All questions of Verb for Class 1 Exam

Explanation:
The correct answer is option 'E': "couldnt have known / would be."

Explanation of the answer:
1. The first part of the sentence states, "As a young woman who had never given birth before..." This implies that the woman has no prior experience with childbirth.
2. The second part of the sentence states, "...she ____ what the experience of childbirth ____ like." Here, we need to fill in the blanks to complete the sentence correctly.
3. We need to choose the verb tense and modal verb that accurately convey the idea that the woman's lack of experience prevents her from knowing what childbirth is like.
4. The modal verbs "doesn't know," "may not know," "must not have known," and "may not know" all express uncertainty or possibility, but they do not convey the idea that the woman's lack of experience prevents her from knowing.
5. The correct verb tense to use is the past perfect tense "couldnt have known" because it emphasizes that the woman's lack of experience occurred in the past and therefore prevented her from knowing what childbirth is like.
6. The correct modal verb to use is "would be" because it expresses the hypothetical nature of the experience of childbirth. Since the woman has never given birth before, she can only imagine or speculate about what the experience would be like.
7. Therefore, the correct answer is option 'E': "couldnt have known / would be," which means that as a young woman who had never given birth before, she couldn't have known what the experience of childbirth would be like.

Key Points:
- The woman has no prior experience with childbirth.
- The verb tense used is the past perfect tense "couldnt have known."
- The modal verb used is "would be" to express the hypothetical nature of the experience.
- The correct answer is option 'E': "couldnt have known / would be."

Explanation:
The sentence talks about the unfortunate incident where a voyaging ship was wrecked during a storm at sea, and only two men on board were able to swim to the small island nearby. In this context, the correct option to fill the blank is 'were able to'.

Reasoning:

- Option 'a' - 'might' implies possibility, but the sentence needs a confirmation that the men were able to swim to the island.
- Option 'b' - 'were supposed to' implies obligation or expectation, but it does not fit the context of the sentence as it is not clear who expected or obligated the men to swim to the island.
- Option 'c' - 'could' implies ability or possibility, but it does not confirm that the men actually swam to the island.
- Option 'd' - 'were able to' implies ability, and it confirms that the men were successful in swimming to the island.
- Option 'e' - 'had to' implies necessity or obligation, but it does not fit the context of the sentence as it is not clear who obligated the men to swim to the island.

Therefore, the correct option is 'were able to'.

Understanding the Correct Answer: "must have had"
The sentence in question is:
"He ____ technical support when his computer broke down because he doesn't know much about computers."
The correct answer is option 'A': "must have had." Let's break down why this is the right choice.
Meaning of "must have had"
- This phrase indicates a strong assumption about a past event.
- In this context, it suggests that since the person lacks knowledge about computers, it is highly likely that he sought help.
Contextual Analysis
- The phrase "when his computer broke down" implies a specific scenario.
- Given his limited knowledge about computers, it is reasonable to conclude that he would need assistance.
Why Other Options Are Incorrect
- b) needn't have had: This implies that he didn't need support, which contradicts the context.
- c) can't have had: This suggests that it was impossible for him to have had support, which is not the case.
- d) didn't have to have: This implies he had a choice about support, which doesn't align with the scenario of a computer breakdown.
- e) shouldn't have had: This indicates a judgment that he was wrong in seeking help, which is not the intent of the sentence.
Conclusion
- The phrase "must have had" effectively conveys that, due to his lack of technical knowledge, it is logical to conclude that he sought technical support during his computer issues. Thus, option 'A' is the most appropriate choice for the sentence.

The correct answer is C: has acknowledged / could have been.
Explanation:
- The sentence is talking about something that happened in the past, before the September 11 attacks.
- The phrase "has acknowledged" is in the present perfect tense, indicating an action that started in the past and has continued up to the present.
- The phrase "could have been" is in the past conditional tense, indicating a possibility or speculation about the past.
- This combination of tenses correctly conveys the idea that the national security adviser acknowledged the need for better intelligence sharing before the September 11 attacks, and it is a possibility that this could have prevented the attacks.
- The other options do not use the correct tenses or do not convey the same meaning as the original sentence.

Understanding the Correct Answer: "might have captured"
The sentence discusses Apple's potential in relation to Microsoft's market share during the late 1990s. The correct answer, "might have captured," indicates a possibility that was not realized. Here’s a breakdown of why this option fits best:
1. Implication of Possibility
- The phrase "might have" suggests that there was a chance or opportunity for Apple to capture market share.
- It conveys a sense of hypothetical outcomes, reflecting on what could have occurred if circumstances were different.
2. Contextual Fit
- The sentence notes that Apple did not have a clear business plan, which implies that although they had the potential ("might have"), they ultimately did not act on it.
- This aligns with the historical context where Apple struggled against Microsoft despite having innovative products.
3. Comparison with Other Options
- "could capture": Indicates present ability, not past potential.
- "needn't have captured": Suggests it was unnecessary, which is not the case here.
- "should captured": Incorrect grammatical structure (should have captured).
- "might capture": Indicates future potential, not a reflection on the past.
Conclusion
- The option "might have captured" accurately encapsulates the idea of Apple having the potential to take market share in a past scenario that did not materialize. This reflects both the opportunity and the lack of execution due to a missing business plan.

Explanation:

Working conditions may have improved in many occupations in the past few years
- This option suggests that there is a possibility that working conditions have improved in various occupations over the past few years.
- It acknowledges the potential for positive changes in the working environment.

One can never be safe, particularly in places with higher risk occupations
- This part of the statement emphasizes the importance of remaining vigilant about safety, especially in workplaces with higher risk factors.
- It highlights the need for ongoing attention to safety measures regardless of any perceived improvements in working conditions.

Conclusion
Overall, option C ("may have improved") is the correct choice as it recognizes the potential for positive changes in working conditions while also emphasizing the continued need for safety precautions in high-risk occupations.

To solve this question, we need to determine the correct verb forms to complete the sentence correctly. Here's a breakdown of the given options:
Option A: is / had heard
- This option uses the present tense "is" and the past perfect tense "had heard."
- However, the use of the past perfect tense does not fit logically in the sentence.
- The past perfect tense is usually used to indicate an action that happened before another past action, but there is no clear indication of a past action in the sentence.
Option B: can be / heard
- This option uses the modal verb "can be" and the simple past tense "heard."
- The use of "can be" implies possibility but does not fit well in the sentence.
- It is more appropriate to use a verb form that expresses a higher degree of certainty.
Option C: might have been / hear
- This option uses the modal verb "might have been" and the base form "hear."
- The use of "might have been" suggests a possibility in the past, but it does not fit well in the sentence.
- It is more appropriate to use a verb form that expresses a higher degree of certainty.
Option D: would be / have heard
- This option uses the modal verb "would be" and the present perfect tense "have heard."
- The use of "would be" indicates a hypothetical situation or expectation, which fits well in the sentence.
- The present perfect tense "have heard" indicates that the action of hearing happened before the present moment.
- This option provides a logical and grammatically correct completion to the sentence.
Option E: will be / will have heard
- This option uses the future tense "will be" and the future perfect tense "will have heard."
- While the use of the future tense is possible, it does not fit well in the sentence.
- The sentence does not provide a clear indication of a future event or time frame.
Therefore, the correct answer is option D: would be / have heard.

Explanation:

Intervention is not always the best solution for a child's habit. The child should be allowed to abandon the habit gradually, all by himself. The correct answer is option 'E' which is explained below:

Could have allowed

- The phrase "could have allowed" indicates a possibility that the parent could have allowed the child to abandon the habit of thumb-sucking gradually.
- This option suggests that the parent could have provided a supportive environment for the child to abandon the habit on his own.
- It is important to note that this option does not imply that the parent should have "allowed" the child to continue the habit. Instead, it suggests that the parent could have taken a more hands-off approach and allowed the child to naturally outgrow the habit.

Other options:

Have allowed, had allowed, must have allowed, were able to allow

- These options are not suitable in this context as they do not convey the same meaning as "could have allowed".
- "Have allowed" and "had allowed" indicate that the parent has already given permission for the child to abandon the habit.
- "Must have allowed" implies that the parent had no other choice but to allow the child to abandon the habit.
- "Were able to allow" implies that the parent had the ability to allow the child to abandon the habit, but it does not suggest that it was the best course of action.

Conclusion:

Parents need to be patient and provide a supportive environment for their child to abandon the habit of thumb-sucking gradually. They should not intervene unless the habit is causing harm to the child. The correct answer is option 'E', which suggests that the parent could have allowed the child to naturally outgrow the habit.

Explanation:
The correct answer is option C: shouldn't have taken.

Explanation:
To understand why option C is correct, let's review the meaning and usage of the different options:

a) needn't have taken: This means that it was not necessary for Martin to take the tennis racket. However, this does not align with the fact that the speaker got angry, indicating that Martin did take the racket.

b) must not have taken: This implies that Martin was not allowed to take the tennis racket. While it is a possibility, it does not explain why the speaker got angry.

c) shouldn't have taken: This option correctly expresses the speaker's anger and implies that Martin was not supposed to take the tennis racket without permission. It suggests that Martin made a mistake by taking it.

d) didn't need to take: This option suggests that Martin had no reason or obligation to take the tennis racket. However, it does not explain the speaker's anger.

e) might not have taken: This option suggests that Martin possibly did not take the tennis racket. However, since the speaker got angry, it implies that Martin did take it.

In conclusion:
Option C, "shouldn't have taken," is the correct answer. It accurately reflects the speaker's anger and implies that Martin made a mistake by taking the tennis racket without permission.

The correct answer is B: .
Explanation:
- The sentence talks about a future possibility, indicating that the vaccine is not currently available.
- The phrase "at least partial protection against HIV" suggests that the vaccine may not offer complete protection, but it can provide some level of defense against the virus.
- The word "could" implies a potential outcome or possibility, which aligns with the idea that the vaccine may become available in the future.
- The other options are not suitable in this context:
- "Had to be" suggests a requirement or necessity, which is not stated or implied in the sentence.
- "Used to be" indicates that the vaccine was available in the past but is no longer the case, which contradicts the idea of a future possibility.
- "Might have been" implies that something was possible in the past but did not occur, which does not fit the context of a potential future vaccine.
- "Would rather be" expresses a preference, which is not relevant to the discussion of a vaccine's availability.

Understanding the Correct Answer
In the sentence "I don't know why she didn't ask me how to do it as I ____ her," the correct completion is "could have helped." Let's break down why option B is the most appropriate choice.
Meaning of "Could Have Helped"
- "Could have helped" suggests a past ability or potential action that was not taken.
- This phrase implies that the speaker had the capacity to assist but was not given the opportunity.
Contextual Clarity
- The context indicates a missed opportunity. The speaker is reflecting on why someone did not ask for help.
- If the speaker "could have helped," it means they were capable and available to provide assistance, but it did not happen.
Analysis of Other Options
- a) Must have helped: This indicates certainty that help was given in the past, which contradicts the context.
- c) Might help: This suggests a possibility in the present or future, not fitting the past context.
- d) Should have helped: This implies a moral obligation that was not fulfilled, which is not the focus here.
- e) Could help: This indicates present ability, which does not align with the past situation being discussed.
Conclusion
In summary, "could have helped" effectively conveys the idea that assistance was possible but not utilized. This aligns with the reflective tone of the sentence, making it the best choice.

The correct answer is option A: shouldn't have given up. Here is the detailed explanation:
- The sentence is talking about the actions of immigrants when they first settled in America.
- The word "now" suggests that the sentence is referring to the present time.
- The word "agree" implies that the immigrants have a consensus or shared belief.
- The word "their" indicates that the immigrants are referring to their own traditions or cultural practices.
- The phrase "given up" means abandoning or relinquishing something.
- Option A: shouldn't have given up is the correct choice because it expresses the idea that the immigrants regret giving up their traditions when they first settled in America.
To summarize:
- Immigrants regret abandoning their traditions when they first settled in America.
- This regret is shared among many immigrants in the present time.
- The correct answer is option A: shouldn't have given up.

The correct answer is D: might have made.
Explanation:
The sentence states that the new steam-powered and mechanized farm equipment made the work easier, but they couldn't get it to work. Here, we are discussing a hypothetical situation where the equipment could have made the work easier, but it didn't. To convey this meaning, we need to use a conditional phrase in the past tense.
Let's analyze the given options:
A: was able to make - This option is grammatically incorrect as it uses the simple past tense ("was") instead of the conditional phrase.
B: can't have made - This option uses the present tense ("can't") instead of the conditional phrase, making it grammatically incorrect.
C: didn't have to make - This option suggests that there was no need to make the equipment, which is not what the sentence implies. It is grammatically incorrect as it doesn't convey the intended meaning.
D: might have made - This option uses the conditional phrase ("might have") in the past tense, which accurately conveys the hypothetical situation where the equipment could have made the work easier. This is the correct answer.
E: had better make - This option implies a suggestion or advice, which is not suitable in the context of the sentence. It is grammatically incorrect and doesn't convey the intended meaning.
Therefore, the correct answer is D: might have made.

To answer this question correctly, we need to understand the meaning of each option and choose the most suitable one.
Option A: would rather drink
- This phrase indicates a preference or choice, but it doesn't convey the necessity or requirement mentioned in the question.
Option B: don't have to drink
- This phrase implies that there is no obligation or need to drink tea or coffee, which contradicts the question's statement that it is necessary to avoid them.
Option C: mustn't drink
- This phrase expresses a prohibition or strong recommendation against drinking tea or coffee in the evenings, aligning with the question's requirement for a good night's sleep.
Option D: were able to drink
- This phrase suggests the ability or possibility to drink tea or coffee, but it doesn't address the necessity or recommendation mentioned in the question.
Option E: could drink
- This phrase implies the ability or opportunity to drink tea or coffee, but it doesn't address the necessity or recommendation mentioned in the question.
Therefore, the correct answer is C: mustn't drink as it accurately reflects the requirement to avoid tea or coffee in the evenings for a good night's sleep.

The correct answer is option 'D' - might have got.

Explanation:
To understand the correct answer, let's examine the given sentence: "I don't know why Peter is so late; do you think he ____ lost coming here?"

The sentence indicates that the speaker is unsure about the reason for Peter's lateness and is seeking the listener's opinion or speculation.

In this context, the use of "might have got" is appropriate because it expresses a possibility or speculation about Peter's situation. Here's why the other options are not the best fit:

a) may get: The verb "get" indicates an action in the present or future tense, but the sentence is referring to Peter's lateness, which is in the past. So, "may get" is not suitable in this context.

b) could get: Similar to option 'a', "could get" also refers to a present or future action. It doesn't convey the idea of Peter being lost in the past.

c) must have got: "Must have got" implies certainty or a strong belief about something that happened in the past. However, the speaker explicitly states that they don't know the reason for Peter's lateness, so using "must have got" would be contradictory.

e) was to have got: This option suggests an obligation or plan to arrive at a certain time. However, it doesn't fit the context of Peter being lost, as it focuses on the intended arrival time rather than the reason for his lateness.

In conclusion, the most appropriate option is 'D' - might have got, as it conveys the idea of possibility or speculation about Peter getting lost on his way to the current location.

Explanation:

The correct answer is option 'C' - "was used to".

Context:
The speaker is discussing their experience of working alone during the night shift. They are expressing their gratitude for being able to work alone because otherwise, they would have felt really bored.

Explanation:
In this context, the phrase "was used to" is the most appropriate choice. Here's why:

1. Meaning:
- "Was used to" is a verb phrase that indicates a habit or a state of being familiar with something.
- It suggests that the speaker had developed a level of comfort or familiarity with working alone during night shifts.

2. Past Tense:
- The usage of "was" indicates that the statement is in the past tense.
- Since the speaker is referring to a specific period in the past (the night shift), it is appropriate to use the past tense.

3. Contrast with Other Options:
- Option 'A' - "was supposed to" implies an expectation or obligation, which doesn't fit the context. The speaker is not discussing what they were supposed to do, but rather expressing their satisfaction with their current situation.
- Option 'B' - "was to" is not grammatically correct in this context. It lacks the necessary verb or verb phrase to complete the sentence.
- Option 'D' - "would" is a conditional verb indicating a hypothetical situation, but it doesn't convey the intended meaning of being familiar with working alone during night shifts.
- Option 'E' - "used to" is a valid choice, but "was used to" is more appropriate grammatically as it matches the past tense used in the sentence.

Conclusion:
Considering the meaning, past tense, and the contrast with other options, the correct answer is option 'C' - "was used to". It accurately conveys the speaker's familiarity and comfort with working alone during the night shift.