Question 1

Error spotting in a complex English sentence: As you know that the ignorant are easily duped. Decide which part of the sentence is grammatically incorrect or state that there is no error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines correct clause structure and the use of conjunctions in English. The sentence uses As you know and also includes the conjunction that, leading to a redundancy problem. Error spotting items like this ensure that candidates understand which connectives are necessary and which are unnecessary or incorrect in a given pattern. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: As you know that the ignorant are easily duped. - Part (a): As you know - Part (b): that the ignorant - Part (c): are easily duped - Part (d): No error We assume that the intended meaning is You know that the ignorant are easily deceived, or As you know, the ignorant are easily deceived. Concept / Approach: As you know is already a complete introductory clause and does not require that immediately after it when the next part is a full clause. There are two correct patterns: - You know that the ignorant are easily duped. - As you know, the ignorant are easily duped. Combining As you know with that creates an unnatural and incorrect construction. Therefore, the presence of that after As you know is the main error in the sentence, and this is associated with part (a) as framed in the original division. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider the pattern in part (a) As you know. This can function as an introductory clause that prepares the listener for known information. Step 2: Examine part (b) that the ignorant. The word that typically introduces a noun clause, for example, You know that the ignorant are easily duped. Step 3: When we begin the sentence with As you know, we usually follow it by a comma and then a complete clause, such as the ignorant are easily duped. Step 4: Therefore, either we remove As from As you know and keep that, or we keep As you know and remove that. Step 5: The most natural correction is: As you know, the ignorant are easily duped. Step 6: This shows that the error arises from the combination As you know that, which belongs to the first part as given in the question. Verification / Alternative check: We can write two grammatically correct alternatives to confirm our reasoning: - You know that the ignorant are easily duped. - As you know, the ignorant are easily duped. Both versions are acceptable and convey the same idea that people who lack knowledge are easily deceived. The original form mixes elements of both and produces an incorrect hybrid. This verification confirms that the redundant conjunction that following As you know is the real error. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in part (b) only: Apart from the presence of that, the phrase the ignorant is correct as a collective noun phrase. The core mistake is the pattern As you know that, which is credited to the introductory part. - Error in part (c) only: Are easily duped is correct; the verb agrees with the plural noun phrase the ignorant and duped is the right past participle of dupe. - No error in the sentence: This ignores the redundancy created by As you know that and is therefore incorrect. - Error in more than one part: Only the introductory structure needs to be changed; the rest is fine, so multiple errors is not accurate. Common Pitfalls: Many learners feel that more connectives make a sentence sound more formal, so they add that unnecessarily. However, English has fixed patterns such as As you know plus comma, followed directly by a clause. Learners should remember that redundancy in conjunctions can be treated as an error in exam questions. A good strategy is to read the sentence without one of the conjunctions and see if it becomes clearer and more natural. Final Answer: Correct option: Error in part (a) only.

Question 2

Error spotting in an imperative English sentence: Pay attention to what I am saying. Decide which part of the sentence has a grammatical error or confirm that there is no error at all.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The sentence Pay attention to what I am saying is a common imperative structure used to give instructions. This item checks whether the learner can recognise a fully correct sentence and avoid making unnecessary changes. In many competitive examinations, some questions are included specifically to test if candidates can confidently choose the No error option when there is no grammatical mistake. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: Pay attention to what I am saying. - Part (a): Pay attention - Part (b): to what - Part (c): I am saying - Part (d): No error We assume that neutral modern English is used and that the verb tense choice is deliberate and correct. Concept / Approach: The structure consists of an imperative verb pay, followed by the noun attention, then the preposition to, and finally a noun clause what I am saying. Imperatives usually omit the subject you, which is understood. The present continuous I am saying correctly describes an action in progress at the moment of speaking. All parts follow standard grammar and idiomatic usage, so no change is required. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Look at part (a) Pay attention. This is a standard imperative expression used in classrooms and formal contexts. Step 2: Consider part (b) to what. The preposition to is necessary after the phrase pay attention when we specify the focus of attention. Step 3: Examine part (c) I am saying. The present continuous tense shows an action happening now, which matches the idea of listening while the speaker is talking. Step 4: When we combine the parts, the full sentence reads: Pay attention to what I am saying, which is fully grammatical and natural. Step 5: Since there is no structural, tense, or prepositional error, we conclude that the correct choice is No error in the sentence. Verification / Alternative check: We can test alternative forms like Pay attention to what I say. This version uses the simple present for a more general statement. However, the original continuous form I am saying is also completely correct because it describes what is being said at that moment. This confirms that the original sentence is acceptable and does not require correction. No rewriting is necessary to meet standard exam expectations. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in part (a) only: Pay attention is a very common idiom and entirely correct, so this option is not valid. - Error in part (b) only: Removing to would produce Pay attention what I am saying, which is incorrect; the given version with to is the correct one. - Error in part (c) only: The verb phrase I am saying is grammatically sound and contextually appropriate, so there is no error here. - Error in more than one part: There is no error in any part, so the idea of multiple errors is clearly wrong. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes overthink such questions and try to force an error where none exists, for example by feeling that I am saying should be I say. It is important to remember that examinations often include fully correct sentences to test confidence in choosing the No error option. Carefully reading the sentence and checking each component against basic rules of grammar helps avoid unnecessary changes. Final Answer: Correct option: No error in the sentence.

Question 3

Error spotting in noun number: One of the assistant was Alfred. Identify which part of this English sentence is grammatically wrong or state that there is no error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests correct noun number after the phrase one of. The sentence refers to Alfred as one member of a group of assistants. English grammar requires a plural noun after one of to show that the individual is part of a larger group. Competitive exam questions often include this pattern because it is a frequent area of error for learners. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: One of the assistant was Alfred. - Part (a): One of the assistant - Part (b): was - Part (c): Alfred - Part (d): No error We assume that the meaning is that Alfred belonged to the group of assistants. Concept / Approach: The structure one of is always followed by a plural noun, for example one of the students, one of the books, one of the teachers. The verb usually agrees with one, so it is singular. Therefore, the correct phrase here should be one of the assistants, not one of the assistant. The verb was and the proper noun Alfred are both correct, so the mistake is confined to the first part of the sentence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine part (a) One of the assistant. Here, assistant appears in the singular form following the phrase one of. Step 2: Recall the rule: after one of, the noun must be plural because you are choosing a single item out of a larger group. Step 3: Therefore, the correct expression should be one of the assistants. Step 4: Check part (b) was. Since one is grammatically singular, the verb was is the correct past tense form of be. Step 5: Check part (c) Alfred. This is simply a proper noun identifying which assistant is meant, and it is correct. Step 6: Since parts (b) and (c) are correct, only part (a) contains an error. Verification / Alternative check: We can rewrite the corrected sentence as: One of the assistants was Alfred. This version now follows the standard pattern: one of plus plural noun plus singular verb plus complement. Another check is to imagine a similar sentence such as One of the cars was stolen, which clearly uses a plural noun after one of. This comparison confirms the correction. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in part (b) only: Was is the correct singular verb for the subject one, so this is not an error. - Error in part (c) only: Alfred as a proper noun is correctly placed and capitalised, so part (c) is correct. - No error in the sentence: Accepting this would allow a singular noun after one of, which is not standard, so this option is wrong. - Error in more than one part: Only the noun in part (a) needs to be changed, so multiple errors is not a correct judgment. Common Pitfalls: Many learners focus only on the nearest noun and may think that assistant looks reasonable after the article the. They forget the special rule that one of must be followed by a plural noun because it indicates selection from a set. Paying attention to fixed patterns like one of the plus plural noun can help avoid such errors in exam situations. Final Answer: Correct option: Error in part (a) only.

Question 4

Error spotting in article usage: Though George is a honourable man his activities arouse suspicion. Choose which part of the sentence is grammatically incorrect or state that there is no error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests the correct use of the indefinite article a or an before a noun that begins with a vowel sound. The sentence describes George as an honourable man, but the article selected does not match the pronunciation of the following word. Article usage is a key grammar area for all competitive exams. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: Though George is a honourable man his activities arouse suspicion. - Part (a): Though George is - Part (b): a honourable man - Part (c): his activities arouse suspicion - Part (d): No error We assume the pronunciation of honourable is the usual English pronunciation starting with a vowel sound. Concept / Approach: The rule is that a is used before words beginning with a consonant sound, and an is used before words beginning with a vowel sound. The word honourable starts with the letter h, but the h is silent in standard pronunciation, so the first sound is the vowel sound similar to o. Therefore, we must use an honourable man, not a honourable man. The rest of the sentence, including the contrast introduced by though, is correct. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine part (a) Though George is. This correctly introduces a concessive clause and is structurally sound. Step 2: Examine part (b) a honourable man. Here, the indefinite article a is placed before the adjective honourable. Step 3: Recall that honourable begins with a silent h, so the word effectively begins with a vowel sound. Step 4: Therefore, the article must be an, giving an honourable man as the correct phrase. Step 5: Examine part (c) his activities arouse suspicion. This clause correctly uses the plural noun activities and the present verb arouse to indicate ongoing suspicion. Step 6: Since only the article in part (b) is wrong, the error lies in part (b) only. Verification / Alternative check: A corrected version of the sentence is: Though George is an honourable man, his activities arouse suspicion. This form is grammatical, uses the correct article, and clearly expresses that there is a contrast between his reputation and his suspicious actions. Checking other similar examples, such as an honest man or an hour, confirms the same principle of using an before words where the initial consonant letter is silent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in part (a) only: The phrase Though George is is correct, so this is not the error. - Error in part (c) only: The clause his activities arouse suspicion correctly conveys meaning and follows proper subject verb agreement, so there is no error here. - No error in the sentence: This option would overlook the incorrect article before honourable, so it is not acceptable. - Error in more than one part: Only part (b) needs correction; the other parts are correct. Common Pitfalls: Students often focus on spelling instead of pronunciation when choosing a or an. They may think that because honourable begins with h, a is suitable. The key is to listen to the initial sound. Whenever the first sound is a vowel, an should be used, even if the word begins with a consonant letter that is silent. Practising with words like hour, honest, and honour can help fix this rule in memory. Final Answer: Correct option: Error in part (b) only.

Question 5

Error spotting in tense and modal usage: She told her teacher that she could not be able to attend the class the previous day because of heavy rains. Identify which part of the sentence is wrong or state that there is no error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines correct usage of modal verbs and expressions of ability in reported speech. The sentence describes a girl explaining to her teacher why she missed class. The phrase could not be able is faulty because it unnecessarily combines a modal verb with a separate expression of ability. Competitive exams frequently test this area to ensure that learners avoid redundant or ungrammatical combinations. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: She told her teacher that she could not be able to attend the class the previous day because of heavy rains. - The reporting clause is She told her teacher that. - The reported clause explains her inability to attend class due to heavy rain on the previous day. We assume a standard past time frame and formal written English. Concept / Approach: In English, we express inability in the past using either could not plus base verb or was not able to plus base verb. We do not combine these forms as could not be able to. The correct options are could not attend the class or was not able to attend the class. Therefore, the verb phrase could not be able to attend is redundant and ungrammatical. The remaining parts of the sentence, including the time expression the previous day, are acceptable. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the reporting verb: told. This is correct for indirect speech in the past tense. Step 2: Examine the embedded clause beginning with that she could not be able to attend the class. Step 3: Recall the rule that could not already expresses inability, so we pair it with a base verb such as attend. Step 4: The correct alternatives are she could not attend the class or she was not able to attend the class. Step 5: The phrase the previous day correctly indicates a day before the time of reporting in indirect speech. Step 6: Because of heavy rains is also a correct causal expression. Hence the only error lies in the verb phrase could not be able to attend the class. Verification / Alternative check: We can construct two corrected versions for verification: Correct version 1: She told her teacher that she could not attend the class the previous day because of heavy rains. Correct version 2: She told her teacher that she was not able to attend the class the previous day because of heavy rains. Both versions are grammatical and convey exactly the same meaning as intended. In both cases the redundancy is removed, confirming that the original phrase could not be able was wrong. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in the time expression the previous day only: The time reference is correct for reported speech referring to yesterday, so this is not an error. - No error in any part of the sentence: This ignores the clearly redundant and ungrammatical form could not be able, so it is incorrect. - Error in both the verb phrase and the time expression: As the time phrase is correct, claiming two errors is wrong. - Error in the reporting verb told only: Told is the normal past tense form used for reporting, so there is no problem with this verb. Common Pitfalls: A common learner mistake is to assume that combining different expressions of inability makes a statement stronger, so they produce forms like could not be able or did not could. However, English prefers clear, single structures. When using a modal like can or could, follow it directly with the main verb. When using be able to, use it with appropriate tense of be and do not add another modal in front. Regular practice with pairs such as can attend and am able to attend, or could attend and was able to attend, can help avoid this redundancy. Final Answer: Correct option: Error in the verb phrase could not be able to attend the class.

Question 6

Error spotting in idiomatic expression: He courted arrest in order to protest against corruption among the government servants. Identify which part of the original sentence was wrong and how it should be corrected.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of idiomatic verbal expressions in English, especially the expression to court arrest. The sentence describes a person deliberately getting himself arrested in order to protest against corruption. The problem lies in the use of the passive form with this particular idiom. Understanding which verbs naturally take passive forms and which remain active is an important part of mastering English usage. Given Data / Assumptions: - Original sentence: He was courted arrest in order to protest against corruption among the government servants. - The structure attempts to use court arrest to show deliberate acceptance of arrest for a cause. - We assume the sentence is intended to describe civil disobedience or similar protest action. Concept / Approach: The idiom is to court arrest, which means to deliberately invite arrest or risk being arrested. It is used in the active voice, with the person as the subject and arrest as the object. We say He courted arrest, not He was courted arrest. The passive structure is ungrammatical and clashes with the meaning of the idiom. On the other hand, the purpose clause in order to protest against corruption among the government servants is grammatically correct and clearly expresses motive. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the initial part He was courted arrest. Here, was is the auxiliary for the passive voice and courted arrest is treated as a past participle phrase. Step 2: Recall the idiomatic form to court arrest, which is normally used as a simple active verb phrase with the structure subject plus verb plus object. Step 3: Recognise that making it passive would require arrest to become the subject, for example Arrest was courted by him, which sounds very unnatural and is not the form used in practice. Step 4: Therefore, the correct opening should be He courted arrest. Step 5: Examine the rest of the sentence in order to protest against corruption among the government servants. This part correctly expresses the purpose and the object of protest. Step 6: We conclude that the only error lies in the use of the passive was courted arrest. Verification / Alternative check: A corrected version of the full sentence is: He courted arrest in order to protest against corruption among the government servants. This form is often seen in news reports and editorials about activists. Another check is to replace the idiom with a simpler verb: He got himself arrested in order to protest against corruption. This has exactly the same meaning and clearly shows that the original intent was active, not passive. This confirms our identification of the error. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - The phrase in order to protest against is incorrect: This expression is fully standard; in order to clearly marks purpose, and protest against is the correct verb plus preposition combination. - The phrase among the government servants is incorrect: Among correctly shows that corruption exists within the group of government servants, so there is no grammatical or usage error here. - There is no error anywhere in the sentence: This option would accept a non standard passive form and ignore the idiomatic rule for court arrest, so it is wrong. - Both the protest phrase and the servants phrase are wrong: As both of these segments are grammatically sound, this option is also incorrect. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes try to change every action verb into the passive without checking whether the result is idiomatic. Some fixed expressions resist passive transformation because their typical usage is strongly active. Remember that to court arrest, to court disaster, and similar expressions like to court trouble are normally kept in the active voice. When in doubt, consult examples from reliable sources and observe how these idioms are actually used. Final Answer: Correct option: The passive form was courted arrest is incorrect.

Question 7

Error spotting in a complex sentence with however: Mr. Joshi was, however, sure that the idea would never work in practice. Decide whether there is any grammatical error in any part of the sentence.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks correct use of the conjunctive adverb however, the structure of a that clause, and the phrase in practice. The sentence describes Mr Joshi's firm belief that a particular idea would fail when applied in real life. Candidates must decide whether any part of this complex sentence violates standard grammar or punctuation conventions. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: Mr. Joshi was, however, sure that the idea would never work in practice. - However is placed between commas after the verb was. - The that clause explains his belief about the idea working in real life. We assume that the sentence appears in a formal context like a report or an analysis. Concept / Approach: The word however can function as a conjunctive adverb inserted between commas to show contrast with previous information. It is common to place however after the verb be in such a structure. The clause that the idea would never work in practice is a correct object clause following sure, and in practice correctly refers to real world application as opposed to theory. Therefore, all parts of the sentence are grammatically acceptable and idiomatic. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine the subject and verb: Mr. Joshi was. This is a correct combination of subject and past tense of be. Step 2: Look at the insertion of however: was, however, sure. The commas around however correctly mark it as a parenthetical adverbial indicating contrast. Step 3: Consider the object complement sure that the idea would never work in practice. Sure can be followed by a that clause indicating the content of belief. Step 4: The clause that the idea would never work in practice is well formed, with the modal would expressing prediction about the future from a past perspective. Step 5: The phrase in practice is standard for discussing how something performs when actually tried, as opposed to in theory. Step 6: Since no segment violates grammatical rules, we conclude there is no error in the sentence. Verification / Alternative check: We can slightly rephrase the sentence to test its correctness: However, Mr. Joshi was sure that the idea would never work in practice. This alternative positions however at the beginning but keeps the same basic structure and shows that the original internal placement is also legitimate. We can also remove the parenthetical commas: Mr. Joshi was sure that the idea would never work in practice, which is entirely grammatical. These checks confirm that the given sentence is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in the placement of however after was: However is often placed in the middle of a sentence with commas, and its position here is acceptable. - Error in the clause that the idea would never work: This clause is correctly constructed and uses would to indicate a belief about an outcome, so no error exists here. - Error in the phrase in practice: In practice is a standard phrase contrasting theory and application, so it is not wrong. - Error in more than one part of the sentence: Because no part needs correction, claiming multiple errors is clearly incorrect. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes feel unsure about the placement of however and overcorrect by moving it unnecessarily. They may also suspect an error whenever a sentence looks slightly more formal or contains insertions with commas. It is important to recognise that not every complex sentence has a mistake. Being able to accept a well formed sentence and confidently choose No error is a crucial exam skill. Final Answer: Correct option: No error in the sentence.

Question 8

Error spotting in reported speech: As I was leaving for Delhi, he asked me whether I could buy a tape recorder for him. Decide whether there is any grammatical error in any part of this sentence.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines correct tense usage and clause structure in indirect speech. The sentence describes a situation where the speaker was about to travel to Delhi and another person made a request. The learner must check whether the time clause, the reporting clause, and the embedded request clause are all grammatically correct. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: As I was leaving for Delhi, he asked me whether I could buy a tape recorder for him. - The sentence begins with a time clause introduced by As. - The main clause contains the reporting verb asked and a whether clause representing a polite request. We assume a narrative context where the speaker is describing a past event. Concept / Approach: As I was leaving for Delhi is a correct time clause in the past continuous tense, showing an action in progress when something else happened. The verb asked can take an indirect question introduced by whether, and could is an appropriate modal in reported speech to show a polite request at the time of asking. The noun tape recorder is a standard object, and for him is the correct phrase to indicate the beneficiary. No part of the sentence violates grammar rules. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check the opening clause As I was leaving for Delhi. As is a suitable conjunction for showing time overlap, and was leaving is correct past continuous. Step 2: Examine the main clause he asked me whether. The verb asked followed by object me and the conjunction whether is a standard pattern for indirect questions. Step 3: Look at the content clause I could buy a tape recorder for him. The modal could is consistent with the past time reporting and expresses ability or willingness politely. Step 4: The object a tape recorder is grammatically correct, and the phrase for him correctly indicates on whose behalf the purchase would be made. Step 5: Combining all parts, the full sentence reads naturally and follows accepted rules for tense sequence and clause formation. Step 6: Therefore, there is no grammatical error in any part of the sentence. Verification / Alternative check: We can convert the sentence back into direct speech to verify it: As I was leaving for Delhi, he said to me, Can you buy a tape recorder for me. Turning this into indirect speech gives exactly the form in the question. This back and forth conversion confirms that the tense of could, the conjunction whether, and the rest of the structure are appropriate. Another variation might use if instead of whether, but whether is especially suitable when the choice is between yes and no, so the original is fully acceptable. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in As I was leaving for Delhi: This is a well formed time clause, so no error exists here. - Error in he asked me whether: This is the correct pattern for reported questions and polite requests, so it is grammatically sound. - Error in I could buy a tape recorder for him: The clause is correct and uses a natural choice of modal for indirect speech. - Error in more than one part of the sentence: Because no part needs correction, this option cannot be chosen. Common Pitfalls: Candidates may suspect errors simply because the sentence is slightly long and contains several clauses. They might also think that whether should be replaced by if or that could must be changed to would. However, in indirect speech many modal choices are possible, and could is often used to convey polite requests. It is important not to change correct sentences without a clear rule that has been violated. Final Answer: Correct option: No error in the sentence.

Question 9

Error spotting with numbered parts: I was taken with surprise when I saw the beautiful Taj Mahal. Identify which numbered part of the sentence contains the error, or choose No error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of idiomatic prepositional usage in English. The sentence describes the speaker's reaction on seeing the Taj Mahal. The phrase taken with surprise is not the correct idiom in English; the standard expression is taken by surprise. Recognising fixed expressions and their correct prepositions is an important skill in competitive English exams. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence broken into parts: Part (1): I was taken with surprise Part (2): when I saw Part (3): the beautiful Taj Mahal. Part (4): No error We assume the intended meaning is that the speaker was suddenly and unexpectedly surprised. Concept / Approach: The idiomatic phrase is to be taken by surprise, which means to be surprised unexpectedly. The preposition with does not collocate correctly with taken in this sense. The rest of the sentence, including the time clause when I saw and the phrase the beautiful Taj Mahal, is correct. Therefore, the error lies only in the first part of the sentence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine part (1) I was taken with surprise. Here the structure is passive: was taken with surprise. Step 2: Recall the correct idiom: to be taken by surprise. The preposition by is always used in this phrase. Step 3: Therefore, part (1) should read I was taken by surprise. Step 4: Look at part (2) when I saw. This is a correct time clause introducing the event of seeing. Step 5: Check part (3) the beautiful Taj Mahal. The noun phrase correctly includes the article and the proper noun Taj Mahal. Step 6: Since parts (2) and (3) are correct and only the preposition in part (1) is wrong, the error is confined to part (1). Verification / Alternative check: A corrected version of the full sentence is: I was taken by surprise when I saw the beautiful Taj Mahal. This version reads smoothly and matches common usage found in reliable English texts. We can test similar expressions like taken by storm and taken by force, where by is also required. This pattern supports the choice of by rather than with in the idiom. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in part (2) only: When I saw is a perfectly correct clause and needs no change. - Error in part (3) only: The noun phrase the beautiful Taj Mahal is correct in both grammar and capitalization. - No error in the sentence: This would wrongly accept a non idiomatic preposition and must therefore be rejected. - Error in more than one part: Only the first part requires correction, so this option is incorrect. Common Pitfalls: Learners often confuse prepositions with similar meanings such as with, by, and in. They may also translate literally from another language, producing awkward combinations. Remember that many English phrases are fixed idioms, and their prepositions cannot be changed freely. Learning common expressions like by chance, by mistake, and by surprise can greatly reduce errors in such questions. Final Answer: Correct option: Error in part (1) only.

Question 10

Error spotting with numbered parts: I finished my household chores before he reached to my place after so long. Identify the numbered part which contains the error, or choose No error.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines correct verb and preposition combinations in English. The sentence describes a person finishing household chores before someone arrived after a long time. The main issue is the incorrect use of the preposition to after the verb reached. Recognising which verbs take no preposition before an object is essential for correct and natural English. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence divided into parts: Part (1): I finished my household chores Part (2): before he reached to my place Part (3): after so long. Part (4): No error We assume that the intended meaning is that the chores were completed before his arrival at the speaker's place. Concept / Approach: The verb reach is a transitive verb, which means it normally takes a direct object without a preposition. We say reach my place, reach the station, or reach home, not reach to my place. Therefore, the insertion of to after reached is grammatically wrong. The other parts of the sentence, including the time clause before he reached and the phrase after so long, are acceptable. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Examine part (1) I finished my household chores. This is a correct past tense statement with a clear object. Step 2: Examine part (2) before he reached to my place. The conjunction before is correct, but the combination reached to my place is not. Step 3: Recall the correct usage: reach takes its object directly, so we must say reached my place. Step 4: Therefore, part (2) should be corrected to before he reached my place. Step 5: Examine part (3) after so long. This phrase naturally expresses that a long time had passed since the last visit. Step 6: Since only the verb plus preposition pattern in part (2) is wrong, the error is confined to part (2). Verification / Alternative check: We can rewrite the sentence correctly as: I finished my household chores before he reached my place after so long. The verb now directly governs the object my place without an extra preposition. Another good check is to compare with similar verbs: arrive at my place requires a preposition, but reach my place does not. This comparison confirms that the original use of to was unnecessary and incorrect. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Error in part (1) only: The clause I finished my household chores is fully correct; there is no error here. - Error in part (3) only: The phrase after so long is idiomatic and grammatically sound, so part (3) is not wrong. - No error in the sentence: This would accept reached to my place as correct English, which it is not, so this option must be rejected. - Error in more than one part: Only part (2) requires correction, so multiple errors is not a valid judgment. Common Pitfalls: Learners often overuse prepositions because many verbs do require them. The influence of other verbs like go to or travel to may lead someone to say reach to. A helpful strategy is to memorise common verbs that take direct objects without prepositions, such as reach a place, discuss a topic, or enter a room. This reduces preposition-related mistakes in competitive exams. Final Answer: Correct option: Error in part (2) only.

Question 11

Fill in the blank with the correct word: Being a _____ doctor, he never shirks work. Choose the most appropriate option to complete the sentence.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a vocabulary based fill in the blank question. The sentence describes a doctor who never shirks work, meaning he always does his duty faithfully. The word needed must match this meaning and grammatically fit between a and doctor. Such questions assess a learner's understanding of the nuances between similar looking words, especially those related to character and behaviour. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: Being a _____ doctor, he never shirks work. - Options: conscious, conscience, conscientious, consensus, considerate. We assume that the sentence is praising the doctor's dedication to his duty and sense of responsibility. Concept / Approach: The clue is in the second half of the sentence: he never shirks work. This suggests that the doctor is careful, dutiful, and sincere about his responsibilities. The adjective that expresses this quality is conscientious, which means governed by a strong sense of duty and moral responsibility. The other options either do not function as adjectives in this position or have different meanings, so they cannot complete the sentence logically or grammatically. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider conscious. This adjective means aware or awake, as in conscious patient. It does not directly convey the idea of never shirking work. Step 2: Consider conscience. This is a noun meaning inner sense of right and wrong, not an adjective. Being a conscience doctor is grammatically wrong. Step 3: Consider conscientious. This adjective means careful to do what one ought to do, thorough, and diligent. Being a conscientious doctor fits the context perfectly. Step 4: Consider consensus. This is a noun meaning general agreement. It cannot be used before doctor in this way. Step 5: Consider considerate. This adjective means thoughtful of others feelings, which is positive but does not directly connect with never shirks work as clearly as conscientious does. Step 6: Therefore, conscientious is the only option that is both grammatically and semantically ideal. Verification / Alternative check: Substitute each option into the sentence for a quick check: Being a conscientious doctor, he never shirks work sounds natural and logically consistent. Being a conscious doctor, he never shirks work is possible but usually conscious is used of patients, not of professional dedication. Being a conscience doctor and Being a consensus doctor are clearly wrong. Being a considerate doctor, he never shirks work is somewhat plausible but focuses on kindness rather than diligence. Thus conscientious remains the strongest and most precise choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - conscious: Means awake or aware, not necessarily hard working or dutiful, so it is less accurate. - conscience: A noun, not an adjective, so it does not fit grammatically before doctor. - consensus: A noun meaning general agreement, completely unrelated to personal work ethic. - considerate: Describes thoughtfulness toward others, which is good but not the main idea of never shirks work. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse conscience, conscious, and conscientious because they look and sound similar. Remember: conscience is the inner moral voice, conscious means awake or aware, and conscientious describes someone who follows their conscience carefully and works diligently. Keeping these distinct meanings in mind will help you choose the right word in exam questions. Final Answer: Correct option: conscientious.

Question 12

Fill in the blank with correct preposition: The meeting was presided _____ by the Chairman. Choose the option that best completes the standard English expression.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of fixed verb preposition combinations, also called collocations. The sentence describes a formal meeting and asks which preposition correctly follows presided to form a natural English phrase. Such collocations are frequently tested because they cannot be deduced purely from literal meaning and must be learned through exposure and practice. Given Data / Assumptions: - Sentence: The meeting was presided _____ by the Chairman. - Options: over, upon, of, in, about. We assume that the Chairman was in charge of the meeting and led its proceedings. Concept / Approach: The standard English collocation is preside over a meeting, a ceremony, or a function. When the passive voice is used, we say The meeting was presided over by the Chairman. None of the other prepositions fit naturally with preside in this context. Therefore, over is the correct choice to complete the sentence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the base active structure: The Chairman presided over the meeting. Step 2: In the passive voice, the object meeting becomes the subject: The meeting was presided over by the Chairman. Step 3: Check the preposition alternatives: presided upon, presided of, presided in, and presided about are all non standard in this meaning. Step 4: Over is the only preposition that collocates correctly with presided in the sense of taking charge of formal proceedings. Step 5: Therefore, we fill the blank with over to form a natural and grammatically correct sentence. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify by using other similar expressions: preside over a court, preside over a function, preside over a meeting. Dictionaries and grammar references consistently show over as the preposition that follows preside when it has this meaning. Replacing over with any other option results in a phrase that native speakers do not use in formal English. This confirms over as the correct answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - upon: Preside upon is not an established collocation in this context. - of: Preside of is ungrammatical in standard English for this meaning. - in: While we can say in the meeting, presided in the meeting is not correct usage. - about: Preside about has no accepted meaning related to chairing a meeting. Common Pitfalls: Students often try to guess prepositions based on general meaning or their first language. With verbs like preside, rely, depend, complain, and object, the safest approach is to memorise the correct preposition: preside over, rely on, depend on, complain about, object to. Becoming familiar with these combinations through reading and practice reduces errors in exams. Final Answer: Correct option: over.

Question 13

Synonym question: In the following question, select the word similar in meaning to Vacillate from the given options.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This vocabulary question asks you to choose a word similar in meaning to Vacillate. It tests your understanding of subtle differences between words related to decision making and stability. Vacillate is often used to describe someone who cannot decide between alternatives and keeps changing their mind. Given Data / Assumptions: - Target word: Vacillate. - Options: Continue, Playful, Conclusive, Irresolute, Steady. We assume that the question follows standard dictionary meanings used in competitive examinations. Concept / Approach: Vacillate is a verb meaning to waver in mind or opinion, to be indecisive, or to swing between different courses of action. The closest idea in the options is expressed by the adjective Irresolute, which describes a person who lacks resolution and cannot decide firmly. The other options either describe continuity, playfulness, finality, or stability, none of which match the sense of wavering or indecision. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Define Vacillate: to waver between different opinions or actions, to be unable to decide. Step 2: Examine Continue. This means to go on doing something without stopping, which is almost the opposite of hesitation. Step 3: Examine Playful. This means full of fun and high spirits, linked to mood rather than decision making. Step 4: Examine Conclusive. This means decisive or final, leaving no doubt, which is again opposite to vacillating. Step 5: Examine Irresolute. This means lacking resolution, uncertain how to act, or unable to make up one's mind. Step 6: Examine Steady. This means firm, stable, and not changing much, which is also opposite to vacillating. Step 7: Among the options, only Irresolute describes the state of mind that naturally leads to vacillation. Verification / Alternative check: We can test the words in example sentences. Someone who vacillates over a decision is clearly being irresolute. We might say He vacillated for hours about whether to accept the job, or He remained irresolute for hours about whether to accept the job. In both cases, the idea of indecision is clear. On the other hand, Continue, Conclusive, and Steady suggest firmness and persistence, which contradict the notion of wavering. Playful focuses on a different semantic field, related to behaviour and emotion rather than decision making. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Continue: Suggests going ahead without hesitation, the opposite of vacillation. - Playful: Refers to a light hearted, fun loving attitude, not indecision. - Conclusive: Means decisive or final, the opposite of wavering in judgment. - Steady: Means firm and stable, which contrasts with the idea of moving back and forth mentally. Common Pitfalls: Learners may be tempted by Conclusive because they associate both words with decisions. However, vacillate describes an undecided state, while conclusive describes a final, decided result. It is also important to notice that the answer is an adjective, Irresolute, while Vacillate is a verb. In synonym questions, exam setters sometimes match a verb with a closely related adjective if that option best captures the meaning. Focus on the core idea rather than the exact part of speech. Final Answer: Correct option: Irresolute.

Question 14

Synonym question: In the following question, select the word similar in meaning to Indomitable from the given options.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This vocabulary question asks for a word similar in meaning to Indomitable. The word typically describes a spirit, will, or courage that cannot be subdued. Understanding this term is important for reading literary and inspirational texts, where it is commonly used to praise strong character. Given Data / Assumptions: - Target word: Indomitable. - Options: Unconquerable, Conflicting, Falsification, Intermittent, Submissive. We assume standard dictionary meanings and typical exam usage. Concept / Approach: Indomitable literally means that which cannot be tamed or subdued. It is often used in phrases like indomitable spirit or indomitable courage. The closest meaning among the options is Unconquerable, which directly captures the idea of not being able to be defeated or overcome. The remaining options describe conflict, falseness, irregularity, or obedience, none of which match the idea of strength that resists defeat. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Define Indomitable: impossible to subdue or defeat, very strong and determined. Step 2: Examine Unconquerable. This means that cannot be conquered, defeated, or overcome, which is very close in meaning. Step 3: Examine Conflicting. This refers to things that are in opposition or disagreement, not to strength or determination. Step 4: Examine Falsification. This means the act of making something false, often connected with deceit, and is unrelated to strength of will. Step 5: Examine Intermittent. This means stopping and starting at intervals, irregular in time, which again has no link to being undefeatable. Step 6: Examine Submissive. This means ready to submit, obedient, or yielding easily, which is actually opposite in spirit to indomitable. Step 7: Therefore, Unconquerable is the only option that faithfully reflects the meaning of Indomitable. Verification / Alternative check: Use the words in sentences for comparison. We can say She had an indomitable spirit in the face of hardship, or She had an unconquerable spirit in the face of hardship. Both sentences convey the same idea of strength that cannot be defeated. In contrast, saying She had a conflicting spirit, an intermittent spirit, or a submissive spirit changes the meaning substantially. This comparison confirms that Unconquerable is the best synonym. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Conflicting: Refers to disagreement or opposition between ideas or interests, not to personal courage or determination. - Falsification: Relates to making something false or forging evidence, unrelated to strength of character. - Intermittent: Describes something that happens at irregular intervals, not a constant strong will. - Submissive: Describes someone who easily yields to others, which is almost the opposite of indomitable. Common Pitfalls: Students may misinterpret Indomitable as simply strong or loud, or confuse it with terms related to conflict (like conflicting) because of the syllable dom which appears in other words. It helps to break the word into in plus domitable, where domitable is related to taming or subduing. Thinking of indomitable as not tameable or not conquerable makes the correct synonym easier to recognise. Final Answer: Correct option: Unconquerable.

Question 15

Antonym question: In the following question, select the word opposite in meaning to Extenuate from the given options.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to select the word opposite in meaning to Extenuate. The word Extenuate is often used in legal or moral contexts where someone tries to make an offence or mistake seem less serious. Knowing its meaning and antonyms helps in understanding argumentative and persuasive texts. Given Data / Assumptions: - Target word: Extenuate. - Options: Strengthen, Enfeeble, Abate, Acquit, Lessen. We assume that the exam is using the common sense of the verb extenuate as to make something seem less serious or to reduce its apparent severity. Concept / Approach: Extenuate means to make an offence, fault, or problem seem less serious by providing excuses or by downplaying it. In a broader sense, it is similar to mitigate or lessen. Therefore, an antonym must express the idea of making something more serious, stronger, or more severe. Among the options, Strengthen best captures the opposite idea, especially in the sense of strengthening a charge or strengthening the impression of seriousness. The other options mostly express weakening or lessening and are therefore closer to synonyms. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Define Extenuate: to reduce the apparent seriousness of an offence or to make something seem less severe. Step 2: Examine Strengthen. This means to make stronger, more forceful, or more intense. Step 3: Examine Enfeeble. This means to make weak or feeble, which is similar to reducing strength. Step 4: Examine Abate. This means to reduce in amount, degree, or intensity, also similar to lessening. Step 5: Examine Acquit. This means to declare someone not guilty of a criminal charge, which is related to judgment, not to the degree of seriousness of an act. Step 6: Examine Lessen. This directly means to reduce in size, degree, or importance and is a near synonym of Extenuate. Step 7: Since Extenuate is about reducing seriousness, the opposite idea of strengthening the seriousness or impact is most clearly expressed by Strengthen. Verification / Alternative check: Consider example sentences: The lawyer attempted to extenuate the client's guilt by pointing to difficult childhood circumstances. The opposite situation would be The lawyer attempted to strengthen the case against the client by highlighting every damaging fact. Here, extenuate softens the perception of guilt, while strengthen intensifies it. Words like Enfeeble, Abate, and Lessen also move in the direction of reducing strength or severity and so are closer to Extenuate rather than opposite to it. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Enfeeble: Means to make weak, which is similar in direction to making something less strong or serious. - Abate: Means to become less intense or to reduce, again aligning with the sense of lessening. - Acquit: Means to declare not guilty, which may remove guilt entirely but does not reflect the opposite of trying to reduce seriousness; it is a different legal act. - Lessen: Directly means to reduce; this is almost a synonym of Extenuate rather than an antonym. Common Pitfalls: Candidates may choose Acquit because it is a legal term that appears near Extenuate in some contexts, but the relationship is not one of direct opposition. Others may be distracted by words that simply involve weakness or reduction without considering the direction of meaning. Remember that antonym questions demand the word that moves the idea in the opposite direction. Since Extenuate reduces the impression of seriousness, its antonym should increase or strengthen that impression. Final Answer: Correct option: Strengthen.

Question 16

Antonym question: In the following question, select the word opposite in meaning to Fecund from the given options.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to select the word opposite in meaning to Fecund. The word is used both in literal contexts, such as fertile land, and in figurative contexts, such as a fecund imagination. A good understanding of its meaning and antonym is useful in reading descriptive and analytical passages. Given Data / Assumptions: - Target word: Fecund. - Options: Prolific, Sterile, Necessitate, Turmoil, Fruitful. We assume that the test is using the most common sense of Fecund, which relates to fertility and productivity. Concept / Approach: Fecund means highly fertile or very productive in terms of offspring, crops, ideas, or artistic creation. It is close in meaning to Prolific and Fruitful. Therefore, its antonym must refer to the absence of fertility or productivity. Among the options, Sterile directly means unable to produce offspring or incapable of producing results, making it the clear opposite. The other options either share similar meanings with Fecund or are unrelated. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Define Fecund: capable of producing abundant offspring, vegetation, or ideas; very fertile or productive. Step 2: Examine Prolific. This means producing much fruit, foliage, or many offspring, and is therefore a synonym, not an antonym. Step 3: Examine Sterile. This means not able to produce children or young, or in a broader sense, not productive. Step 4: Examine Necessitate. This verb means to make something necessary, and is unrelated to fertility or productivity. Step 5: Examine Turmoil. This noun means a state of great disturbance or confusion, again unrelated to fecundity. Step 6: Examine Fruitful. This means producing good or helpful results, successful, or literally bearing fruit, and is thus another synonym of Fecund. Step 7: Sterile, meaning barren or unproductive, clearly stands as the opposite of Fecund. Verification / Alternative check: Consider example phrases: fecund soil can support many crops, fecund imagination produces many ideas. The opposite phrases would be sterile soil, which cannot support crops, or sterile imagination, which does not produce creative ideas. Prolific and Fruitful, in contrast, would fit in the same sentences as Fecund, reinforcing that they are synonyms. Necessitate and Turmoil do not form natural opposite pairs with Fecund in any context. Why Other Options Are Wrong: - Prolific: Means highly productive or fertile, acting as a synonym of Fecund. - Necessitate: Means to make necessary, having no semantic relation to fertility. - Turmoil: Refers to confusion or disorder, unrelated to productivity or fertility. - Fruitful: Means productive or yielding good results, again very close in meaning to Fecund. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes choose Prolific or Fruitful because they recognise them as positive words from similar contexts, without noticing that the question asks for an opposite, not a similar word. It is crucial to read whether the question is about synonym or antonym. Remember Fecund equals fertile or productive, and Sterile equals barren or unproductive, making them natural opposites. Final Answer: Correct option: Sterile.

Question 17

In the following question, out of the four given alternatives, select the option which best expresses the meaning of the idiom or phrase “the thin end of the wedge”, that is, a small beginning that can later lead to a much larger and often harmful d…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests the meaning of a common English idiom, “the thin end of the wedge”. Idiom questions are very popular in competitive examinations because they check whether a candidate understands figurative language rather than only literal meanings. In real life communication, idioms like this are used to warn that a seemingly small action or decision may be the start of something much bigger and often harmful. Understanding this idiom helps learners interpret editorials, essays, and conversations that talk about gradual negative change in policies or social behaviour. Given Data / Assumptions: The idiom provided is “the thin end of the wedge”. We need to select the option that best expresses its intended figurative meaning. Four possible meanings are given as alternative options. We assume standard modern British or international English usage as found in newspapers and reference dictionaries. Concept / Approach: The idiom “the thin end of the wedge” comes from a physical wedge used to split wood or rock. A wedge has a thin edge and a thick body. Once the thin end is inserted into a small crack and hammered in, the wider end forces the gap to become larger and larger. In language, this image is used to describe a small, apparently harmless beginning that may open the way for more serious, damaging, or undesirable developments. Therefore, the correct meaning is about the start of a harmful development, not about vigilance, tricks, or possessions. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the metaphor behind a wedge. A wedge is a tool whose thin edge goes in first, then gradually allows the thicker part to force change. Step 2: Link this image to social or personal situations. A minor rule change, a small compromise, or a tiny concession can be the first step toward larger and more serious changes later. Step 3: Compare the options. Option B, “Start of harmful development”, directly matches this idea, because it captures the notion of a small beginning that leads to a bigger negative outcome. Step 4: Confirm that the other options do not match the idiom. They talk about vigilance, tricks, or possessions, none of which convey the idea of a gradual negative progression. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, imagine a sentence from a newspaper editorial: “Allowing private companies to monitor user data may seem harmless now, but it could be the thin end of the wedge.” Here, the writer clearly warns that a small step could lead to more serious privacy violations later. If we replace “the thin end of the wedge” with “start of harmful development”, the sentence still makes complete sense. Replacing it with “in strict vigilance” or “not a worthy possession” would distort the meaning. This confirms that the idiom refers to the first small step in a future harmful process. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “In strict vigilance” refers to careful watching or monitoring. The idiom does not talk about watching something, but about the beginning of a negative trend. Option C: “Be aware of the trick” suggests noticing a deception or trick. The idiom is not directly about a trick; it is about a small beginning that leads to larger consequences. Option D: “Not a worthy possession” talks about value or worth of an object. The idiom does not refer to an object or ownership, so this option is unrelated. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes misinterpret idioms word by word. They may think of “thin” as referring to physical thinness, or they may connect “wedge” with being stuck, and then guess a completely different meaning. Another common error is to pick an option that sounds vaguely negative without fully matching the idiom, such as something about tricks or unworthy possessions. In idiom questions, always recall the well known figurative meaning from usage, not from literal translation of individual words. Regular reading of quality English texts helps to fix these idioms in memory. Final Answer: The idiom “the thin end of the wedge” means the start of harmful development, that is, a small beginning that can lead to much bigger and more serious negative changes later.

Question 18

In the following question, out of the four given alternatives, choose the option which best expresses the meaning of the idiom or phrase “to accept the gauntlet”, a traditional expression related to honour and challenge.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks the candidate understanding of a classical English idiom that has its origin in medieval customs. “To accept the gauntlet” is often used in literature, speeches, and exam passages when someone agrees to face a difficult task, competition, or conflict. Knowing the precise meaning helps aspirants interpret narrative passages and answer idiom based questions accurately in competitive examinations. Given Data / Assumptions: The idiom in focus is “to accept the gauntlet”. Four possible explanations are given as answer choices. We assume standard historical and modern English usage. The task is to pick the meaning that best matches the idiom as commonly used. Concept / Approach: The word “gauntlet” refers to an armoured glove worn by knights. In medieval times, a knight who wanted to challenge another would throw his gauntlet on the ground. If the other knight picked up the gauntlet, he accepted the challenge, usually for a duel or combat. Because of this practice, the expression “to throw down the gauntlet” came to mean to issue a challenge, and “to accept the gauntlet” came to mean to accept that challenge. Therefore, the idiom is about readiness to face a contest or difficulty, not about defeat, fate, or hidden meanings. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Break down the historical image: a warrior throws a metal glove, another warrior picks it up. Step 2: Understand that picking up the glove symbolised agreement to fight or compete, that is, acceptance of a challenge. Step 3: Map this image to modern situations, where people use the idiom when someone confidently agrees to face a difficult exam, a debate, or a demanding project. Step 4: Compare the answer choices and select the one that directly expresses “accepting a challenge”. Verification / Alternative check: Consider a sentence such as “When the rival company announced a massive discount campaign, our firm accepted the gauntlet and launched an even more aggressive strategy.” If we replace “accepted the gauntlet” with “accepted challenge”, the sentence meaning remains complete and natural. Replacing it with “accepted defeat” would be contradictory, because accepting defeat means surrendering, not fighting back. Replacing it with “accepted what is written in fate” would suggest passive resignation, which again conflicts with the active, courageous tone of the idiom. This check confirms that the idiom clearly refers to accepting a challenge. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B: “To accept defeat” is the opposite spirit of the idiom. Accepting the gauntlet means preparing to fight, not surrendering. Option C: “To accept what is written in fate” describes fatalism or passive acceptance of destiny, which does not match the active, combative nature of the idiom. Option D: “To be able to grasp the hidden meaning” refers to understanding subtle ideas. The idiom does not relate to interpretation, but to competition or conflict. Common Pitfalls: Candidates sometimes confuse “gauntlet” with “gamut” or other similar sounding words, leading to wrong guesses. Another pitfall is to focus on the word “accept” and choose an answer related to acceptance of fate or defeat. However, one must always connect idioms to their cultural and historical roots. Reading classic literature and good quality editorials helps fix such idioms in long term memory. When in doubt, try to recall the original image: a knight picking up a thrown glove to show readiness to fight. That picture will guide you to the correct meaning every time. Final Answer: The idiom “to accept the gauntlet” means to accept challenge, that is, to agree to face a test, fight, or competition bravely.

Question 19

Improve the underlined part of the sentence by choosing the most appropriate option: “The (reason of) her outburst at the party is yet unknown to anyone present.”

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks knowledge of correct preposition usage with the noun “reason”. Such sentence improvement questions are common in competitive exams because many learners use incorrect prepositions due to direct translation from their mother tongue. The aim is to identify which phrase sounds natural and grammatically correct in standard English when describing the cause of an event like an emotional outburst at a party. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “The reason of her outburst in the party is yet unknown.” The underlined phrase is “reason of”. We must select the most suitable replacement among the given options. We assume normal conversational and written English standards used in formal contexts. Concept / Approach: In English, certain nouns collocate naturally with particular prepositions. The noun “reason” is usually followed by the preposition “for” when we talk about the cause of an action, event, or feeling, as in “reason for his success” or “reason for the delay”. The phrase “reason of” is very rare and generally not accepted in standard formal English for this meaning. Prepositions “to” and “on” do not fit directly after “reason” in this sense. Therefore, “reason for” is the correct and idiomatic choice in this context. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the relationship expressed by the phrase. We are talking about the cause of her outburst, so we need a preposition that links “reason” to the action. Step 2: Recall common patterns: “reason for something” and “reason why something happens” are widely accepted forms. Step 3: Replace “reason of” with each option and check for naturalness: “reason for her outburst” sounds correct and standard. Step 4: Confirm that the other options do not fit formal usage, then choose “reason for”. Verification / Alternative check: We can check usage by forming a few more sentences. For example, “Nobody knows the reason for his absence from the meeting” and “What is the reason for this delay” are clearly correct. If we replace “for” with “of” in such sentences, they sound awkward and non standard. The same logic applies to the sentence in the question. Professional writers, teachers, and high quality grammar references consistently prefer “reason for” when specifying the cause of an action. This independent check supports our choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B: “reason to” is used in patterns like “reason to worry” or “reason to celebrate”, where it is followed by a verb. Here we have a noun phrase “her outburst”, so “reason to her outburst” is wrong. Option C: “reason on” is not a standard collocation in this sense. It does not occur in formal English to express cause. Option D: “No improvement” would keep “reason of”, which is not natural or idiomatic in standard grammar for this context. Common Pitfalls: Many learners rely on direct translation from regional languages, which often use a structure equivalent to “reason of” or “cause of”. While “cause of” is correct in English, “reason of” is not, so confusion arises. Another pitfall is ignoring collocations and only thinking in terms of dictionary meanings of prepositions. In exams, always recall how educated native and proficient speakers usually form such phrases: “reason for”, “cause of”, “effect on” and so on. Building a list of such common patterns can significantly increase accuracy in sentence improvement questions. Final Answer: The correct improvement is “reason for”, so the sentence should read “The reason for her outburst at the party is yet unknown.”

Question 20

Improve the underlined part of the sentence by choosing the most appropriate option: “I left my job because I did not (agree to) the company appraisal policies.”

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on correct preposition use with the verb “agree”. In English, “agree” combines with different prepositions depending on what follows, and examination questions often test these subtle differences. Here, the sentence is about a person not sharing the same opinion as the appraisal policies of a company. Choosing the correct preposition helps the sentence sound natural and grammatically accurate in formal communication such as reports, letters, and interviews. Given Data / Assumptions: Original sentence: “I left my job because I did not agree to the company appraisal policies.” The underlined part is “agree to”. We have four options, including “No improvement”. The object after the verb is “the company appraisal policies”, that is, a set of rules or ideas. Concept / Approach: The verb “agree” can be used in several patterns. We generally use “agree with” to show that our opinions match those of a person, statement, idea, plan, or policy, for example, “I agree with you” or “I do not agree with this proposal”. We use “agree to” when we give formal consent to do something, such as “agree to the terms” or “agree to help”. We use “agree on” when people reach a common decision about a subject, as in “agree on a date”. Since the sentence talks about accepting or rejecting appraisal policies as ideas, “agree with the company appraisal policies” is the most accurate and idiomatic structure. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify what “agree” is linked to in the sentence. Here, it is linked to “the company appraisal policies”, which are a set of rules and ideas. Step 2: Recall that we generally say we “agree with” ideas, opinions, or policies when our views match them. Step 3: Test each option in the sentence: “agree with the company appraisal policies” sounds natural and widely used in formal English. Step 4: Decide that “agree with” is the correct improvement and reject the other alternatives. Verification / Alternative check: We can compare a few correct sentences. For instance, “Employees agree with the new bonus scheme” and “Many citizens do not agree with the new tax policy” both show the pattern “agree with” followed by policies or rules. On the other hand, we use “agree to” when there is an implied act of consent, such as “She agreed to the surgery” or “He agreed to work overtime”. In the question, the speaker is expressing disagreement with the fairness or suitability of appraisal policies, not refusal to sign a specific contract document, so “agree with” is ideal. This cross check confirms our choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A: “agree about” is used when people have the same opinion about a general topic, for example, “They agree about the need for reforms.” It is possible but less natural with a specific set of policies here, and exam usage prefers “agree with policies”. Option C: “agree on” is used when multiple people reach a joint decision on something, such as “agree on a date”. The sentence is not about a joint decision; it is about one person disagreeing with existing policies. Option D: “No improvement” retains “agree to the company appraisal policies”, which suggests formal consent to terms rather than general agreement. It is not the best choice for this context. Common Pitfalls: Learners often treat all prepositions after “agree” as interchangeable, which leads to awkward expressions. Another pitfall is thinking in terms of literal translation from other languages, where one preposition covers many English uses. In examinations, it is important to remember common collocation patterns: “agree with a person or idea”, “agree to a proposal or plan as consent”, and “agree on a matter when two sides reach the same decision”. Associating each pattern with clear example sentences helps fix them in memory and improves accuracy in questions of this type. Final Answer: The correct improvement is “agree with”, so the sentence should read: “I left my job because I did not agree with the company appraisal policies.”

English Questions