixed sequences lead to awkward time jumps where events and consequences are reversed or appear out of context. They do not build the story in a clear chronological order. Common Pitfalls: Students often focus on the most dramatic sentence, such as the description of unruly crowds, and try to place it too early. Another mistake is ignoring the simple fact that biographical passages tend to present age and general recognition before specific major events. When you see dates such as 1904 and references like “Helen Keller Day”, pay close attention to how they fit into a timeline and ensure that each event has a clear cause and effect relationship with the next. Final Answer: The correct sequence is P S Q R, so the correct option is “P S Q R”.

Question 2

In the following item, a scientific passage about Frederick Soddy and Ernest Rutherford is jumbled. The passage has six sentences, of which S1 and S6 are fixed as the opening and closing sentences. The middle four sentences labelled P, Q, R and S ha…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This jumbled passage narrates the early work of Frederick Soddy with Ernest Rutherford on radioactive thorium and the discovery of Gamma rays. The first sentence introduces Soddy as a young scientist who joined Rutherford, and the last sentence explains what Gamma rays are. The middle sentences describe his age, their collaboration and their discoveries, and must be arranged to form a coherent scientific story. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: Introduces Frederick Soddy as a young Oxford physical chemist who joined Rutherford. S6: States that Gamma rays are a very strong form of X rays. Q: He was just twenty three. S: When he teamed up with Rutherford, they investigated radioactive thorium. R: They found that thorium changed into thorium X and emitted a gas and a third type of ray, which they called Gamma. P: His association with Rutherford lasted only two years, but it was long enough to change physics. We assume that Soddy's age is mentioned soon after his introduction, and that their research and discoveries are detailed before discussing how long the association lasted. Concept / Approach: To reconstruct the correct order: Place the simple biographical detail about his age immediately after he is introduced. Then describe what they did together, starting with the investigation of thorium. Next, mention what they discovered during that investigation, including Gamma rays. Finally, conclude with the statement about the duration and impact of their association before S6, which explains Gamma rays in a modern perspective. Chronology and cause and effect are again the main guides. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After S1 introduces Soddy, the question “How young was he?” naturally arises. Sentence Q answers that by stating, “He was just twenty three.” So Q directly follows S1. Step 2: After stating his age, it makes sense to describe what he actually did with Rutherford. Sentence S explains that when he teamed up with Rutherford, they investigated thorium, a radioactive element. This gives the context for their joint work. Step 3: Once the investigation is introduced, the passage should describe their findings. Sentence R states that thorium changed into a new element, thorium X, and that a gas and a new type of ray, named Gamma, were emitted. This is the key scientific discovery that leads directly into S6. Step 4: Sentence P comments on the significance of this two year association, saying that it was enough to change the whole face of physics. This reflective remark fits well just before S6, which gives a modern understanding of Gamma rays. Step 5: The resulting sequence is Q S R P between S1 and S6, giving a smooth narrative from introduction and age, to collaboration, to discovery, and then to long term significance. Verification / Alternative check: Read the assembled passage with Q S R P inserted. After S1 you immediately learn how young Soddy was, then what he worked on with Rutherford, followed by the specific discovery related to thorium and Gamma rays, and finally a comment on how influential this short collaboration was. S6 then reinforces that Gamma rays are now known to be a very fierce form of X rays. There are no contradictions or unexplained jumps, so the sequence is verified as coherent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: P Q S R: Placing P straight after S1 talks about the duration and impact of the association before we even know what their research was or how old Soddy was, making the narrative feel out of order. Q P S R or Q P R S: These put the commentary about the duration of their association directly after the age statement, delaying the description of the actual research and discoveries and weakening the logical build up to S6. Only Q S R P correctly arranges the factual details and the evaluative comment in a natural and informative sequence. Common Pitfalls: In science based jumbled passages, students sometimes focus on technical terms like “Gamma rays” and jump prematurely to those sentences, ignoring the narrative structure. Another common error is to place reflective or concluding comments like P too early, before the main findings have been described. Always identify which sentences describe events or discoveries, which provide background details, and which offer conclusions or evaluations, and then order them accordingly. Final Answer: The correct order is Q S R P, so the correct option is “Q S R P”.

Question 3

In the following item, a descriptive passage about a boy climbing up creaking stairs in the dark is jumbled. The passage consists of six sentences, with S1 and S6 fixed at the beginning and the end. The middle four sentences labelled P, Q, R and S a…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This jumbled passage paints a suspenseful scene of a boy climbing dark, creaking stairs. The fixed first and last sentences frame the situation: he is moving through darkness and is eventually grabbed by an old man. The middle sentences describe what he sees, hears and thinks as he climbs. You must sequence them to maintain the atmosphere and logical flow of events. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: The boy feels his way up creaking stairs in thick darkness. S6: Just as he thinks he is safe, a gaunt old man grabs his shoulder. R: His eyes are raised to the faint moonlight shining above the landing. Q: He stops when the great clock below whines and strikes once. S: After the sound dies down, he hesitates and then creeps on, thinking that if others could sleep through the clock, they could sleep through any noise he made. P: He knows that all he has to do is get past the central door on the landing. We assume the scene moves from perception (moonlight) to interruption (clock), to renewed movement, and finally to his goal on the landing. Concept / Approach: To order these sentences: Start with what he can see or sense as he climbs toward the landing. Introduce the sudden interruption by the clock striking. Then show his reaction to that interruption and his thoughts about making noise. Finally, describe his immediate objective on the landing before S6 brings the surprise of the old man. You must maintain both suspense and logical sequencing of sensory details and thoughts. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After S1, the next likely detail is what he can see in the darkness. Sentence R provides this: “His eyes were raised to the faint moonlight that shone above the landing.” This shows that he can barely see the landing ahead. Step 2: As he climbs, something sudden happens. Sentence Q states that he stops when the great clock below whines and strikes once. This is a natural interruption to his movement toward the landing described in R. Step 3: After the clock strikes, he must decide whether to continue. Sentence S shows his reaction: he hesitates, then creeps on, reasoning that if others could sleep through the clock, they could sleep through any noise he made. This is logically connected to the sound in Q. Step 4: Now that he has decided to continue, his focus returns to his immediate objective. Sentence P expresses this goal: “All he had to do was just get past the central door on the landing.” This builds the tension right before S6, where the door opens and the old man appears. Step 5: The sequence R Q S P between S1 and S6 therefore preserves the narrative structure and the suspense of the scene. Verification / Alternative check: Reading S1, R, Q, S, P and S6 in order, the scene is clear: he feels his way up, sees faint moonlight above, is startled by the clock, thinks about whether others are awake, decides to go on, focuses on passing the central door, and is then grabbed by the old man. There are no logical gaps, and each action or perception follows naturally from the previous one. Why Other Options Are Wrong: P Q S R: This begins with his goal of getting past the door before describing the moonlight above the landing, which is less natural. It also places the visual detail of R after his mental calculation in S, weakening the flow. P R Q S: Here his goal is stated before the visual description, and the interruption by the clock and his reaction do not fall into a clean sequence. R Q P S: This order places P before S, so he defines his goal before describing his reaction to the clock, which disrupts the natural progression from interruption to response to renewed focus on the goal. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes try to arrange sentences only by their grammatical correctness rather than by narrative flow. In descriptive scenes, you should look for a pattern of perception, interruption, thought and renewed action. Another mistake is to ignore subtle time markers such as “after the sound died down” in S, which clearly ties S to Q. When you see such markers, always use them to decide what must come now and what must come later. Final Answer: The correct sequence of sentences is R Q S P, so the correct option is “R Q S P”.

Question 4

In the following item, a passage about the housefly is jumbled. The passage consists of six sentences with S1 and S6 fixed at the beginning and the end. The four middle sentences labelled P, Q, R and S are given in a mixed order. Read the passage ca…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This jumbled passage discusses how people view the common housefly. It starts by asking whether the housefly is a nuisance and ends by explaining what it is doing when it rubs its legs together. The middle sentences must describe why people find it annoying, how they used to think of it, and what science has revealed about its danger as a carrier of disease. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: Asks whether the housefly is a nuisance. S6: Explains that when a fly rubs its legs together, it is cleaning itself. S: Describes the nuisance aspects, such as the buzzing sound and crawling on skin. P: Says that for ages people considered the fly only a nuisance. R: Explains that now we know the housefly is actually one of humanity's worst enemies. Q: States that scientists discovered that flies carry deadly disease germs. We assume the passage moves from everyday annoyance to historical perception, then to scientific truth and finally to specific disease danger. Concept / Approach: To order these sentences: Begin with specific examples of the nuisance mentioned in S1. Then state the long held belief that the fly was only a nuisance. Next, introduce the contrast that now we know more serious facts. Finally, support that contrast by explaining the discovery about disease germs. Look for contrast markers such as “But now we know” to identify turning points in the argument. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After the question in S1, the passage should give concrete reasons why people think the fly is a nuisance. Sentence S provides these concrete examples: buzzing, crawling on skin and causing irritation, so S follows S1. Step 2: Once specific nuisances are listed, P summarises the traditional human view: “For ages that is what human beings considered the fly to be, just a nuisance.” This generalisation naturally follows the examples in S. Step 3: Then the passage must introduce a contrast between past and present understanding. Sentence R does this: “But now we know that the innocent looking housefly is one of humanity's worst enemies.” The word “But” signals a shift from the old view in P. Step 4: Finally, Q explains why it is one of our worst enemies: because it has been discovered that flies carry disease germs causing millions of deaths. This strengthens the claim made in R. Step 5: With S, P, R and Q inserted between S1 and S6, the argument flows smoothly from simple annoyance to deadly danger, before returning in S6 to a specific observable behaviour of the fly. Verification / Alternative check: Reading the passage in the order S1, S, P, R, Q and S6, you get a clear structure: first, reasons why people call the fly a nuisance; second, the traditional belief; third, the contrasting modern understanding; fourth, scientific evidence of the danger; and finally, an interesting fact about the fly cleaning itself. The logical contrast between “just a nuisance” and “worst enemy” is strong and well supported by Q, confirming that the sequence is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: R Q P S: This starts with the modern view that the fly is our enemy before explaining why people thought it was a nuisance, which breaks the natural flow from common experience to scientific understanding. P Q S R: This order jumps from “just a nuisance” directly to carrying disease, then reverts to examples of buzzing and crawling, and finally announces that now we know better. This back and forth movement creates confusion. Q P R S and similar orders detach the explanation about disease germs from the contrasting statement in R and fail to build the argument systematically from everyday experience to scientific fact. Common Pitfalls: A common error is to overlook signal words such as “But now we know” that clearly indicate a shift in the line of thought. Another pitfall is to treat each sentence as independent rather than part of a small argument. When you see examples followed by a general statement, then a contrast, and then supporting evidence, you should place them in that order to maintain coherence. Final Answer: The correct sequence is S P R Q, so the correct option is “S P R Q”.

Question 5

In the following item, a descriptive passage about the dinosaur Iguanodon is jumbled. The passage consists of six sentences with S1 and S6 fixed. The four middle sentences labelled P, Q, R and S are given in random order. Read the sentences describi…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This jumbled passage provides factual information about the dinosaur Iguanodon. It begins by stating that Iguanodon was one of the first dinosaurs to be scientifically described and ends with information about its age and fossil distribution. The middle sentences must describe its size, teeth and limbs in a logical order that would typically be used in a scientific description. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: Introduces Iguanodon as an early scientifically described dinosaur. S6: Indicates that it lived about seventy million years ago and where its fossils are found. S: States that it was about forty feet long. R: Says that it had numerous teeth in the sides of the jaws arranged in rows. P: Explains that these teeth formed a dental battery with constantly replacing teeth. Q: States that the forelimbs were slightly larger than those of other members of its group Ornithischia. We assume the passage will move from general physical description (size), to dental features, to limb description, before concluding with time and fossil information in S6. Concept / Approach: Scientific descriptions often follow a structured pattern: Overall size or length of the organism. Key anatomical features such as teeth and skull. Additional physical details such as limbs and posture. We must also ensure pronouns like “these teeth” in P refer back correctly to a previous sentence that has already introduced the teeth in R. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After S1, which introduces the dinosaur, S is the best candidate because it gives an immediate impression of size: “It was about forty feet in length.” Size is usually one of the first physical details in such descriptions. Step 2: Once size has been described, the passage can focus on specific anatomical features. Sentence R tells us that Iguanodon had numerous teeth in the sides of its jaws arranged in rows. This is logically the next level of detail after size. Step 3: Sentence P begins with “These teeth”, which must refer to teeth mentioned in the immediately preceding sentence. Therefore P must follow R. It explains how the teeth formed a dental battery with constantly replacing teeth. Step 4: Once the teeth have been fully described, further physical detail is provided by Q, which states that the forelimbs were slightly larger than those of other members of Ornithischia. Limb size comes naturally after describing size and teeth. Step 5: The resulting sequence S R P Q gives a consistent and well organised description between S1 and S6. Verification / Alternative check: Reading the full passage with S, R, P and Q in that order, we get a smooth flow: introduction of the dinosaur, its length, details of its teeth, special features of those teeth, and a final note about its forelimbs, followed by age and fossil distribution. The pronoun “These teeth” clearly refers back to teeth introduced immediately before, and all the information is presented in a logical descriptive order, confirming that the sequence is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Q S R P: This begins with forelimbs and then abruptly shifts to length, teeth and dental battery. It disrupts the natural progression from general to specific features and puts limb details before basic size information. R Q P S: Placing Q after R before P separates “These teeth” in P from their introduction in R, weakening the pronoun reference. Also, S appears last among the middle sentences even though size is usually mentioned early. P Q S R and similar orders start with P, where “These teeth” appear without any prior mention of teeth, so the pronoun reference becomes unclear. This violates normal cohesion rules. Common Pitfalls: Students may overlook pronoun references such as “These teeth” and place the sentence P too early. They may also ignore how scientific texts often structure descriptions, with length and general form first, followed by specific features. To avoid these errors, always check what each pronoun refers to and look for standard descriptive patterns: overall size, then detail, then comparison. Final Answer: The correct sequence is S R P Q, so the correct option is “S R P Q”.

Question 6

In the following item, a technical passage about a device that heats fluids without an electrical element is jumbled. The passage consists of six sentences with S1 and S6 fixed. The four middle sentences labelled P, Q, R and S are given in a mixed o…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This passage describes a mechanical device that can heat fluids without using any electrical heating element. The first and last sentences are fixed and state the overall capability and safety of the system. The middle sentences explain how the device is built and how it works. Your task is to arrange these middle sentences in a logical, step by step description of structure and operation. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: A single device can heat fluids without an electrical element. S6: There is no risk of fire and the system suits dangerous environments. Q: The device has a container similar to a crankcase that contains the fluid. S: Inside the container, a motor and pulley turn a rotor wheel that pushes fluid repeatedly through nozzles into a central cavity. R: Compression and friction at the nozzles heat the fluid, raising the temperature in the central cavity. P: A heat exchanger transfers heat from the central cavity to different types of heaters or industrial processors. We assume the passage will first describe the physical structure, then the motion of fluid, then the heating mechanism, and finally the heat transfer to other systems. Concept / Approach: To order these sentences: First identify the basic structure: the container and what it holds. Next describe the internal moving parts and how they move the fluid. Then explain how that motion produces heat. Finally, describe how the generated heat is used via a heat exchanger. A clear mechanical process must go from static structure to dynamic action to practical output. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: After S1 states that the device heats fluids, the reader needs to know what the device physically looks like. Sentence Q provides this: “It has a container like the crankcase of a car's engine, which contains the fluid to be heated.” So Q follows S1. Step 2: Once the container is introduced, the next logical step is to describe the moving parts inside it. Sentence S does this: “A motor and pulley inside the container turn a rotor wheel, which in turn forces the fluid again and again through narrow nozzles into a central cavity.” Thus S should follow Q. Step 3: We now know that fluid is forced through nozzles into a central cavity. The next question is how heat is generated. Sentence R explains that “Compression and friction at the nozzles heat the fluid so that the temperature in the central cavity rises steadily.” Therefore R comes after S. Step 4: After the fluid in the central cavity is heated, the device must transfer this heat to useful applications. Sentence P explains that a heat exchanger transfers heat from the central cavity to an air heater, water heater or industrial processor. So P logically follows R. Step 5: With Q S R P in place, S6 then remarks that the absence of an electrical element eliminates fire risk, which concludes the description. Verification / Alternative check: Reading S1, Q, S, R, P and S6 in order, the explanation is clear: structure, motion, heat generation and heat utilisation, followed by a conclusion about safety. At no point does the description jump backward or leave out an essential step. Each sentence answers a new “what happens next” question, so the sequence is verified. Why Other Options Are Wrong: R P S Q: This begins with heating and heat transfer before even mentioning the container or how the fluid is moved, which is confusing and incomplete. S P Q R: Here the fluid motion is described before the container is introduced, and heat transfer is mentioned before the heating mechanism is explained, which disrupts the logical order of explanation. S R P Q and other mixed orders similarly put dynamic or outcome related details before basic structural information, making it hard for the reader to visualise the device properly. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes focus on the most technical sounding sentence and place it first, rather than starting with basic structure. Another frequent mistake is to ignore the implied sequence of operations inherent in mechanical descriptions. To avoid these mistakes, always reconstruct the process in your mind, step by step, and then assign sentences to those steps in order: physical arrangement, movement, effect, and use. Final Answer: The correct sequence is Q S R P, so the correct option is “Q S R P”.

Question 7

In the following item, a passage about the rules governing pesticides is jumbled. The passage consists of six sentences with S1 and S6 fixed at the beginning and the end. The four middle sentences labelled P, Q, R and S are given in random order. Re…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This passage discusses the need to tighten rules on pesticides while acknowledging their importance in agriculture. The fixed first and last sentences frame the issue of regulation and broader pollution control. The middle sentences must balance the benefits of pesticides with the need for practical and feasible rules and refer to a proposed amendment that may have gone too far. Given Data / Assumptions: S1: States that rules on pesticide imports, manufacture and use need to be tightened. S6: Calls for better pollution control for many other industries as well. Q: Emphasises that no one can deny the importance of pesticides in agriculture. S: States that nearly a fourth of crops are still lost to pests and weeds. P: Says that a more practical and feasible approach is needed to tackle this problem. R: Mentions a proposed amendment that attempts to tighten rules but may have gone overboard. We assume the author first stresses the usefulness of pesticides and existing crop losses, then calls for a practical approach, and finally evaluates the proposed amendment. Concept / Approach: To order the sentences: After S1, reassure the reader that pesticides are important so that the call for tighter rules does not sound extreme. Support that importance with data about crop loss. Then state that the approach to tightening rules must be practical and feasible. Finally, introduce and evaluate the proposed amendment before moving to the broader pollution context in S6. The structure is a balanced argument: need for regulation, recognition of benefits, call for practicality, and critique of the current proposal. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: S1 focuses on tightening rules for pesticides. Immediately after that, it is natural to assure the reader that the author does not ignore the usefulness of pesticides. Sentence Q exactly does this by stating, “No one can deny the importance of pesticides in our agriculture.” Therefore Q follows S1. Step 2: To reinforce the importance of pesticides, we present evidence of ongoing crop damage. Sentence S states that even today nearly a fourth of our crop is lost due to pests and weeds. This supports Q and shows why pesticides remain necessary. Step 3: Now the passage can move to the question of how to regulate pesticides sensibly. Sentence P says that a more practical and feasible approach is required to tackle the problem of tightening rules without harming agricultural needs. P therefore follows S. Step 4: The next logical step is to discuss the specific proposed amendment. Sentence R says the amendment attempts to tighten rules but goes overboard in many cases. This concludes the discussion of pesticide regulation before S6 shifts the focus to other industries. Step 5: Thus the middle sentences must appear in the order Q S P R. Verification / Alternative check: Reading the passage with Q, S, P and R between S1 and S6, the argument is balanced and clear. The author begins by calling for tighter rules, then acknowledges the importance of pesticides, supports this with crop loss statistics, insists on a practical regulatory approach, and finally criticises an amendment that may be excessive. S6 then reminds us that other industries also pollute and must be controlled. The flow of ideas is logical and persuasive. Why Other Options Are Wrong: R P S Q: This jumps straight to the proposed amendment before acknowledging pesticide importance and crop losses. It also introduces the idea of going overboard before explaining why pesticides are still needed. R Q S P: Here the proposed amendment precedes any discussion of importance and crop loss, making the critique feel premature. P R S Q and similar orders either put the call for practicality before giving data on crop losses or mention the amendment before establishing context. They do not build the argument in a clear and convincing way. Common Pitfalls: A frequent mistake in such argument based jumbled passages is to focus only on the sentence that directly mentions an “amendment” and to put it early, thinking it is central. However, good argumentation always lays out context and evidence before evaluating specific proposals. Students should watch for sentences that anchor the debate (like importance and crop loss) and place them before evaluative comments about proposed changes. Final Answer: The correct sequence is Q S P R, so the correct option is “Q S P R”.

Question 8

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: Suppose if you are selected, will you give us a treat?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your understanding of correct conditional sentence structure in English. The given sentence “Suppose if you are selected, will you give us a treat?” is awkward because it uses two conditional markers together. You must choose the alternative that expresses the condition in a grammatically correct and natural way. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “Suppose if you are selected, will you give us a treat?” We are expressing a real possibility in the future: you may be selected. Standard first conditional structure in English is: If + present tense, will + base verb. The word “suppose” can sometimes introduce a conditional idea, but it is not used together with “if” in this way. Concept / Approach: The key concept is to avoid redundancy in conditional clauses. Using two markers of condition together, such as “suppose if”, makes the sentence ungrammatical or at least very awkward. We must: Either use “If you are selected, …” Or use “Suppose you are selected, …” But not “Suppose if you are selected, …” Since the options provided include only one correctly formed conditional with “if” plus “will”, that option is the best choice. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the error. The phrase “Suppose if” is a double marking of the same idea, because both “suppose” and “if” introduce a condition. This makes the clause clumsy and unidiomatic. Step 2: Decide which marker to keep. In examination style English, the most straightforward and natural pattern is the standard first conditional, which starts with “If”. Therefore, we choose to remove “suppose” and keep “If”. Step 3: Apply the basic pattern. The correct pattern is “If you are selected, will you give us a treat?” with “If” + present simple (“are selected”) followed by “will” + base verb (“give”). This structure is grammatically correct and conveys the intended meaning clearly. Step 4: Compare the options to match this correct structure exactly and select it as the answer. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify correctness by reading the sentence aloud and checking whether it sounds like normal, fluent English. “If you are selected, will you give us a treat?” is clear, concise and grammatically correct. It correctly expresses a future possibility and the result. In contrast, “Supposing if you are selected” and “If suppose you are selected” sound unnatural and ungrammatical. Therefore, the chosen alternative is clearly the best. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “Supposing if you are selected, will you give us a treat?” still uses both “supposing” and “if”, so the redundancy remains. Option B: “If suppose you are selected, will you give us a treat?” has the words in an incorrect order and is not acceptable in standard English usage. Option D: “No improvement” would keep the original incorrect structure “Suppose if you are selected”, so it is not correct. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes think that adding extra words like “suppose” makes a sentence more polite or more emphatic, but this often leads to redundancy and ungrammatical forms. In conditional sentences, remember that a single clear marker like “if” is usually enough. If you want to use “suppose” or “supposing”, you should not also add “if” immediately after it. For example, “Suppose you are selected” is acceptable, but “Suppose if you are selected” is not. Final Answer: The improved sentence is If you are selected, will you give us a treat?, so the correct option is “If you are selected, will you give us a treat?”.

Question 9

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: I would rather have a noble enemy than a mean friend.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question tests your knowledge of the correct use of “would rather” in English. The given sentence expresses a preference for one option over another: having a noble enemy rather than a mean friend. You must decide whether the structure is already correct or whether one of the suggested alternatives improves it. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “I would rather have a noble enemy than a mean friend.” The speaker is expressing a general preference, not a specific plan or future action. The common and correct English structure is “would rather + base verb + A than B”. We must compare each option to this standard form. Concept / Approach: The phrase “would rather” is a modal expression used to state preference. The standard pattern is: Subject + would rather + base verb + object 1 + than + object 2 For example: “I would rather stay at home than go out” or “I would rather drink tea than coffee.” The given sentence uses exactly this pattern with the verb “have”. Any deviation that changes “would rather have” to “would have” or “will have” distorts the intended meaning. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check whether the original sentence follows the “would rather + base verb” pattern. It does: “would rather have” is modal “would rather” plus base verb “have”. Step 2: Confirm that “than” correctly introduces the second item of comparison. The sentence says “a noble enemy than a mean friend”, which fits the pattern “A than B”. Step 3: Evaluate whether the sentence clearly expresses a general preference. It does: the speaker prefers a noble enemy over a mean friend in general, not in one specific situation. Step 4: Compare the sentence with each suggested alternative and see if any option improves the grammar or meaning. None of them does, so the original sentence must be correct. Verification / Alternative check: Read the sentence aloud: “I would rather have a noble enemy than a mean friend.” It sounds natural and clearly states a preference. The verb form and comparison structure are exactly in line with standard English usage. No alternative expresses the idea more clearly or more grammatically, so we can be confident that no improvement is necessary. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “I would more have a noble enemy…” is incorrect because “would more have” is not a standard expression of preference. “Would rather” is the correct idiomatic form. Option B: “I would have a noble enemy…” drops “rather” and changes the meaning to a more definite or hypothetical statement, not a preference between two options. Option C: “I will have a noble enemy…” uses “will have” which expresses future intention or prediction, not a general preference. It also drops the crucial “rather”, which carries the idea of choice. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to confuse “would rather” with “would have” or “will have”, but these are different structures with different meanings. Another pitfall is trying to add unnecessary words like “more” after “would”, which makes the phrase unidiomatic. Whenever you see a sentence with “would rather” followed by a base verb and a comparison using “than”, it is likely already correct and requires no change. Final Answer: The original sentence is already correct, so the best choice is No improvement.

Question 10

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: He decided to take the help of a guide lest he may miss the way.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question focuses on the correct use of the conjunction “lest”. The sentence “He decided to take the help of a guide lest he may miss the way” aims to express that he took a guide in order to avoid missing the way. You must select the alternative that uses the correct verb form after “lest”. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “He decided to take the help of a guide lest he may miss the way.” The word “lest” introduces a clause that expresses fear or a negative purpose (to prevent something bad). Standard English usage typically requires “should” or sometimes a bare verb after “lest”, not “may” or “will”. The sentence refers to a possible future event that the subject wants to avoid. Concept / Approach: The conjunction “lest” has a formal flavour and usually takes: “lest + subject + should + base verb” or “lest + subject + base verb” in very formal or older style. Using “may” or “will” after “lest” is non standard. Therefore, we must: Replace “may” with “should” in this context. Keep the rest of the clause unchanged so that the meaning remains “in order to prevent missing the way”. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise the function of “lest” here. It shows the reason for taking a guide: to avoid the danger of missing the way. Step 2: Recall the correct structure: “lest he should miss the way” is the accepted pattern in standard English. The “should” conveys a potential risk that we want to prevent. Step 3: Compare this to “lest he may miss the way” in the original sentence. “May” suggests possibility but does not fit the usual grammatical pattern after “lest”. Step 4: Choose the option that replaces “may” with “should” while leaving the rest of the sentence intact: “He decided to take the help of a guide lest he should miss the way.” Verification / Alternative check: Read the improved sentence: “He decided to take the help of a guide lest he should miss the way.” It clearly expresses that he took a guide in order to avoid the possibility of getting lost. The phrase sounds natural and follows the rule that “lest” should be followed by “should” plus the base form of the verb. No other option matches both the grammar and the intended meaning as precisely. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B: “lest he will miss the way” uses “will”, which is not standard after “lest” and feels awkward. “Will” suggests certainty rather than a possibility that one wishes to avoid. Option C: “lest he might fail to see the way” slightly changes the wording and uses “might fail to see” instead of “miss”. Although “might” is possible in some contexts, the form with “should miss” is more standard and precise in examination style English. Option D: “No improvement” would keep “lest he may miss the way”, which is not idiomatic and does not follow the standard pattern. Common Pitfalls: Learners often forget that words like “lest” and “in case” have specific grammatical patterns. It is easy to treat them as general conjunctions and attach any modal verb after them. To avoid this, remember that “lest” is followed either by “should” plus base verb or by the bare verb in very formal style. In exam questions, the structure “lest he should + base verb” is usually the safest and most correct choice. Final Answer: The improved sentence is He decided to take the help of a guide lest he should miss the way.

Question 11

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: He wanted my permission to taking part in sports.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests your understanding of the correct use of infinitives after certain verbs. The sentence “He wanted my permission to taking part in sports” is not grammatically correct. You must select the option that uses the correct form of the verb after “permission to”. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “He wanted my permission to taking part in sports.” The verb “want” can be followed by a noun phrase or a to infinitive (“to + base verb”). The phrase “permission to” is normally followed by a base verb, not by an ing form. The intended meaning is that he asked for permission so that he could take part in sports. Concept / Approach: The pattern here is: “permission to + base verb” Examples include “permission to leave”, “permission to speak”, and “permission to enter”. Using “to taking” is incorrect because it mixes the infinitive marker “to” with a gerund form “taking”. We must replace “to taking part in sports” with “to take part in sports”. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the incorrect part of the sentence. The phrase “to taking part in sports” is ungrammatical because “to” should be followed by the base form “take”, not the ing form “taking”. Step 2: Recall the correct construction: “permission to take part in sports.” Here “to take” is the infinitive of “take”. Step 3: Replace the incorrect phrase “to taking part in sports” with “to take part in sports” and keep the rest of the sentence unchanged. Step 4: The improved sentence becomes “He wanted my permission to take part in sports.” Verification / Alternative check: Read the improved sentence: “He wanted my permission to take part in sports.” It sounds natural and matches standard English usage. The structure “wanted my permission to take” is clear and grammatically correct. Comparing it with common patterns such as “wanted permission to go”, “wanted permission to stay” confirms that it is the correct form. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B: “for to take part in sports” uses the phrase “for to”, which is archaic and not standard in modern English. It is incorrect in examination contexts. Option C: “for to taking part in sports” combines both the archaic “for to” and the wrong ing form, so it is doubly incorrect. Option D: “No improvement” would keep the incorrect phrase “to taking part in sports”, which is grammatically wrong. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse “to” as a preposition with “to” as part of the infinitive. After nouns like “permission”, “plan” or “decision”, the pattern usually demands an infinitive (“to + base verb”), not “to + ing”. For example, “permission to enter” not “permission to entering”. Remember to check whether “to” is acting as a preposition (in which case an ing form might follow) or as part of an infinitive (which takes a base verb). Here, it is clearly part of the infinitive. Final Answer: The improved sentence is He wanted my permission to take part in sports.

Question 12

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: We are doing this in the interest of the poors.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question focuses on correct usage of the phrase “in the interests of” and the noun “poor”. The original sentence “We are doing this in the interest of the poors” contains two errors: an incorrect singular form of “interest” in this idiomatic expression and an incorrect plural noun “poors”. You must choose the alternative that corrects both issues. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “We are doing this in the interest of the poors.” The idiomatic expression is “in the interests of” when referring to benefits or welfare. The word “poor” when used to mean poor people collectively is an adjective used as a plural noun and has no “s” at the end. The sentence aims to mean that the action is being taken for the welfare of poor people. Concept / Approach: Two grammatical points are involved: Phrase: “in the interests of” is the standard form, not “in the interest of”, when referring generally to welfare or advantage. Noun: “the poor” is used without adding “s” to “poor” when we mean poor people as a group. We do not say “the poors”. Therefore, both “interest” and “poors” must be corrected simultaneously. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Correct the idiomatic phrase. The standard phrase in this context is “in the interests of” because the action is being presented as serving the welfare of a group. So “interest” becomes “interests”. Step 2: Correct the noun referring to poor people. In English, we say “the poor” without an added “s”. “Poor” acts as an adjective used substantively to mean “poor people”. Step 3: Combine both corrections in one sentence: “We are doing this in the interests of the poor.” Verification / Alternative check: Read the improved sentence: “We are doing this in the interests of the poor.” It sounds fully natural and idiomatic. The phrase correctly expresses that the action serves the welfare of poor people, and both “interests” and “the poor” are in standard form. Comparing this to other common expressions like “in the interests of justice”, “in the interests of safety” confirms that “interests” is correct here. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “in the interests of the poors” corrects only “interest” but still uses “poors”, which is incorrect. “Poors” is not used in standard English. Option C: “for the interests of the poor” uses “for” instead of “in”, which makes the idiomatic phrase less natural. The usual expression in formal English is “in the interests of the poor”. Option D: “No improvement” leaves both the idiom and the noun in incorrect form, so it cannot be right. Common Pitfalls: Many learners think that because “poor” refers to multiple people, it must be pluralised as “poors”. However, English often uses adjectives as nouns for groups of people, such as “the rich”, “the poor”, “the blind”, “the old”. These words do not take “s” in this use. Another common mistake is to change fixed idiomatic expressions like “in the interests of” into non standard variants. Always check such common phrases in reliable sources or remember them as fixed patterns. Final Answer: The improved sentence is We are doing this in the interests of the poor.

Question 13

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: He reached his destination at night.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks your understanding of correct preposition use with the verb “reach”. The sentence “He reached his destination at night” looks simple, and you must decide whether it is already correct or whether one of the alternatives is better. The key point is that “reach” does not normally take a preposition before its object. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “He reached his destination at night.” The verb “reach” is a transitive verb that directly takes an object without any preposition: “reach home”, “reach the station”, “reach our destination”. The phrase “at night” correctly indicates the time at which he reached. The intended meaning is that he arrived at his destination during the night. Concept / Approach: The grammar rule is: “reach + object” (no “to” or “at” before the object). Examples include: “We reached home late”, “They reached the city by noon.” The time adverbial “at night” is correctly formed and placed. Therefore, we must confirm whether the original sentence follows this rule and whether any option improves it. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check the verb object structure. “Reached his destination” is a correct use of “reach” as a transitive verb with a direct object “his destination”. No preposition is inserted between them, which is correct. Step 2: Check the time expression. “At night” is the standard way to indicate that something happened during the night. So the time phrase is also correct. Step 3: Put the two parts together: “He reached his destination at night.” The sentence is grammatically correct and clear in meaning. Step 4: Compare with the alternatives, none of which follows standard usage as naturally as the original sentence. Verification / Alternative check: If you read the original sentence aloud, it sounds natural and matches common English usage. Compare it with sentences like “He reached home at night”, “She reached the village in the evening”. All of these have the same correct structure: “reached + object + time phrase”. Therefore, the original sentence is correct and requires no improvement. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “He reached destination at night.” omits the possessive “his”. While not always wrong in every context, it sounds incomplete and less natural here. Option B: “At his destination he reached at night.” is awkwardly worded and uses an unnecessary preposition and inversion that do not fit natural English usage. Option C: “He reached on his destination at night.” incorrectly adds the preposition “on” after “reached”. We do not say “reached on his destination”. Common Pitfalls: Many learners wrongly think that verbs like “reach” behave like “arrive” and therefore add prepositions such as “to” or “at” (for example, “reached to the station”). However, “reach” is used without a preposition before the place object. To avoid this error, remember that we say “arrive at the station” but “reach the station”. The two verbs behave differently despite having similar meanings. Final Answer: The original sentence is already correct, so the best choice is No improvement.

Question 14

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: One is often pleased with himself.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question examines your knowledge of reflexive pronouns used with the impersonal subject “one”. The original sentence “One is often pleased with himself” uses “himself”, which does not match the impersonal “one” correctly. You must select the reflexive form that agrees with “one” in formal English. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “One is often pleased with himself.” Subject: “One” used as an impersonal pronoun to refer to people in general. Reflexive pronoun that formally matches “one” is “oneself”. The sentence expresses a general truth about human nature: people are often pleased with themselves. Concept / Approach: In formal English, when using “one” as a general subject, we should maintain consistency throughout the sentence: “One” → “oneself” (reflexive), “one’s” (possessive). Mixing “one” with “himself”, “herself” or “themselves” is considered inconsistent and ungrammatical in careful, formal writing. Therefore, we need to replace “himself” with “oneself”. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the mismatch between subject and reflexive. The subject is “One”, but the reflexive used is “himself”. They do not belong to the same set of pronouns. Step 2: Recall the correct reflexive pronoun for “one”, which is “oneself”. Step 3: Replace “himself” with “oneself”, keeping the rest of the sentence intact. Step 4: The improved sentence becomes “One is often pleased with oneself.” Verification / Alternative check: Read the improved sentence: “One is often pleased with oneself.” In formal English, this is the standard and correct structure. It maintains the same impersonal tone throughout the sentence. If we wanted a less formal variant, we might say “People are often pleased with themselves”, but with “one” as subject, “oneself” is the correct reflexive. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “One is often pleased with one’s self.” uses an old fashioned and less common split form “one’s self”. Modern standard English prefers the single word “oneself”. Option B: “One is often pleased with themselves.” mixes the singular impersonal “one” with the plural reflexive “themselves”, which is inconsistent in formal usage. Option D: “No improvement” would leave “himself” in place, which does not agree with the pronoun “one” and is therefore incorrect in meticulous grammar. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to use pronouns like “he”, “his”, or “himself” after “one” because we think of a typical person as male, but this is both grammatically inconsistent and stylistically outdated. Another modern tendency is to replace “one” with “they” and “themselves”, which is acceptable in informal style but not in a formal examination context if “one” is already used. To remain consistent, always pair “one” with “oneself” and “one’s”. Final Answer: The improved sentence is One is often pleased with oneself.

Question 15

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: Unless you are not very careful, you will run into debt.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on the correct use of “unless” in conditional sentences. The given sentence “Unless you are not very careful, you will run into debt” contains a double negative idea that makes the meaning confusing. You must choose the alternative that expresses the intended warning clearly and correctly. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “Unless you are not very careful, you will run into debt.” The conjunction “unless” means “if not”. The intended meaning is likely: “If you are not very careful, you will run into debt.” The double negative “unless” plus “are not” should be avoided, because it creates a confusing statement. Concept / Approach: The key idea is that “unless” already carries a negative sense. Therefore: “Unless you are careful” means “if you are not careful”. “Unless you are not careful” would literally mean “if you are careful”, which reverses the intended warning. To correct this, we must remove the extra “not” in the clause following “unless”. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Rewrite the original idea using “if” instead of “unless” to clarify the intended meaning. The intended warning is “If you are not very careful, you will run into debt.” Step 2: Replace “if you are not very careful” with an equivalent clause using “unless”. The equivalent clause is “Unless you are very careful, you will run into debt.” Step 3: This removes the double negative and restores the correct logical relationship between carefulness and falling into debt. Verification / Alternative check: The corrected sentence “Unless you are very careful, you will run into debt” clearly means “If you are not very careful, you will run into debt.” The warning is now easy to understand: being careful is the condition that prevents debt. The original version, with “Unless you are not very careful”, could be misinterpreted or sound awkward because of the conflicting negatives. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B: “You will be very careful unless you run into debt” completely changes the meaning and suggests that debt is the condition for being careful, which is not the intended warning. Option C: “You may be very careful, but you will run into debt” creates a contrast instead of a condition and suggests that debt will happen regardless of carefulness, which is not the intended sense of the original sentence. Option D: “No improvement” would keep the confusing double negative and is not acceptable. Common Pitfalls: Double negatives often slip into speech when we combine words like “unless”, “until”, “without” with “not” in the same clause. This leads to sentences that either contradict themselves or have the opposite meaning of what we intend. The safest method is to check such sentences by converting “unless” clauses into “if” clauses in your mind and seeing whether the meaning is what you really want. Then convert them back correctly using a single negative. Final Answer: The improved sentence is Unless you are very careful, you will run into debt.

Question 16

Improve the following sentence by choosing the most appropriate alternative. If no improvement is needed, select the option corresponding to “No improvement”. Sentence: I am living in Bombay for the last ten years.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question tests your understanding of the correct tense for actions that started in the past and continue up to the present. The original sentence “I am living in Bombay for the last ten years” is incorrect because it uses the present continuous tense “am living” with a time expression that clearly indicates a long duration until now. You must choose the correct tense form to express this ongoing action. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “I am living in Bombay for the last ten years.” The phrase “for the last ten years” indicates that the action started ten years ago and continues to the present. The appropriate tense for such actions in English is the present perfect continuous: “have been living”. The speaker is describing a situation that is still true now. Concept / Approach: The grammar rule is: Use present perfect continuous (have been + ing form) to describe an action that started in the past and is still continuing up to now, especially when you use expressions like “for five years”, “since 2010”, “for the last ten years”. Therefore, “am living” must be changed to “have been living” to match the time expression. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the time frame. The phrase “for the last ten years” clearly refers to a period starting in the past and continuing until now. Step 2: Choose the correct tense pattern. For such continuous actions, we use the present perfect continuous: “I have been living…”. Step 3: Replace “am living” with “have been living” while keeping the rest of the sentence unchanged. Step 4: The improved sentence is “I have been living in Bombay for the last ten years.” Verification / Alternative check: Read the improved sentence: “I have been living in Bombay for the last ten years.” It clearly communicates that the action began ten years ago and continues to the present moment. This is exactly how native speakers would express this idea. The form is also consistent with other similar sentences such as “I have been working here for three years” and “She has been studying English since 2015.” Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “I had lived in Bombay for the last ten years.” uses the past perfect tense, which is used for actions completed before another point in the past. It does not fit here because the action is still continuing in the present. Option C: “I lived in Bombay for the last ten years.” uses simple past tense, which suggests that the period has ended. It is more suitable if the speaker no longer lives in Bombay. But the phrase “for the last ten years” usually implies up to now, so simple past is not appropriate. Option D: “No improvement” would leave the grammatically incorrect “am living” unchanged, so it is not correct. Common Pitfalls: Learners often overuse the present continuous tense with time expressions like “for five years” because they focus on the ongoing nature of the action and forget that English uses present perfect continuous for this purpose. A simple way to avoid this error is to remember that if you mention the length of time up to now (“for ten years”, “since 2010”), you should almost always use “have been + ing” for actions that are still not finished. Final Answer: The improved sentence is I have been living in Bombay for the last ten years.

Question 17

In the following sentence improvement question, choose the best version of the sentence: 'I wish I can help you.'

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests sentence improvement in English grammar, specifically the use of wish with unreal or hypothetical situations. In competitive exams, candidates are often asked to recognise correct structures used to express desires that are contrary to present reality. The sentence given is I wish I can help you. At first glance it looks almost correct, but the auxiliary verb can does not match the meaning of an unreal present wish. Understanding the correct pairing of wish with the appropriate modal verb is essential for accurate and natural English usage in both spoken and written communication. Given Data / Assumptions: The original sentence is: I wish I can help you. The speaker wants to help but is unable to do so at present. The task is to choose the grammatically best and most natural version of this sentence. Options use different modal verbs and forms of help. Concept / Approach: When wish refers to a situation in the present that is unreal or not possible, English usually uses a past form of the verb to signal distance from reality. Therefore, we use could instead of can. The structure is I wish + subject + could + base verb for present unreal ability. This is similar to the pattern I wish I were richer or I wish I knew the answer. The idea is that the wish expresses regret or an impossible or unlikely situation in the present, not a real ability or permission. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the meaning of the sentence. The speaker wants to help now but cannot; this is a hypothetical present situation.Step 2: Recall the rule: for present unreal wishes, use wish + past tense form or wish + could + base verb.Step 3: Compare options. Option A uses could help, which matches the pattern I wish I could help you.Step 4: Option B uses may, which typically expresses possibility or permission in the present or future, not an unreal wish.Step 5: Option C uses could helped, which is grammatically incorrect because could is always followed by the base form help, not the past form helped.Step 6: Option D repeats the incorrect original structure with can.Step 7: Conclude that Option A is the only grammatically correct and natural sentence. Verification / Alternative check: You can check the decision by comparing with other common examples. For instance, native speakers say I wish I could speak French or I wish I could visit you, not I wish I can speak French. If the speaker had the real ability, they would simply say I can help you. This contrast confirms that wish requires could when talking about an unreal or unfulfilled desire at the present time. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B: I wish I may help you mixes wish with may, which sounds unnatural in modern English for this meaning. May is rarely used after wish in this way. Option C: I wish I could helped you is grammatically wrong because could must be followed by the base verb help, not the past form helped. Option D: I wish I can help you repeats the incorrect form that fails to convey the unreal present situation correctly. Common Pitfalls: Candidates often confuse can and could, thinking that could only shows past ability. However, could is also used to express a hypothetical or unreal present or future situation. Another common mistake is to combine wish with may or might inappropriately. Remember that for regrets or unreal wishes about the present, English regularly uses wish + past tense or wish + could. This pattern is heavily tested in exams, so memorising typical examples will strengthen your accuracy and confidence. Final Answer: The best and grammatically correct improvement is I wish I could help you.

Question 18

In the following sentence improvement question, choose the best version of the sentence: 'My brother is looking forward to meeting his employer tomorrow.'

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of verb patterns and preposition use in English, especially the common expression look forward to. Many competitive exam questions focus on whether candidates know that to in this phrase is a preposition, not part of an infinitive, so it must be followed by a noun or gerund form. The given sentence is My brother is looking forward to meeting his employer tomorrow. The task is to decide if this sentence needs improvement and, if so, which alternative is best according to standard English usage. Given Data / Assumptions: The original sentence is: My brother is looking forward to meeting his employer tomorrow. The phrase look forward to expresses pleasant anticipation of a future event. Options change the verb form after to and the overall structure. The correct option must be grammatically accurate and natural. Concept / Approach: The key grammar point is that look forward to is a fixed phrasal expression where to is a preposition. Prepositions are normally followed by a noun, pronoun, or gerund. Therefore, the pattern is look forward to + noun or look forward to + verb-ing. Examples include I am looking forward to the party and She is looking forward to meeting you. Using the bare infinitive form meet after to here is incorrect because that treats to as part of an infinitive rather than a preposition. Similarly, adding extra words like for or that can disturb the fixed expression and sound unnatural. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the core expression: is looking forward to.Step 2: Recall the correct pattern: look forward to + noun or verb-ing.Step 3: Examine the original sentence. It uses meeting after to, which is a gerund and fits the pattern perfectly.Step 4: Check Option A: to meet uses the bare infinitive, which does not follow the prepositional to and is considered incorrect with look forward to.Step 5: Check Option B: looks forward for meeting introduces an incorrect preposition for and changes the tense slightly, making the sentence awkward.Step 6: Check Option C: repeats the grammatically correct original sentence.Step 7: Check Option D: is looking forward that he will meet breaks the fixed expression and creates an unidiomatic structure.Step 8: Conclude that the original sentence, as in Option C, is already correct and needs no improvement. Verification / Alternative check: Compare with standard examples from grammar references. Commonly taught models include I look forward to hearing from you, We are looking forward to our vacation, and They are looking forward to seeing their friends. In each case, to is followed by a gerund or noun. You never see look forward to meet in correct formal English. This confirms that meeting is the right form after to in the given sentence. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: My brother is looking forward to meet his employer tomorrow uses the bare infinitive meet after the preposition to and is grammatically wrong in this structure. Option B: My brother looks forward for meeting his employer tomorrow misuses the preposition for and changes the aspect unnecessarily, making the sentence awkward. Option D: My brother is looking forward that he will meet his employer tomorrow uses that he will meet, which is not the normal construction after look forward to. Common Pitfalls: A frequent mistake is to treat to after look forward as if it formed an infinitive, leading to incorrect patterns like look forward to meet you. Another pitfall is adding extra prepositions such as for or using clauses with that after look forward. Remember that look forward to is a fixed expression and should be followed by a noun or verb-ing form. Repeating and practising such chunks helps you sound more fluent and avoids unnecessary errors in exams. Final Answer: The correct and most natural sentence is My brother is looking forward to meeting his employer tomorrow.

Question 19

In the following sentence improvement question, choose the best version of the sentence: 'My father has given his ascent for my long tour.'

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence improvement question checks vocabulary and correct word choice in English. The original sentence uses the word ascent, which refers to an upward movement or climb, rather than assent, which means agreement or approval. Exams often test such confusing pairs of words called homophones or near homophones. Being able to distinguish between ascent, assent, accent, and invented spellings like approof is essential for accuracy in formal writing and for scoring well in general English sections. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: My father has given his ascent for my long tour. The intended meaning is that the father has agreed to or approved a long tour. Options replace the problematic word with different nouns: accent, approof, assent, or no change. Only one option should correctly reflect the intended meaning and proper spelling. Concept / Approach: The key concept is lexical choice. Ascent means climb or rise, such as the ascent of a mountain or the ascent of a staircase. Assent means approval or agreement, particularly in a formal context, such as parental assent or official assent to a proposal. Accent refers to pronunciation features, such as a regional accent. The word approof is a misspelling and not standard English. Considering the context, the sentence clearly refers to the father granting permission for a long tour, so we require the noun that conveys agreement or approval, namely assent. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Understand the meaning of the sentence. The speaker wants to say that the father has approved the plan for a long tour.Step 2: Identify the incorrect word in the original version: ascent.Step 3: Recall meanings of the confusing words. Ascent relates to climbing; assent refers to approval; accent is about pronunciation.Step 4: Examine Option A, which uses accent. This does not fit the context of giving approval.Step 5: Examine Option B, which uses approof. This is not a standard English word and appears as an incorrect form of approval.Step 6: Examine Option C, which uses assent. This matches the intended sense of agreement perfectly.Step 7: Examine Option D, No improvement. Since the original word ascent is wrong here, no improvement cannot be correct.Step 8: Conclude that Option C provides the correct and precise sentence. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify by substituting definitions. If we say My father has given his approval for my long tour, the sentence makes clear sense. The word assent is very close in meaning to approval and is traditionally used with give one is assent. On the other hand, My father has given his ascent for my long tour would literally mean he has given his climb for my tour, which is illogical. This semantic check confirms that assent is the right choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: My father has given his accent for my long tour mixes up a pronunciation term with an approval context, so it is semantically incorrect. Option B: My father has given his approof for my long tour uses a non-standard, misspelled word that would be marked wrong in any formal exam. Option D: No improvement suggests that ascent is acceptable, but this does not match the required meaning of agreement or permission. Common Pitfalls: Learners often confuse ascent and assent because they sound alike. It is useful to remember that ascent contains the word sent, which you can associate with going up or being sent upwards, while assent starts with as and includes sent, which you can link to sending your approval. Another pitfall is ignoring spelling and context and focusing only on sound similarity. Exam questions frequently exploit such confusions, so it is important to read carefully and verify meaning rather than relying on intuition alone. Final Answer: The correctly improved sentence is My father has given his assent for my long tour.

Question 20

In the following sentence improvement question, choose the best version of the sentence: 'Heavy work has been thrusted on me.'

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines the correct use of irregular verbs in English, especially the past participle form used after has been in passive constructions. The given sentence Heavy work has been thrusted on me sounds almost correct but contains an error in the form of the verb thrust. Many irregular verbs in English do not form their past tense and past participle by adding ed, so knowing their principal parts is crucial for scoring well in grammar questions. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: Heavy work has been thrusted on me. The structure is passive voice with has been followed by a past participle. The verb in question is thrust, meaning to push forcefully. Options offer different verb forms and structures, including a no improvement choice. Concept / Approach: In English, verbs can be regular or irregular. Regular verbs form the past tense and past participle by adding ed, as in worked or pushed. Irregular verbs, however, have special forms that must be memorised. The verb thrust is an irregular verb with the forms thrust (present), thrust (past), and thrust (past participle). Therefore, the correct passive construction is has been thrust, not has been thrusted. Moreover, the preposition on is idiomatic in the phrase thrust something on someone, meaning to impose something on a person, especially work or responsibility, often unwillingly. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the tense and voice: has been indicates present perfect passive.Step 2: Recall that in the passive, has been must be followed by a past participle.Step 3: Check the principal parts of thrust: thrust, thrust, thrust.Step 4: Recognise that thrusted is not a standard form and should be treated as incorrect in exams.Step 5: Examine Option B: Heavy work has been thrust on me. This uses the correct past participle and preserves the passive meaning.Step 6: Examine Option C: Heavy work has thrust down on me. This changes the structure from passive to active-like and introduces down unnecessarily, making the sentence unclear and less idiomatic.Step 7: Option D, No improvement, cannot be chosen because thrusted is incorrect.Step 8: Conclude that Option B is the only grammatically correct and natural improvement. Verification / Alternative check: Compare with dictionary or standard examples: He thrust the papers into my hands, The responsibility was thrust on her suddenly, and Heavy responsibilities have been thrust on the committee. In all these examples, thrust remains unchanged in past and past participle positions. No reputable source uses thrusted as accepted standard. This confirms that has been thrust is the correct passive form. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: Heavy work has been thrusted on me uses a non-standard form thrusted, which will be marked wrong in examinations. Option C: Heavy work has thrust down on me changes the voice and introduces down, resulting in an unnatural and confusing sentence. Option D: No improvement ignores the irregular nature of thrust and incorrectly accepts thrusted. Common Pitfalls: Students often apply the regular ed pattern to all verbs, creating incorrect forms like costed, betted, or thrusted. Many common irregular verbs keep the same form in present, past, and past participle, such as cut, put, spread, and thrust. It is important to revise irregular verbs systematically and notice patterns in commonly tested words. Another pitfall is not noticing that a sentence is in the passive voice, leading to confusion about which verb form is required after has been or had been. Final Answer: The correct improved sentence is Heavy work has been thrust on me.

English Questions