Time Left - 08:00 mins
SSC Steno Mega Quiz on English
Attempt now to get your rank among 10595 students!
Question 1
In the sentence, identify the segment which contains the grammatical error. If the sentence has no error, then select 'No error'.
We have to accept the fact that driving vehicles require expertise.
Question 2
In the sentence, identify the segment which contains the grammatical error. If the sentence has no error, then select 'No error'.
No beggar who comes to our doors goes back empty-handed.
Question 3
Identify the best way to improve the underlined part of the given sentence. If there is no improvement required, select ‘no Improvement’.
I didn’t need to water the flowers. Just after I finished, it started raining.
Question 4
In the sentence, identify the segment which contains the grammatical error.
She always fed her childrens before she fed her dog.
Question 5
Select the most appropriate meaning of the given idiom/proverb.
Practice makes a man perfect
Question 6
Select the most appropriate meaning of the given idiom.
Every inch a gentleman
Question 7
Select the word which means the same as the group of words given.
Study of evolution of mankind
Question 8
Select the word which means the same as the group of words given.
A person who is well-known in an unfavourable way
Question 9
Select the correctly spelt word.
Question 10
Select the correctly spelt word.
Question 11
Find a word that is the synonym of -
LUNGE
Question 12
Which one of the following is the synonym of the word written in capital letters in the sentence, "Being a BASHFUL and timid girl, she does not like to socialise very often."?
Question 13
Rearrange the parts of the sentence in correct order.
The NSG
P-of nuclear trade, spelt out in its guidelines and trigger-lists
Q-covering every aspect
R-has already made its rules,
The NSG
P-of nuclear trade, spelt out in its guidelines and trigger-lists
Q-covering every aspect
R-has already made its rules,
Question 14
Rearrange the parts of the sentence in correct order.
The yatra focussed
P-for poor and
Q-marginalised communities
R-on access to development and dignity
The yatra focussed
P-for poor and
Q-marginalised communities
R-on access to development and dignity
Question 15
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Many people believe nothing can be done about the English language because
Question 16
Select the most appropriate option to fill in the blank.
The residence of that rich man was plain to the point of being ____________,with no luxuries.
Question 17
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
The author believes that
Question 18
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
The author believes that the first stage towards the political regeneration of the language would be
Question 19
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
The author believes that
Question 20
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hands cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half- conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified from, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and fail then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish, thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits, one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration, so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
What causes bad language in the end?
- 10595 attempts
- 78 upvotes
- 121 comments
Tags :
SSC & RailwayGeneralSep 22SSC & Railway
