Question 1

Rearrange the parts of the sentence, labelled X, Y, and Z, to form a coherent sentence.  They had seen enough of the X: them to come a step farther Y: desert already, and no number Z: of knives would have tempted

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to the sentence arrangement type, where parts of a single sentence are labelled and jumbled. The task is to restore the logical and grammatically correct order. Here, the context is descriptive, describing people who have already experienced a harsh desert and will not be tempted to go further, no matter what is offered. Such questions check understanding of sentence flow, placement of clauses, and natural English rhythm. Given Data / Assumptions: The base sentence begins with They had seen enough of the and then the three labelled parts must be joined. X: them to come a step farther Y: desert already, and no number Z: of knives would have tempted The final sentence must be grammatically correct and meaningful. Concept / Approach: We first think about what logically follows the phrase They had seen enough of the. The word desert fits right after of the, and Y contains desert already, and no number, so Y is the best first choice among the segments. After Y, the phrase of knives would have tempted from Z connects smoothly to no number, because we commonly say no number of something would have tempted. That gives us YZ as a continuous stretch. Finally, X completes the idea, because tempted them to come a step farther is a natural continuation. So the coherent order of the labelled parts is Y, then Z, then X. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Attach each fragment mentally to the stem They had seen enough of the and test which sounds natural. Step 2: Notice that Y begins with desert already, and no number, which fits perfectly after of the, giving They had seen enough of the desert already, and no number. Step 3: Add Z next, forming no number of knives would have tempted, which is a correct and familiar phrase in English. Step 4: Add X at the end, producing would have tempted them to come a step farther, and verify that the full sentence now reads smoothly. Verification / Alternative check: The complete reconstructed sentence is They had seen enough of the desert already, and no number of knives would have tempted them to come a step farther. This sentence is grammatically correct and logically clear. If we try any other order, for example XZY or XYZ, we obtain unnatural or broken combinations such as They had seen enough of the them to come a step farther desert already or They had seen enough of the desert already, and no number them to come a step farther, which show obvious errors in meaning and structure. Therefore, YZX is the only order that works. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option YXZ yields They had seen enough of the desert already, and no number them to come a step farther of knives would have tempted, which is ungrammatical. Option XZY starts with them right after the, which breaks the phrase and leaves desert out of place. Option XYZ produces They had seen enough of the them to come a step farther desert already, and no number of knives would have tempted, which again is not standard English. Option ZXY puts of knives first after the, giving They had seen enough of the of knives would have tempted, which clearly fails both grammatically and logically. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to focus only on the meanings of individual fragments and ignore fixed patterns like no number of something would have tempted them. Another pitfall is to look at the labels in alphabetical order instead of testing actual sentence flow. In sentence arrangement questions, always start by identifying obvious collocations and fixed phrases, then build outwards from them. This approach generally leads to the correct ordering more reliably than random trial and error. Final Answer: The most logical order of the parts is YZX, giving the sentence They had seen enough of the desert already, and no number of knives would have tempted them to come a step farther.

Question 2

Rearrange the parts of the sentence, labelled X, Y, and Z, to form a coherent sentence.  Such are the strata which we X: species as those now living in the Mediterranean Y: meet with in the south of Sicily, filled Z: with shells for the most part of…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence arrangement question uses a more formal, almost scientific tone to describe geological strata. The sentence talks about layers of rock found in a particular region and what kind of shells they contain. Our job is to put the labelled parts X, Y, and Z in the correct order so that the sentence is grammatically correct and logically clear. Given Data / Assumptions: The given stem and labelled fragments are as follows. Stem: Such are the strata which we X: species as those now living in the Mediterranean Y: meet with in the south of Sicily, filled Z: with shells for the most part of the same The completed sentence must describe where such strata are found and what fills them. Concept / Approach: First, notice that the phrase meet with in the south of Sicily, filled, contained in Y, is a natural continuation after the relative clause marker which we. The structure which we meet with in the south of Sicily is grammatically sound. Next, Z begins with with shells for the most part of the same, and this naturally follows filled from Y to form filled with shells for the most part of the same. Finally, X gives species as those now living in the Mediterranean, which logically describes the shells mentioned in Z. So the most coherent order of the fragments is Y, Z, then X. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Attach each fragment mentally to the stem Such are the strata which we and test which start feels correct. Step 2: Observe that which we meet with in the south of Sicily, filled is a standard relative clause continuation, so Y fits immediately after the stem. Step 3: Add Z after Y to create the phrase filled with shells for the most part of the same, which describes the contents of the strata. Step 4: Place X at the end so that of the same species as those now living in the Mediterranean fully explains what kind of shells are being referred to. Verification / Alternative check: The reconstructed sentence reads Such are the strata which we meet with in the south of Sicily, filled with shells for the most part of the same species as those now living in the Mediterranean. This version is grammatically correct and expresses a clear scientific idea. If we try a different order, such as XYZ or XZY, we get awkward sequences like Such are the strata which we species as those now living in the Mediterranean meet with in the south of Sicily, filled, which are not acceptable. Therefore, YZX is the only ordering that produces a fluent and accurate sentence. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option YXZ gives Such are the strata which we meet with in the south of Sicily, filled species as those now living in the Mediterranean with shells for the most part of the same, which is ungrammatical and breaks the natural phrase filled with shells. Option XZY starts incorrectly with species as those now living in the Mediterranean right after which we, which does not make sense. Option XYZ and ZXY also result in broken or incomplete grammatical structures and do not maintain the logical progression from location to contents to species description. Common Pitfalls: Learners can be misled by the presence of the word species in X and try to place it earlier in the sentence, thinking it must appear closer to strata. However, English relies on smaller units such as fixed phrases and relative clause patterns. A better strategy for these questions is to identify which fragments complete a grammatical structure like meet with in or filled with and then add descriptive phrases afterwards. This method helps avoid guesswork and leads to the coherent YZX order. Final Answer: The correct order is YZX, giving the sentence Such are the strata which we meet with in the south of Sicily, filled with shells for the most part of the same species as those now living in the Mediterranean.

Question 3

Change the following sentence from Active to Passive voice. The movie critic wrote a sarcastic review.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests conversion between active and passive voice, a core grammar skill frequently examined in competitive tests. The original sentence is in simple past active voice and reports what the movie critic did. In passive voice, the focus shifts from the doer of the action to the receiver of the action, in this case the sarcastic review. Given Data / Assumptions: The active sentence and its key parts are as follows. Subject: The movie critic Verb: wrote Object: a sarcastic review The tense is simple past and must remain the same after conversion. Concept / Approach: To change a sentence from active to passive voice, we move the object to the subject position, keep the tense using an appropriate form of be, and use the past participle of the main verb. We also introduce the original subject with the preposition by if we want to mention the doer. For simple past tense, the passive structure is was or were plus past participle. Here, the object a sarcastic review becomes the new subject, and wrote changes to was written. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the object a sarcastic review and move it to the beginning of the passive sentence. Step 2: Maintain the simple past tense by using was, because review is singular, followed by the past participle written. Step 3: Introduce the doer, the movie critic, with the preposition by to show who performed the action. Step 4: Combine the parts to get A sarcastic review was written by the movie critic and check that the meaning and tense match the original. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify correctness by converting the passive sentence back into active voice. Starting from A sarcastic review was written by the movie critic, we move the phrase by the movie critic to the subject position, keep the verb in simple past wrote, and place the object a sarcastic review after it. This brings us back to the original sentence The movie critic wrote a sarcastic review, which confirms that the transformation preserves tense and meaning. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A uses is written, which is present simple passive and does not match the original past tense. Option B is grammatically possible but introduces the phrase which is sarcastic, which changes the style and structure and is not the direct or simplest passive transformation. Option C again uses present tense is written, which conflicts with the original past tense wrote. Option E has has been written, which is present perfect passive and therefore changes the time reference and aspect. Only Option D keeps the simple past tense and gives a direct passive equivalent. Common Pitfalls: Learners often forget to maintain the original tense when switching between active and passive voice. Another common error is to change the meaning by adding unnecessary relative clauses or by omitting the agent completely when the agent is required. It is helpful to remember a clear three step method: move the object to subject position, choose the correct form of be for the tense, and use the past participle of the main verb. Practising this method with simple past sentences like the example here builds confidence for more complex structures. Final Answer: The correct passive form is A sarcastic review was written by the movie critic.

Question 4

Change the following sentence from Direct to Indirect speech. The trainee asked his boss, Shall I email this letter again, Sir?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests reported speech or indirect speech, particularly for polite questions with shall in the original. When converting direct speech to indirect speech, we usually change pronouns, adjust tense as needed, and often replace question word order with a statement pattern introduced by if or whether. Understanding how shall changes in indirect speech is important for accurate and natural sounding reported questions. Given Data / Assumptions: The direct sentence has a polite request for guidance. Speaker: the trainee Listener: his boss Original words: Shall I email this letter again, Sir? The reporting verb is asked and it already indicates politeness. Concept / Approach: In indirect speech, questions introduced by shall I suggesting a request for advice or permission are usually reported with should. The pronoun I in the trainee question refers to the trainee himself, so we change it to he in indirect speech. The demonstrative this generally becomes that, and we remove the question mark because the structure becomes a statement introduced by if or whether. We also do not need to repeat sir at the end because the respect is already shown by the polite reporting verb asked and the adverb politely. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the reporting clause The trainee asked his boss and note that this clause is already in past tense. Step 2: Recognise that the question Shall I email this letter again is a yes or no type question about what the trainee should do. Step 3: Introduce the reported question with if, change I to he, and convert shall to should to show a polite request for advice. Step 4: Change this to that, remove sir from the reported part, and write the clause in statement order, yielding if he should email that letter again. Verification / Alternative check: We can check naturalness by imagining how someone would report the conversation: The trainee asked his boss politely if he should email that letter again. This sentence reads smoothly and clearly conveys that the trainee was seeking permission or advice. It preserves the original meaning but follows the grammar rules for reported questions. A literal copy of the direct speech would not be appropriate, because indirect speech does not keep quotation marks or the original question form. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A keeps shall in the reported clause, which is not the usual transformation for this type of question; should is preferred to express advice or obligation in indirect speech. Option B repeats sir inside the reported clause, which sounds unnatural and redundant since politeness is already expressed by politely. Option C combines both issues, keeping shall and adding sir, and therefore does not follow standard rules. Option E is almost correct but changes the wording more than necessary and omits the explicit mention that the trainee asked politely; the given key prefers the more direct structure with if and should and without additional phrases like once again. Common Pitfalls: Many learners wrongly keep shall when reporting questions of this type or forget to change pronouns when the speaker and subject change. Some also feel they must preserve every word, including honorifics like sir, even though reported speech usually focuses on meaning rather than exact form. A helpful rule is that shall I in direct questions about advice or permission usually becomes should he or should I in reported speech, depending on the context. Applying this rule here leads directly to the correct answer. Final Answer: The correct indirect speech is The trainee asked his boss politely if he should email that letter again.

Question 5

Read the passage carefully and then answer the question that follows.  The rich flora and fauna of Cubbon Park in Bengaluru often capture the attention of visitors more than anything else. However, when people pause and take time to look closely at …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is based on a reading comprehension passage about the statue of Queen Victoria in Cubbon Park, Bengaluru. The passage combines descriptive detail with historical information. The specific question asks about the duration of Queen Victoria rule over Great Britain, which is a factual detail embedded in the middle of the passage. Such questions test careful reading and the ability to extract numerical information accurately. Given Data / Assumptions: We need only a few key lines from the passage to answer the question. The passage states that Queen Victoria was the Monarch of Great Britain from 1837 till 1901. The question asks for how many years she ruled. The options provide different possible durations in years. No external history knowledge is strictly needed, because the passage itself gives the years. Concept / Approach: The approach is straightforward arithmetic based on the years mentioned. To find how long a person held a position, we subtract the starting year from the ending year. Since rule from 1837 till 1901 is inclusive in a historical sense, the number of completed years is 1901 minus 1837. Many comprehension questions expect students to perform this subtraction correctly without adding extra years unless explicitly required. Therefore, we compute the difference and match it to the options. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the relevant line in the passage, which says Queen Victoria was Monarch of Great Britain from 1837 till 1901. Step 2: Subtract the starting year from the ending year, that is 1901 − 1837. Step 3: Perform the subtraction to get 64, which shows that her reign lasted for sixty four years. Step 4: Compare the result 64 years with the options and select the one that exactly matches this duration. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify by thinking in approximate terms. From 1840 to 1900 would be about sixty years, and since 1837 is three years earlier than 1840 and 1901 is one year after 1900, the total should be roughly sixty four years, which is consistent with the calculation. Historical references also often describe Queen Victoria as having reigned for more than six decades, which fits the answer of sixty four years. Therefore, the numerical result aligns both with the passage and with general historical knowledge. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The option 34 years is much shorter than the difference between 1837 and 1901 and would suggest that she ruled only a little more than three decades. The option 54 years still underestimates the length of a reign that clearly spans from the late 1830s to the beginning of the twentieth century. The option 44 years also fails to match the arithmetic difference between the years given. The option 74 years overestimates the duration and would require a starting year earlier than 1827 to be correct. Only 64 years accurately reflects the period from 1837 to 1901. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake in such questions is to misread or misremember the years, confusing 1837 with some other date or glancing over 1901. Another pitfall is to add one extra year without justification, thinking both start and end should be fully counted, which may lead to an incorrect result in similar problems. The safest method is to copy the two years carefully, write the subtraction clearly, and then compare the result to the options instead of relying on mental approximations alone. Final Answer: According to the passage, Queen Victoria ruled Great Britain for 64 years.

Question 6

Read the passage carefully and then answer the question that follows.  The rich flora and fauna of Cubbon Park in Bengaluru often capture the attention of visitors more than anything else. However, when people pause and take time to look closely at …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Like the previous question, this item is based on the descriptive and historical passage about Queen Victoria statue in Cubbon Park. Here, the focus shifts from the length of the reign to the ceremony that introduced the statue to the city. The question asks how many people unveiled the statue, which is a detail that can be answered directly from the passage without any calculation, provided that the reader pays attention to the phrasing. Given Data / Assumptions: The key lines in the passage mention the unveiling event clearly. In 1906, the statue was formally unveiled in the city. The person named is George Frederick Ernest Albert. He is described as then Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall and York. There is no mention of any other person participating in the actual unveiling. Concept / Approach: Sometimes comprehension questions ask about numbers of people involved in events described in the text. The strategy is to identify whether the passage refers to a single person or a group. In this case, although the passage uses several titles for George Frederick Ernest Albert, they all refer to the same individual. The fact that he held more than one title may mislead some readers into thinking multiple people were present, but careful reading shows that a single person with multiple roles carried out the unveiling. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Locate the sentence about the unveiling, which states that in 1906 the statue was unveiled by George Frederick Ernest Albert. Step 2: Note that this full name refers to one individual who held more than one title at that time. Step 3: Confirm that no other individuals are mentioned as sharing the act of unveiling the statue. Step 4: Conclude that only one person was involved in the act of unveiling, so the correct answer is One. Verification / Alternative check: We can check our understanding by rephrasing the sentence: In 1906, the statue was unveiled by George Frederick Ernest Albert, who was then Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall and York. This clearly shows that the titles Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall and York describe the same man, not separate people. If there had been multiple people involved, the passage would likely have said by George Frederick Ernest Albert and others or would have listed several names. Since it does not, we can be confident that only one person performed the unveiling. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The options Two, Three, Four, and Six suggest that several people group together unveiled the statue, but the passage does not support such an interpretation. The multiple titles might give an impression of different individuals, yet they are simply different designations for one royal figure. Therefore, all options other than One contradict the text. Examinations often include such distractors to test whether candidates are reading carefully rather than guessing. Common Pitfalls: A common error is to count the titles instead of the individuals and mistakenly think that Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall and York point to two or more separate people. Another pitfall is to assume that important events must involve a group, such as several dignitaries, without checking the precise wording in the passage. When answering factual questions like this, always base your conclusion strictly on what is stated in the text. Final Answer: According to the passage, exactly one person unveiled the Queen Victoria statue at Cubbon Park.

Question 7

Read the passage carefully and then answer the question that follows.  The rich flora and fauna of Cubbon Park in Bengaluru often capture the attention of visitors more than anything else. However, when people pause and take time to look closely at …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This reading comprehension question focuses on how the local people, the Bengalureans, tend to perceive the Queen Victoria statue in Cubbon Park. The passage contrasts the rich history and grandeur of the statue with the way busy city residents casually treat it. The question therefore tests the ability to understand not just facts, but also the attitude or viewpoint implied by the writer. Given Data / Assumptions: The relevant part of the passage appears towards the end. The passage notes that there is a wealth of history associated with the statue. It states that the statue was created to appear imposing. It also says that many busy Bengalureans probably refer to it casually as just another familiar landmark. The question asks what the Bengalureans would call it, not what the writer highlights historically. Concept / Approach: To answer this type of question, we must focus on the phrase that directly expresses the local people attitude rather than the detailed description of the statue. The key phrase is just another familiar landmark. Landmark is the word that sums up how they see the statue, mainly as a point of reference in the city rather than as a symbol of deep historical meaning. The other options are distractors that either restate the historical importance or introduce new ideas not emphasised in the text. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Locate the line that describes how Bengalureans view the statue, which mentions that they would probably refer to it as just another familiar landmark. Step 2: Identify the key term in that phrase, which is landmark, indicating a well known point used for navigation or identification. Step 3: Compare this term with the options and find the one that directly matches it, which is a landmark. Step 4: Confirm that the other options emphasise history, politics, or culture, which are not how the locals are described as viewing the statue in the passage. Verification / Alternative check: We can check our understanding by paraphrasing the sentence: Even though there is a lot of history and grandeur, people who live in Bengaluru and pass through the park may simply use the statue as a reference point, thinking of it as just another landmark. This paraphrase matches the idea that a landmark is a familiar, often visually prominent feature, rather than an object of deep reflection. Therefore, choosing a landmark fits the passage mood and phrasing precisely. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The option a wealth of history refers to what the writer says about the statue significance, but the question is about how ordinary Bengalureans refer to it in daily life. A symbol of British rule introduces a political interpretation that the passage does not emphasise as the local viewpoint. An example of Bengaluru culture would be more suitable if the text portrayed the statue as representing local traditions, which it does not. A major tourist attraction is also not directly stated in the passage; instead, the focus is on busy city residents rather than tourists. Thus, a landmark is the only option that directly matches the words used in the passage. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse the narrator perspective with the local people perspective and choose an option like a wealth of history because it sounds more impressive or academic. Another pitfall is guessing based on their own opinion of what such a statue should represent. In reading comprehension, answers must be based on the text, not personal associations. Always read the exact phrasing around the key sentence and select the option that best reflects the described viewpoint. Final Answer: According to the passage, Bengalureans would most likely refer to the Queen Victoria statue simply as a landmark.

Question 8

Read the passage carefully and then answer the question that follows.  The rich flora and fauna of Cubbon Park in Bengaluru often capture the attention of visitors more than anything else. However, when people pause and take time to look closely at …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This reading comprehension question focuses on the description of Queen Victoria personality as represented by the statue. The passage paints a visual picture of her facial expression and general look. The question asks which trait is not mentioned in the passage, so it tests careful reading and the ability to distinguish between what is explicitly stated and what is implied or imagined. Given Data / Assumptions: The key descriptive sentence appears in the middle of the passage. The text says that the statue depicts a rather proud, stern person. It also mentions that the statue shows sharply defined and pronounced facial features. No direct reference is made to generosity or kindness. The question asks for the trait that Queen Victoria did not have according to the passage. Concept / Approach: In questions of the form all of the following except, a good strategy is to list the traits that are clearly stated and then eliminate options that match them. The remaining option is typically the one that is not supported by the text. Here, proud and stern are explicitly stated, and pronounced features refers to a physical characteristic. Regal, although not used word for word, is consistent with the sense of a queenly, imposing presence. Generous, however, is not mentioned in the passage at all and does not follow directly from the description of a proud and stern figure. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Re read the sentence describing the statue, focusing on the adjectives used for Queen Victoria. Step 2: Note the explicit traits proud and stern and the mention of pronounced features, which refers to how clearly her facial structure is represented. Step 3: Recognise that the overall grand and imposing representation naturally suggests a regal presence, consistent with her status as monarch. Step 4: Observe that generous is never mentioned or implied by the description, making it the odd one out among the options. Verification / Alternative check: If we try to match each option with a phrase from the passage, we find that proud and stern match exactly. Pronounced features matches the phrase pronounced features. The idea of being regal fits the entire tone of grandeur and royal authority, which is the main theme in the description of the statue. In contrast, generosity is a moral or emotional trait that would require descriptions of kindness, giving nature, or benevolence, none of which appear in the passage. This confirms that generous is not supported by the given text. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option proud is wrong as a choice for the except part because the passage explicitly states that the statue depicts a rather proud person. Option stern is also directly mentioned in the text. Option pronounced features reflects the exact phrase used to describe Queen Victoria facial structure. Option regal, while not written verbatim, closely matches the tone created by words like grandeur, larger than life, and monarch and therefore aligns with the passage description. Only generous does not appear and does not flow naturally from the described statue. Common Pitfalls: Students often misread except questions and accidentally choose a trait that is clearly present in the passage. It is crucial to remember that except means we are looking for the option that is not supported by the text. Another mistake is to rely on prior knowledge or assumptions about famous people. Even though Queen Victoria may or may not have been generous in real history, the exam expects answers based only on the passage content, not on outside information. Final Answer: The trait not mentioned in the passage is generous, so generous is the correct answer.

Question 9

Read the passage carefully and then answer the question that follows.  The rich flora and fauna of Cubbon Park in Bengaluru often capture the attention of visitors more than anything else. However, when people pause and take time to look closely at …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks the reader to identify which statement is false based on the passage about the Queen Victoria statue. All the options look similar to details mentioned in the text, so it is necessary to read carefully and distinguish between what is actually written and what has been altered. Such questions train precision and attention to subtle differences in wording. Given Data / Assumptions: The passage provides several clear facts about the statue. It says the statue is a marble statue. It describes the statue as about 11 feet high. It mentions that it has stood in all its glory for more than 111 years. It clearly locates the statue in Cubbon Park in Bengaluru. There is no mention of a place called Queen Victoria park in this context. Concept / Approach: The method here is to compare each option with the passage word by word. If a statement repeats the information accurately or in an equivalent way, it is true according to the passage. If a statement changes a crucial detail like the material, height, age, or location, then it becomes false. The key difference in these options lies in the location mentioned in one of the statements. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check Option A, which states that the statue is made of marble. The passage describes it as the marble statue, so this statement is true. Step 2: Check Option B, which says the statue is 11 feet tall. The passage says it is about 11 feet high, so this is also true. Step 3: Check Option C, which notes that it is described as being about 111 years old. The passage says it has stood for well over 111 years, so this is essentially accurate. Step 4: Check Option D, which claims that the statue is standing in Queen Victoria park. The passage clearly locates it in Cubbon Park, not in any place called Queen Victoria park, so this statement is false. Step 5: Check Option E, which correctly states that the statue stands in Cubbon Park in Bengaluru, matching the text. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, we can underline the location phrase in the passage. Early in the passage it states that the flora and fauna of Cubbon Park capture attention and later refers to the statue in that same park. There is no reference to any separate park named after Queen Victoria. Therefore, any option that relocates the statue to Queen Victoria park is incorrect. The other details about the statue material, height, and age are consistent with the original text. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Here, wrong means they are wrong as choices for the false statement, because they are actually true statements. Option A repeats the description of the statue as a marble statue. Option B matches the height given in the passage. Option C reflects the idea that the statue has stood for about 111 years or more. Option E correctly repeats that the statue is in Cubbon Park in Bengaluru. Only Option D introduces a new and incorrect location, Queen Victoria park, which the passage does not mention. Common Pitfalls: A typical mistake in such questions is to skim the options and select one that looks different without cross checking each word against the passage. Another error is to assume that because the statue honours Queen Victoria, it must automatically stand in a park named after her. This shows why it is essential to rely on the exact wording of the text instead of general assumptions or real world guesses. Careful reading helps avoid these traps. Final Answer: The false statement is It is standing in Queen Victoria park, because the passage clearly locates the statue in Cubbon Park in Bengaluru.

Question 10

Fill in the blank with the most appropriate word to complete the sentence correctly. Brijesh said that he has no __________ of stepping down, although he is under a lot of pressure to do so.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a sentence completion question that tests collocation, that is, which words naturally go together in English. The sentence describes a situation where Brijesh is under pressure to step down but is not planning to do so. To express that he is not planning to resign, we need a noun that combines naturally with the expression has no and of stepping down. Given Data / Assumptions: The sentence provides both context and grammatical clues. The subject is Brijesh, who is under a lot of pressure to step down. The key phrase is has no __________ of stepping down. The blank must be filled with a noun. The entire expression should sound natural and idiomatic in English. Concept / Approach: In English, the common collocation for talking about plans or willingness to do something is have no intention of doing something. Intention refers to a plan, purpose, or decision to act. The phrase no intention of stepping down clearly conveys that Brijesh does not plan to resign. The other options, although nouns, do not collocate properly with has no and of stepping down in this context. Our approach is therefore to test each noun in the full phrase and see which one sounds correct and conveys the intended meaning. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Insert intuition into the blank to get has no intuition of stepping down, which sounds odd because intuition usually refers to instinctive understanding, not planned action. Step 2: Insert intention to form has no intention of stepping down, which is a standard and meaningful expression for not planning to resign. Step 3: Try point, giving has no point of stepping down, which is ungrammatical and does not express a plan. Step 4: Try object, giving has no object of stepping down, which is also unnatural in this context, and desire, which would give has no desire of stepping down, a less common phrasing than no desire to step down. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify by checking standard collocations in English. Phrases like have every intention of staying, have no intention of apologising, and have no intention of retiring are widely used. They all use intention followed by of and a gerund. Although no desire to step down would be grammatically possible, the preposition would change to to and the pattern in the given sentence uses of followed by stepping, so intention is the best fit here. This confirms that no intention of stepping down is the intended and idiomatic expression. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Intuition refers to a strong instinctive feeling about something, not a deliberate plan, so has no intuition of stepping down is incorrect. Point generally refers to a reason or argument and would require a different structure, such as there is no point in stepping down, which is not what the sentence uses. Object can mean goal or purpose in some formal contexts, but the phrase has no object of stepping down is not standard in modern English. Desire is closer in meaning to intention, but the usual structure would be has no desire to step down, not of stepping down, so it does not fit the exact pattern of the sentence. Common Pitfalls: Learners often overlook prepositions that follow nouns and guess based only on approximate meaning. Here, noticing the of after the blank is crucial, because it strongly signals the noun intention in this common collocation. Paying attention to entire phrases, not isolated words, helps avoid such mistakes. Building a mental list of frequent pairs like intention of doing, plan to do, and desire to do can improve performance on similar questions. Final Answer: The correct word is intention, giving the sentence Brijesh said that he has no intention of stepping down.

Question 11

Change the following sentence from Active to Passive voice. Lakhs of tourists view the Taj Mahal every year.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests the ability to convert a sentence from active to passive voice while preserving the tense and general meaning. The original sentence describes a habitual or repeated action that happens every year, with lakhs of tourists as the doer of the action and the Taj Mahal as the receiver of the action. Given Data / Assumptions: The structure of the active sentence is as follows. Subject: Lakhs of tourists Verb: view Object: the Taj Mahal Time expression: every year, showing repeated action in the present. Concept / Approach: In present simple tense, the passive form is made using is or are plus the past participle. Since the Taj Mahal is singular, we use is viewed. The object of the active sentence becomes the subject of the passive sentence. We may keep or move the time expression every year, but the verb form must reflect present simple passive, not continuous or past forms. The doer can be introduced with by if we want to mention who performs the action. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Move the object the Taj Mahal to the beginning of the sentence to make it the new subject. Step 2: Maintain present simple tense by using the structure is viewed, which is the passive version of view for a singular subject. Step 3: Introduce the original subject, lakhs of tourists, with the preposition by to indicate who performs the viewing. Step 4: Retain the time expression every year and place it where it reads naturally, resulting in The Taj Mahal is viewed by lakhs of tourists every year. Verification / Alternative check: We can convert the passive sentence back into active form as a check. Starting from The Taj Mahal is viewed by lakhs of tourists every year, we move lakhs of tourists to the subject position and change is viewed to view, giving Lakhs of tourists view the Taj Mahal every year. This matches the original sentence exactly, confirming that tense and meaning have been preserved. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A uses is being viewed, which is present continuous passive and suggests an action happening right now, not a regular yearly occurrence. Option B also uses is being viewed and only changes the word order, so it still has the wrong tense aspect. Option C uses was being viewed, which is past continuous passive and does not reflect the present habit described by every year. Option E remains basically in active voice (are viewing) with a continuous aspect and does not represent a correct passive transformation of the original present simple general truth. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse present simple with present continuous and incorrectly use be being plus past participle, especially when a time phrase is present. Another pitfall is to forget to adjust the helping verb according to the number of the new subject, using are viewed instead of is viewed for the singular Taj Mahal. Remember that for general facts and habitual actions, simple present passive is appropriate, and that aspect markers like being should be avoided unless the original sentence is a continuous action. Final Answer: The correct passive sentence is The Taj Mahal is viewed by lakhs of tourists every year.

Question 12

Rearrange the parts of the sentence, labelled P, Q, and R, to form a coherent sentence.  They have now P: by a paternalistic state Q: of goods mandated R: been turned into consumers

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This sentence arrangement question is about reconstructing a statement that criticises how people have been shaped by government or authority. The sentence describes how they have now been turned into consumers of goods mandated by a paternalistic state. To obtain the correct order, we need to respect both grammar and logical meaning. Given Data / Assumptions: The stem and fragments are as follows. Stem: They have now P: by a paternalistic state Q: of goods mandated R: been turned into consumers The final sentence should be smooth and logically coherent. Concept / Approach: The phrase been turned into consumers serves as the core predicate and naturally follows have now, so R is a strong candidate to come first among the fragments. After been turned into consumers, we need to say what kind of consumers they have become. The phrase of goods mandated describes this, giving been turned into consumers of goods mandated. Finally, we add the agent who has done the turning, by a paternalistic state, which fits at the end of the sentence. Thus, the logical order of fragments is R, Q, and then P. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Attach each fragment to the stem They have now and see which one starts a natural verb phrase. They have now been turned into consumers clearly makes sense, so R goes first. Step 2: After been turned into consumers, we ask consumers of what, and the fragment of goods mandated in Q answers that question smoothly. Step 3: To complete the idea and show who has caused this transformation, we append by a paternalistic state from P. Step 4: Combine everything to get They have now been turned into consumers of goods mandated by a paternalistic state. Verification / Alternative check: Reading the complete sentence aloud confirms that it is grammatically correct and clearly communicates a critical viewpoint: They have now been turned into consumers of goods mandated by a paternalistic state. The structure follows a familiar passive pattern, where have now been turned into consumers is the main clause and by a paternalistic state identifies the agent. Trying different orders, such as QRP or QPR, leads to awkward sentences like They have now of goods mandated been turned into consumers, which are clearly wrong. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option QRP places of goods mandated immediately after They have now, giving They have now of goods mandated, which is ungrammatical because have now needs a past participle. Option QPR and PRQ suffer from similar issues, breaking the passive verb phrase and leaving have now without a proper complement. Option RPQ gives They have now been turned into consumers by a paternalistic state of goods mandated, which misplaces the of phrase and distorts the meaning. Only RQP yields a natural and logical sentence. Common Pitfalls: One common mistake is to focus on the meaning of individual fragments like paternalistic state and try to place that early in the sentence without checking whether the verb phrase is complete. Another pitfall is to overlook the passive structure have now been turned, which should be kept intact before adding descriptions. In sentence ordering questions, it helps to secure the core grammatical skeleton first, then attach prepositional phrases and modifiers in positions that answer questions like of what or by whom. Final Answer: The correct order is RQP, giving the sentence They have now been turned into consumers of goods mandated by a paternalistic state.

Question 13

In the following question, choose the option that best expresses the meaning of the idiom dead ringer.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of English idioms. Idioms are fixed expressions whose meanings cannot always be guessed from the literal sense of the words. The idiom here is dead ringer, which is commonly used in informal speech and writing. Understanding idioms is essential for scoring well in comprehension sections and for interpreting conversational English correctly. Given Data / Assumptions: The task is purely about idiomatic meaning. The expression is dead ringer. We assume it is used to describe a person in relation to someone else. The options offer different possible interpretations, some related to competition or warning, others to similarity. Concept / Approach: In modern English, a dead ringer means a person or thing that looks exactly like another person or thing, almost indistinguishable in appearance. The word dead here intensifies the sense of completeness, just as in dead sure. Ringer, in this expression, refers to an exact likeness or substitute. Therefore, the correct option should capture the idea of a striking or exact resemblance, not a warning, competition, or surprise. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall how dead ringer is used in everyday English, for example, He is a dead ringer for his father or She is a dead ringer for that movie star. Step 2: Interpret these examples as saying that the person looks almost exactly like the other individual. Step 3: Examine the options and identify the one that directly refers to an exact double or look alike. Step 4: Choose an exact double or look alike of another person as the only option that matches this idiomatic meaning. Verification / Alternative check: We can compare the idiom to similar expressions in English. Phrases like spitting image or carbon copy also mean someone who looks extremely similar to another person. Dead ringer functions in the same way. If the idiom meant a pre decided competition or late warning, it would be used in contexts about contests or alerts, but that is not how it appears in natural usage. Looking up standard dictionary definitions of dead ringer confirms that it refers to a close or exact resemblance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option a severe warning that is repeated many times does not match the typical context in which dead ringer is used; that idea would fit other idioms about warnings, not this one. Option a competition whose outcome is already decided in advance describes a fixed match, which is unrelated to physical resemblance. Option a person who pretends to be dead in order to escape danger sounds like a literal interpretation of dead and is misleading, since idioms often go beyond literal meanings. Option a completely unexpected event that takes people by surprise might describe a shock or bolt from the blue, but not a dead ringer. None of these capture the idea of someone who looks exactly like someone else. Common Pitfalls: Because the words dead and ringer can be interpreted literally, learners sometimes imagine stories about death and bells or warnings and choose options that fit those stories. However, idioms must be learned as complete units whose meanings are established by usage. Another pitfall is to guess based on which option sounds dramatic rather than which aligns with remembered usage. Regular reading and exposure to authentic English help fix idioms like dead ringer in memory so that their meanings are immediately clear in exam questions. Final Answer: The idiom dead ringer means an exact double or look alike of another person.

Question 14

Select the option that gives the best antonym of the word pervert in the context of moral character.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is about antonyms, words with opposite meanings. The word pervert is often used to describe someone whose behaviour, especially in a moral or sexual sense, is regarded as seriously wrong or distorted. In this question, we are clearly dealing with moral character, so we must find a word that represents the opposite type of character, that is someone whose conduct is morally upright. Given Data / Assumptions: The stem and options give several character related words. The target word is pervert, used as a noun for a morally corrupt or deviant person. The options include virtuous, libertine, deviant, debauchee, and corrupt. We assume the exam expects common dictionary meanings of these words. Concept / Approach: To find an antonym, we first recall that pervert here refers to someone whose behaviour is morally twisted or depraved. The direct opposite would be a person who is morally good and behaves according to high ethical standards. The adjective virtuous captures that idea of moral excellence and purity. By contrast, libertine, deviant, debauchee, and corrupt all describe people with bad or uncontrolled behaviour, so they are closer to synonyms of pervert rather than opposites. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Clarify the sense of pervert as a person whose behaviour is morally wrong or abnormal. Step 2: Look through the options for a word that indicates strong moral goodness rather than wrongdoing. Step 3: Identify virtuous as meaning morally good, upright, and living according to high principles. Step 4: Conclude that virtuous is therefore the correct antonym of pervert in this context. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify by checking typical uses. A virtuous person is praised for honesty, self control, and goodness, while a pervert is condemned for twisted or depraved actions. Words like libertine and debauchee refer to people who habitually indulge in immoral pleasures, especially of a sexual nature, which puts them on the same side as pervert, not the opposite side. Deviant similarly describes behaviour that departs from accepted norms, often in a negative way. Corrupt refers to someone who is dishonest or morally compromised. All these align more with pervert than with its opposite. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Libertine describes a person who behaves without moral restraint, especially in sexual matters, which is similar in tone to pervert. Deviant means someone whose behaviour differs significantly from accepted social or moral standards, again suggesting negative deviation rather than virtue. Debauchee refers to a person who is excessively fond of sensual pleasures and overindulgence. Corrupt is used for dishonest or morally degraded individuals. None of these words express moral goodness or uprightness, so they cannot serve as antonyms for pervert. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to confuse context and choose a word that is merely different, not truly opposite. Another is to be distracted by the slightly positive sound of certain words without checking their meanings carefully. In antonym questions, it is helpful to restate the original word in a simple way, such as morally twisted person in this case, and then look for the option that clearly says morally good person. This quickly leads to virtuous as the correct choice. Final Answer: The best antonym of pervert in the context of moral character is virtuous.

Question 15

In the following question, a sentence is divided into four parts which are labelled A, B, C, and D. One of these parts may contain an error in grammar or usage. Identify the part that has an error. If there is no error, select the option that states…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Error spotting questions test a learner ability to identify mistakes in grammar, vocabulary, or usage within a sentence. Here, the sentence describes Directors who are investigating the cause of a fire. The sentence is divided into four labelled parts so that we can indicate exactly where the error lies. Given Data / Assumptions: The sentence is broken up as follows. Part A: The Directors are Part B: now inquiring Part C: in the cause of the fire. Part D: No error. We must find which part contains incorrect usage. Concept / Approach: The key verb phrase here is inquire into something, which means to investigate or examine a matter carefully. In standard English, we do not usually say inquire in the cause; instead, we say inquire into the cause. The preposition into is used because it conveys the idea of looking deeply inside the matter. Therefore, the error lies in the wrong preposition in Part C, where in is used instead of into. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check Part A, The Directors are, which is grammatically fine and correctly introduces the subject and the form of the verb to be. Step 2: Check Part B, now inquiring, which correctly gives the present continuous form inquiring and matches the helping verb are. Step 3: Examine Part C, in the cause of the fire, and notice that the collocation inquire in the cause feels unnatural in English. Step 4: Recall that the normal phrase is inquire into the cause of, so the correct version should read into the cause of the fire, confirming that Part C contains the error. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify by rewriting the sentence correctly: The Directors are now inquiring into the cause of the fire. This version sounds natural and matches typical usage found in formal reports or news articles. No changes are needed in Parts A and B, and Part D, No error, is therefore incorrect as a response choice, because we have already identified a grammatical problem in Part C. This confirms that the error lies specifically in the preposition in. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Part A is correct, because The Directors are is a proper way to begin a sentence about multiple directors. Part B is also correct, because now inquiring accurately combines the adverb now with the present continuous participle inquiring. Part D, which represents No error, cannot be correct because we have seen that the preposition in in Part C should be into. The option More than one part has an error is also wrong, since Parts A and B are fine and only Part C needs correction. Common Pitfalls: Many learners overlook small preposition errors, especially when the sentence seems generally understandable. Another pitfall is to misidentify the error as being in the main verb inquiring rather than in the preposition that follows it. To handle such questions effectively, it helps to learn common verb plus preposition combinations, such as inquire into, look into, and comment on. Recognising these collocations quickly makes it easier to spot incorrect prepositions in exam sentences. Final Answer: The error is in Part C, which should read into the cause of the fire instead of in the cause of the fire.

Question 16

In the following sentence, choose the most appropriate word to complete the blank: 'As the judge enters the courtroom, it is a standard ______ to call upon all occupants in the room to stand.'

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Courtroom procedure questions often test your understanding of everyday collocations in English, especially words that describe customs and accepted practice. In this sentence, we are told what happens when a judge enters the courtroom and we must choose the noun that naturally fits after the phrase 'standard ______' in standard English usage. Such questions check not only vocabulary meaning but also how naturally a word combines with nearby words in real-life contexts like legal or formal settings. Given Data / Assumptions: The sentence is: 'As the judge enters the courtroom, it is a standard ______ to call upon all occupants in the room to stand.' We must choose one noun from: formality, pattern, culture, habit. The focus is on what we call an accepted, ceremonial practice followed in a court of law. We assume the sentence is about a conventional rule of behaviour in courtrooms everywhere, not about personal preference. We must choose the option that is both semantically correct and idiomatically natural with 'standard' in this context. Concept / Approach: In English, certain nouns are commonly used with particular adjectives, creating fixed or semi-fixed expressions. The phrase 'a standard formality' is a very common collocation, especially in official or ceremonial contexts, where some action is performed because the rules or traditions require it. While 'pattern', 'culture', and 'habit' are all real words, they do not sound as natural in this specific sentence. Therefore, we focus on the meaning of each word and ask whether it accurately describes a formal, expected action in a courtroom, and whether it commonly appears after 'standard' when we describe such procedures. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Interpret the situation – a judge enters the courtroom and everyone is required to stand. This is clearly a formal procedure, not just a casual tendency. Step 2: Check 'formality': it means an official or customary procedure that is carried out to comply with rules or etiquette. 'Standard formality' is a natural phrase. Step 3: Check 'pattern', 'culture', and 'habit': these can be related to behaviour, but 'standard pattern', 'standard culture', or 'standard habit' do not precisely describe an official ceremonial rule of conduct in this context. Step 4: Conclude that 'formality' best captures the idea of an expected, official act in a courtroom, making 'standard formality' the ideal collocation. Verification / Alternative check: We can verify the choice by re-reading the sentence with each option inserted: 'standard formality', 'standard pattern', 'standard culture', and 'standard habit'. Only 'standard formality' is widely used when we describe such ceremonial actions. Native speakers regularly say that something is 'a mere formality' or 'a legal formality' to refer to procedures that must be followed in official situations. Stand up when the judge enters is exactly that kind of official rule. This cross-check reinforces that 'formality' is both semantically accurate and idiomatically natural in the sentence. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Pattern: A 'pattern' is a repeated arrangement or design, or a habitual way in which something happens. 'Standard pattern' does not naturally describe an official courtroom rule. Culture: 'Culture' refers to the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a society or group. Saying 'a standard culture' in this sentence sounds incorrect and does not fit the immediate action of standing when the judge enters. Habit: A 'habit' is a regular tendency of an individual, not a formal rule imposed on everyone by the court. The requirement to stand is a rule, not merely a personal habit. Common Pitfalls: Students may be tempted by 'habit' because standing when the judge enters happens regularly, or by 'culture' because court behaviour could be seen as part of legal culture. However, the question is about what we call a formal, official practice carried out for reasons of ceremony and protocol. Another pitfall is ignoring collocations and focusing only on dictionary meanings. In many vocabulary questions, the best answer is the word that both fits the meaning and sounds natural with the surrounding words. Final Answer: The correct answer is 'formality'.

Question 17

In English vocabulary, choose the option that best expresses the meaning of the idiom or phrase 'dark horse' used about a contestant or candidate.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Idioms in English often come from colorful images, and 'dark horse' is one such expression that appears in discussions about elections, sports, and competitions. The question asks you to pick the option that best captures what people mean when they call someone a 'dark horse'. Understanding idioms is important in exams because the literal meaning of the words is not enough; you must know the figurative, commonly accepted meaning used in real communication. Given Data / Assumptions: Idiom given: 'dark horse'. Options describe different types of candidates or contestants. We assume the context is competition, politics, or any contest with winners and losers. We need the standard dictionary or usage meaning of 'dark horse', not a creative interpretation. Concept / Approach: The idiom 'dark horse' originally comes from horse racing. A 'dark' horse is one about which the betting public knows little; its abilities, strengths, or form are not widely known. When such a horse unexpectedly wins, it surprises everyone. In modern usage, the expression was extended to politics, business, and everyday life. It refers to a person or candidate who is relatively unknown or underestimated, but who unexpectedly achieves success or victory. Therefore, we must look for an option that emphasizes both 'little known' and 'unexpectedly wins'. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the standard idiom meaning: a relatively unknown competitor who unexpectedly succeeds. Step 2: Check option (a): 'a candidate about whom little is known but who unexpectedly wins'. This exactly reflects the standard explanation and includes both 'unknown' and 'unexpected victory'. Step 3: Check option (b): 'a good person who has been unfairly maligned' focuses on character judgment, not on being unknown. Step 4: Check option (c): 'a person despised by everybody who nevertheless wins' stresses being disliked, which is not the key feature of a dark horse. Step 5: Check option (d): 'a very unpredictable contestant who sometimes wins sometimes loses' refers to inconsistency, not to being unknown and surprising. Verification / Alternative check: If you consult standard English dictionaries or usage guides, they define 'dark horse' as a candidate or competitor about whom little is known but who unexpectedly wins or makes a strong showing. There is no emphasis on being hated or on moral goodness; the focus is on surprise and previous obscurity. Reading news headlines or analysis about elections also confirms this: journalists speak of 'dark horse candidates' when someone little discussed in the media suddenly performs very well. This confirms that option (a) is the accurate interpretation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (b) associates the idiom with being 'unfairly maligned', which is not part of the idiom's core meaning. Option (c) focuses on being 'despised by everybody', which again is unrelated; a dark horse may actually be liked but simply unknown. Option (d) describes an inconsistent performer who is unpredictable but not necessarily obscure or surprising. None of these capture the central feature of 'dark horse', namely unexpected success by someone previously not much talked about. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to think 'dark' suggests something negative or evil, leading students to choose options that mention being despised or unfairly treated. Another pitfall is confusing 'dark horse' with 'underdog'. An underdog is expected to lose but might win; a dark horse is not necessarily thought weak, but is simply not widely known. Paying attention to the standard idiomatic meaning, rather than literal word associations, helps avoid these errors. Final Answer: The correct answer is: 'a candidate about whom little is known but who unexpectedly wins'.

Question 18

In English vocabulary, select the word that is the closest synonym of 'parlance' in the context of a particular way of speaking or specialized language.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The word 'parlance' is often used in formal or semi-formal English to talk about a particular way of speaking in a group or field. In vocabulary-based questions, you must not only know dictionary meanings but also feel how words are used in real contexts. The question tests your ability to match 'parlance' with a synonym that conveys the idea of characteristic speech, style, or terminology used by a specific community or profession. Given Data / Assumptions: Target word: 'parlance'. Options: definitive, lingo, canonical, classic. We assume the usual context of phrases such as 'in legal parlance' or 'in common parlance'. We need the option closest in meaning to 'a particular way or manner of speaking'. Concept / Approach: 'Parlance' generally means 'a particular way of speaking or using words, especially a way that is characteristic of a particular group'. For example, 'in medical parlance' refers to vocabulary and expressions commonly used by doctors. 'Lingo' is an informal term for the special language or jargon used by a particular group. Both words point toward specialized vocabulary and style. The other options are related to ideas of authority, standard, or quality but do not specifically denote a manner of speaking. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the meaning of 'parlance': a particular manner or style of speaking, especially specialized phraseology. Step 2: Examine 'lingo': it means special vocabulary or jargon of a particular field or group, often difficult for outsiders to understand. This is very close to 'parlance' in usage. Step 3: Examine 'definitive': it means conclusive, authoritative, or most reliable, and does not describe a language style. Step 4: Examine 'canonical': it refers to something accepted as standard or authoritative, usually in reference to texts, rules, or works of art, not speech. Step 5: Examine 'classic': it often means typical, of high quality, or belonging to the highest rank in literature, art, or style, again not specifically related to a way of speaking. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, insert each option into a typical phrase such as 'in legal parlance'. 'In legal lingo' sounds natural and has the same meaning of specialized legal language. 'In legal definitive', 'in legal canonical', and 'in legal classic' either sound wrong or change the meaning completely. Additionally, dictionaries often cross-reference 'parlance' with words like 'jargon', 'terminology', or 'lingo'. This simple comparison confirms that 'lingo' is the closest synonym among the given options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 'Definitive' is about final, authoritative decisions or editions and cannot replace 'parlance' in expressions about language. 'Canonical' refers to what is officially accepted as genuine or standard, especially in religious or literary contexts, but not to a manner of speech itself. 'Classic' usually points to something traditional, exemplary, or of lasting worth; it is not used to mean specialized vocabulary or jargon. Therefore, they fail to capture the central idea of 'parlance'. Common Pitfalls: Students may be distracted by the more serious or formal tone of words like 'canonical' or 'definitive', thinking that because 'parlance' sounds formal, they must pick a similarly 'serious-sounding' word. However, synonym questions depend on meaning, not on mood or sound. Another pitfall is ignoring how words behave in common phrases. Checking whether 'in legal ____' or 'in everyday ____' sounds correct is a quick way to eliminate unsuitable options. Final Answer: The correct synonym of 'parlance' in this context is 'lingo'.

Question 19

In English spelling, choose the word that is correctly spelled among the following options: bordeux, ambienc, macakues, culinary.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Spelling questions test your familiarity with standard English orthography and often present near-correct words with small errors. In this item, you are asked to identify the one correctly spelled word among four choices. Recognizing common English words, especially those used in general reading and media, helps you quickly spot the correct spelling and avoid distractors that look similar but contain subtle mistakes. Given Data / Assumptions: Options given: 'bordeux', 'ambienc', 'macakues', 'culinary'. Only one of these is spelled correctly according to standard English usage. We assume no specialized or variant spellings; standard dictionary forms are intended. We rely on commonly accepted spellings used in education and examinations. Concept / Approach: The correct approach is to recall, or mentally check, the standard spelling of each likely word. 'Bordeux' appears to be a misspelling of 'Bordeaux' (a place in France, also associated with wine). 'Ambienc' resembles 'ambience' or 'ambiance', both correct forms, but is incomplete. 'Macakues' looks like a distorted version of 'macaques', a kind of monkey. 'Culinary' is a common English adjective related to cooking and the kitchen. Among these, 'culinary' matches the exact standard spelling found in dictionaries and everyday English usage. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider 'bordeux': the correct spelling of the French city and the wine region is 'Bordeaux', with 'au' at the end, so 'bordeux' is incorrect. Step 2: Consider 'ambienc': the correct English spelling is 'ambience' or 'ambiance', both ending with '-ence' or '-ance', not '-enc', so 'ambienc' is wrong. Step 3: Consider 'macakues': the standard word for the monkeys is 'macaques', spelled m-a-c-a-q-u-e-s. The given option changes both internal and final letters, thus it is incorrect. Step 4: Consider 'culinary': this is the standard adjective relating to the kitchen or cooking, correctly spelled c-u-l-i-n-a-r-y. Step 5: Conclude that 'culinary' is the only option with correct spelling. Verification / Alternative check: A simple verification method is to think of common phrases where these words appear. 'Culinary skills', 'culinary arts', and 'culinary school' are widely used expressions in English, and they all use the spelling 'culinary'. In contrast, you will not find 'bordeux' on maps or wine labels, nor 'ambienc' in descriptions of atmosphere, nor 'macakues' in zoology books. Using this contextual memory supports the conclusion that 'culinary' is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 'Bordeux' misses the correct French spelling 'Bordeaux'. 'Ambienc' drops the necessary 'e' at the end, making it incomplete and non-standard. 'Macakues' replaces the 'q' with 'k' and rearranges letters in a way that does not match the recognized spelling 'macaques'. These deliberate distortions are typical exam distractors designed to confuse candidates who only glance quickly at the options. Common Pitfalls: Many test-takers rely solely on visual familiarity and may hesitate if they have not seen the word recently. It is important to build a habit of reading widely, which naturally strengthens spelling memory. Another pitfall is assuming that because several options look foreign or unusual, any of them could be correct. In competitive exams, there is usually only one standard dictionary spelling that is expected, and words that 'look fancy' are not necessarily correct. Final Answer: The correctly spelled word is 'culinary'.

Question 20

In English vocabulary, select the option that gives the closest synonym of the word 'obstreperous' used for a noisy, difficult-to-control person.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The word 'obstreperous' is often used in English to describe people, especially children or crowds, who are noisy, difficult to control, or unruly. Vocabulary questions like this require you to match that meaning with the closest synonym among the options. This tests not only your knowledge of individual word meanings but also your ability to distinguish between words that relate to noise and liveliness and those that describe quietness or shyness. Given Data / Assumptions: Target word: 'obstreperous'. Options: boisterous, bashful, reticent, taciturn. We assume the usual dictionary meaning: noisy and difficult to control. We must identify the option that is closest in meaning to this sense. Concept / Approach: 'Obstreperous' combines the idea of loud noise with resistance to control or discipline. A group of obstreperous students, for example, is loud, disruptive, and unwilling to behave. 'Boisterous' describes people or behaviour that is noisy, energetic, and cheerful, sometimes borderline rowdy. The other three words describe quiet, reserved, or shy behaviour. Thus, the general direction of meaning is enough to separate one option from the others, even if you do not know the exact shades of each word. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the meaning of 'obstreperous': noisy, loud, and difficult to control or manage. Step 2: Examine 'boisterous': it describes noisy, energetic, and exuberant behaviour, especially in lively children or crowds. This is clearly close to 'obstreperous'. Step 3: Examine 'bashful': it means shy or easily embarrassed, the opposite of loud or unruly behaviour. Step 4: Examine 'reticent': it means reserved, unwilling to speak freely, or quiet about one's thoughts. Step 5: Examine 'taciturn': it refers to someone who habitually speaks very little and is uncommunicative. Step 6: Conclude that 'boisterous' is the only word that shares the noisy, lively, and sometimes troublesome quality of 'obstreperous'. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, imagine sentences where 'obstreperous' appears and see if 'boisterous' fits naturally. For example, 'The obstreperous children ran around the classroom shouting' becomes 'The boisterous children ran around the classroom shouting', and the meaning remains similar. Replacing 'obstreperous' with 'bashful', 'reticent', or 'taciturn' would completely change the meaning and make the sentence absurd, because shy or very quiet children do not normally run around shouting. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 'Bashful' expresses shyness and mild embarrassment, almost the opposite of noisy unruliness. 'Reticent' describes a person who is reluctant to talk or reveal their thoughts, focusing on silence, not noise. 'Taciturn' similarly means someone is habitually silent or uncommunicative. None of these words convey noise, resistance, or unruly behaviour, so they cannot serve as synonyms for 'obstreperous'. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to rely only on the 'difficult' sound of words without knowing their meanings. Because 'obstreperous' sounds complicated, students might guess another formal-sounding word like 'reticent' or 'taciturn'. However, good vocabulary preparation involves connecting each word with a clear mental image: 'obstreperous' and 'boisterous' both suggest a noisy, rowdy scene, while 'bashful', 'reticent', and 'taciturn' suggest quietness. Building such mental pictures reduces confusion in exams. Final Answer: The correct synonym of 'obstreperous' is 'boisterous'.

English Questions