Time Left - 07:00 mins
Quiz on Cloze Test and Sentence Correction
Attempt now to get your rank among 6515 students!
Question 1
Direction: In the passage given below, there are blanks, each preceded by a word given in bold. Every blank has four alternative words given in options (A), (B), (C) and (D). Find the word which best suits the place. If the given word suits the blank, mark 'no correction/change required' as the answer.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Choose the correct answer from the given options.
Question 2
Direction: In the passage given below, there are blanks, each preceded by a word given in bold. Every blank has four alternative words given in options (A), (B), (C) and (D). Find the word which best suits the place. If the given word suits the blank, mark 'no correction/change required' as the answer.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Choose the correct option from the given words.
Question 3
Direction: In the passage given below, there are blanks, each preceded by a word given in bold. Every blank has four alternative words given in options (A), (B), (C) and (D). Find the word which best suits the place. If the given word suits the blank, mark 'no correction/change required' as the answer.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Choose the correct word from the given options.
Question 4
Direction: In the passage given below, there are blanks, each preceded by a word given in bold. Every blank has four alternative words given in options (A), (B), (C) and (D). Find the word which best suits the place. If the given word suits the blank, mark 'no correction/change required' as the answer.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Choose the correct word from the given options.
Question 5
Direction: In the passage given below, there are blanks, each preceded by a word given in bold. Every blank has four alternative words given in options (A), (B), (C) and (D). Find the word which best suits the place. If the given word suits the blank, mark 'no correction/change required' as the answer.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Nowadays, globalization’s opponents seem increasingly to be drowning out its defenders. If they get their way, the post-World War II international order – which aimed, often successfully, to advance peace and prosperity through exchange and connection – could well resemble (1). Can globalization be saved?
At first glance, the outlook appears grim. Every aspect of globalization – free trade, free movement of capital, and international migration – is under attack. Leading the charge are couthy (2) forces – from populist political parties to separatist groups to terrorist organizations – whose actions tend to focus more on what they oppose than on what they support.
In Russia and Asia, anti-Western groups are at the forefront of the campaign against globalization. In Europe, populist parties have tended to emphasize their aversion to European integration, with those on the right often also condemning (3) immigration, while the left denounces rising economic inequality. In Latin America, the enemy seems to be foreign abetment (4) of any kind. In Africa, tribal separatists oppose anyone standing in the way of independence. And in the Middle East, the Islamic State (ISIS) virulently rejects modernity – and targets societies that embrace it. Despite their differences, these groups have one thing in common: a deep hostility toward international structures and interconnectedness (though, of course, a murderous group like ISIS is in a different category from, say, European populists). They do not care that the international order they want to tear down enabled the rapid post-1945 economic growth that liberated billions of developing-country citizens from poverty. All they see are massive, unbending organisation (5) and intolerable inequalities in wealth and income, and they blame globalization.
Choose the correct response from the given words.
Question 6
Directions: In the given question, a part of the sentence is printed in bold. Below the sentence alternatives to the bold part are given at (A), (B), (C) and (D) which may help improve the sentence. Choose the correct alternative. In case the given sentence is correct, your answer is (E) i.e. No correction required.
The very publicised mid day meal scheme mean to reduce dropout rate in schools seems to be not yielding the desired results.
Question 7
Direction:In the given question, a part of the sentence is printed in bold. Which of the following among (A), (B), (C) and (D) given below the sentence can replace the word(s) printed in bold to make the sentence grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark E i.e. 'No correction required' as the answer.
The court refused to provide relieve to the petitioner and stated that playing of all diesel vehicles was banned with immediate effect.
Question 8
Direction: In the following question, a part of the sentence is printed in bold. Below the sentence alternatives to the bold part are given at (A), (B), (C) and (D) which may help improve the sentence. Choose the correct alternative. In case the given sentence is correct, your answer is (E), i.e., 'No correction required'.
An Australian man, long thought to being associated of the digital currency Bitcoin, has publicly identified himself as its creator.
Question 9
Direction: Which of the phrases (A), (B), (C) and (D) given below each sentence should replace the phrase given in bold to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark (E) i.e. 'no change/correction required' as the answer.
There is a need for the technical committee to discuss threadbare of reduce the numbers of senior tournaments.
Question 10
Direction: In the following question, a part of the sentence is bold. Five alternatives to the bold part are given at (A), (B), (C) and (D) which may improve the sentence. Choose the correct alternative. In case the given sentence is correct, your answer is (E) i.e. No correction required.
Mr. Jaitley said that a better spread of the monsoon meant that the government could expect higher production of pulses this year, which should ease of their prices into the market.
- 6515 attempts
- 48 upvotes
- 258 comments
Mar 29PO, Clerk, SO, Insurance
