Languages: Mock Test - 4 - CUET MCQ

The background of the emergence of political secularism in Europe is profound religious homogenisation -dissenters, and adherents of non-dominant religions, were expelled or exterminated during and after the wars of religion. Rulers publicly confessed allegiance to one of the many churches in these predominantly single-religion societies, thereby consolidating a strong alliance between state and the dominant church. Trouble began, however, when this church became increasingly politically meddlesome and socially oppressive. The key issue then was how to tame the power of this church. The state's disentanglement from the dominant church (church-state separation) was necessary to realise a number of goals, including the enhancement of individual liberty and equality. But for this secularism, tackling religious diversity was simply not an issue, because it had already been liquidated in all kinds of ethically undesirable ways.

By contrast, in India, deep religious diversity was not an optional extra but part of its social, cultural and historical landscape. Gandhi understood this and never tired of stating it: India is "perhaps one nation in the ancient world which had recognised cultural democracy, whereby it is held that the roads to one and the same God are many, but the goal was one, because God was one and the same. In fact, the roads are as many as there are individuals in the world... The various religions were as so many leaves of a tree; they might seem different but at the trunk they are one". Gandhi dismissed the idea that there could ever be one religion in the world, a uniform religious code, as it were, for all humankind.

Q. Tackling religious diversity to achieve 'Church-State separation 'was not an issue, because

The background of the emergence of political secularism in Europe is profound religious homogenisation -dissenters, and adherents of non-dominant religions, were expelled or exterminated during and after the wars of religion. Rulers publicly confessed allegiance to one of the many churches in these predominantly single-religion societies, thereby consolidating a strong alliance between state and the dominant church. Trouble began, however, when this church became increasingly politically meddlesome and socially oppressive. The key issue then was how to tame the power of this church. The state's disentanglement from the dominant church (church-state separation) was necessary to realise a number of goals, including the enhancement of individual liberty and equality. But for this secularism, tackling religious diversity was simply not an issue, because it had already been liquidated in all kinds of ethically undesirable ways.

By contrast, in India, deep religious diversity was not an optional extra but part of its social, cultural and historical landscape. Gandhi understood this and never tired of stating it: India is "perhaps one nation in the ancient world which had recognised cultural democracy, whereby it is held that the roads to one and the same God are many, but the goal was one, because God was one and the same. In fact, the roads are as many as there are individuals in the world... The various religions were as so many leaves of a tree; they might seem different but at the trunk they are one". Gandhi dismissed the idea that there could ever be one religion in the world, a uniform religious code, as it were, for all humankind.

Q. As per Gandhiji's concept of religious diversity, which of these analogies best describes the relation between the different religions and God.

Persuasion is the art of convincing someone to agree with your point of view. According to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, there are three basic tools of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos.

Ethos is a speaker's way of convincing the audience that she is a credible source. An audience will consider a speaker credible if she seems trustworthy, reliable, and sincere. This can be done in many ways. For example, a speaker can develop ethos by explaining how much experience or education she has in the field.

After all, you would be more likely to listen to advice about how to take care of your teeth from a dentist than a fire fighter. A speaker can also create ethos by convincing the audience that she is a good person who has their best interests at heart. If an audience cannot trust you, you will not be able to persuade them.

Pathos is a speaker's way of connecting with an audience's emotions. For example, a speaker who is trying to convince an audience to vote for him might say that he alone can save the country from a terrible war.

These words are intended to fill the audience with fear, thus making them want to vote for him. Similarly, a charity organization that helps animals might show pictures of injured dogs and cats to an audience. These images are intended to fill the viewers with pity. If the audience feels bad for the animals, they will be more likely to donate money.

Logos is the use of facts, information, statistics, or other evidence to make your argument more convincing.

An audience will be more likely to believe you if you have data to back up your claims. For example, a commercial for soap might tell you that laboratory tests have shown that their soap kills all 7,000,000 of the bacteria living on your hands right now. This piece of information might make you more likely to buy their brand of soap.

Presenting this evidence is much more convincing than simply saying "our soap is the best!" Use of logos can also increase a speaker's ethos; the more facts a speaker includes in his argument, the more likely you are to think that he is educated and trustworthy.

Although ethos, pathos, and logos all have their strengths, they are often most effective when they are used together.

Indeed, most speakers use a combination of ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade their audiences. The next time you listen to a speech, watch a commercial, or listen to a friend try to convince you to lend him some money, be on the lookout for these ancient Greek tools of persuasion.

Q. The main idea of the passage is to

Persuasion is the art of convincing someone to agree with your point of view. According to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, there are three basic tools of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos.

Ethos is a speaker's way of convincing the audience that she is a credible source. An audience will consider a speaker credible if she seems trustworthy, reliable, and sincere. This can be done in many ways. For example, a speaker can develop ethos by explaining how much experience or education she has in the field.

After all, you would be more likely to listen to advice about how to take care of your teeth from a dentist than a fire fighter. A speaker can also create ethos by convincing the audience that she is a good person who has their best interests at heart. If an audience cannot trust you, you will not be able to persuade them.

Pathos is a speaker's way of connecting with an audience's emotions. For example, a speaker who is trying to convince an audience to vote for him might say that he alone can save the country from a terrible war.

These words are intended to fill the audience with fear, thus making them want to vote for him. Similarly, a charity organization that helps animals might show pictures of injured dogs and cats to an audience. These images are intended to fill the viewers with pity. If the audience feels bad for the animals, they will be more likely to donate money.

Logos is the use of facts, information, statistics, or other evidence to make your argument more convincing.

An audience will be more likely to believe you if you have data to back up your claims. For example, a commercial for soap might tell you that laboratory tests have shown that their soap kills all 7,000,000 of the bacteria living on your hands right now. This piece of information might make you more likely to buy their brand of soap.

Presenting this evidence is much more convincing than simply saying "our soap is the best!" Use of logos can also increase a speaker's ethos; the more facts a speaker includes in his argument, the more likely you are to think that he is educated and trustworthy.

Although ethos, pathos, and logos all have their strengths, they are often most effective when they are used together.

Indeed, most speakers use a combination of ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade their audiences. The next time you listen to a speech, watch a commercial, or listen to a friend try to convince you to lend him some money, be on the lookout for these ancient Greek tools of persuasion.

Q. It can be inferred from the passage that

Persuasion is the art of convincing someone to agree with your point of view. According to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, there are three basic tools of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos.

Ethos is a speaker's way of convincing the audience that she is a credible source. An audience will consider a speaker credible if she seems trustworthy, reliable, and sincere. This can be done in many ways. For example, a speaker can develop ethos by explaining how much experience or education she has in the field.

After all, you would be more likely to listen to advice about how to take care of your teeth from a dentist than a fire fighter. A speaker can also create ethos by convincing the audience that she is a good person who has their best interests at heart. If an audience cannot trust you, you will not be able to persuade them.

Pathos is a speaker's way of connecting with an audience's emotions. For example, a speaker who is trying to convince an audience to vote for him might say that he alone can save the country from a terrible war.

These words are intended to fill the audience with fear, thus making them want to vote for him. Similarly, a charity organization that helps animals might show pictures of injured dogs and cats to an audience. These images are intended to fill the viewers with pity. If the audience feels bad for the animals, they will be more likely to donate money.

Logos is the use of facts, information, statistics, or other evidence to make your argument more convincing.

An audience will be more likely to believe you if you have data to back up your claims. For example, a commercial for soap might tell you that laboratory tests have shown that their soap kills all 7,000,000 of the bacteria living on your hands right now. This piece of information might make you more likely to buy their brand of soap.

Presenting this evidence is much more convincing than simply saying "our soap is the best!" Use of logos can also increase a speaker's ethos; the more facts a speaker includes in his argument, the more likely you are to think that he is educated and trustworthy.

Although ethos, pathos, and logos all have their strengths, they are often most effective when they are used together.

Indeed, most speakers use a combination of ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade their audiences. The next time you listen to a speech, watch a commercial, or listen to a friend try to convince you to lend him some money, be on the lookout for these ancient Greek tools of persuasion.

Q. According to the passage, persuasion is

Persuasion is the art of convincing someone to agree with your point of view. According to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, there are three basic tools of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos.

Ethos is a speaker's way of convincing the audience that she is a credible source. An audience will consider a speaker credible if she seems trustworthy, reliable, and sincere. This can be done in many ways. For example, a speaker can develop ethos by explaining how much experience or education she has in the field.

After all, you would be more likely to listen to advice about how to take care of your teeth from a dentist than a fire fighter. A speaker can also create ethos by convincing the audience that she is a good person who has their best interests at heart. If an audience cannot trust you, you will not be able to persuade them.

Pathos is a speaker's way of connecting with an audience's emotions. For example, a speaker who is trying to convince an audience to vote for him might say that he alone can save the country from a terrible war.

These words are intended to fill the audience with fear, thus making them want to vote for him. Similarly, a charity organization that helps animals might show pictures of injured dogs and cats to an audience. These images are intended to fill the viewers with pity. If the audience feels bad for the animals, they will be more likely to donate money.

Logos is the use of facts, information, statistics, or other evidence to make your argument more convincing.

An audience will be more likely to believe you if you have data to back up your claims. For example, a commercial for soap might tell you that laboratory tests have shown that their soap kills all 7,000,000 of the bacteria living on your hands right now. This piece of information might make you more likely to buy their brand of soap.

Presenting this evidence is much more convincing than simply saying "our soap is the best!" Use of logos can also increase a speaker's ethos; the more facts a speaker includes in his argument, the more likely you are to think that he is educated and trustworthy.

Although ethos, pathos, and logos all have their strengths, they are often most effective when they are used together.

Indeed, most speakers use a combination of ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade their audiences. The next time you listen to a speech, watch a commercial, or listen to a friend try to convince you to lend him some money, be on the lookout for these ancient Greek tools of persuasion.

Q. Which of the following is an antonym of the word "trustworthy" as it is used in the passage?

Persuasion is the art of convincing someone to agree with your point of view. According to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, there are three basic tools of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos.

Ethos is a speaker's way of convincing the audience that she is a credible source. An audience will consider a speaker credible if she seems trustworthy, reliable, and sincere. This can be done in many ways. For example, a speaker can develop ethos by explaining how much experience or education she has in the field.

After all, you would be more likely to listen to advice about how to take care of your teeth from a dentist than a fire fighter. A speaker can also create ethos by convincing the audience that she is a good person who has their best interests at heart. If an audience cannot trust you, you will not be able to persuade them.

Pathos is a speaker's way of connecting with an audience's emotions. For example, a speaker who is trying to convince an audience to vote for him might say that he alone can save the country from a terrible war.

These words are intended to fill the audience with fear, thus making them want to vote for him. Similarly, a charity organization that helps animals might show pictures of injured dogs and cats to an audience. These images are intended to fill the viewers with pity. If the audience feels bad for the animals, they will be more likely to donate money.

Logos is the use of facts, information, statistics, or other evidence to make your argument more convincing.

An audience will be more likely to believe you if you have data to back up your claims. For example, a commercial for soap might tell you that laboratory tests have shown that their soap kills all 7,000,000 of the bacteria living on your hands right now. This piece of information might make you more likely to buy their brand of soap.

Presenting this evidence is much more convincing than simply saying "our soap is the best!" Use of logos can also increase a speaker's ethos; the more facts a speaker includes in his argument, the more likely you are to think that he is educated and trustworthy.

Although ethos, pathos, and logos all have their strengths, they are often most effective when they are used together.

Indeed, most speakers use a combination of ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade their audiences. The next time you listen to a speech, watch a commercial, or listen to a friend try to convince you to lend him some money, be on the lookout for these ancient Greek tools of persuasion.

Q. The tone of the author is

The world marvels at how well the Indian Constitution has kept a diverse country together for more than 70 years. Its robustness and durability rest on its many built-in safeguards securing citizens' rights to freedom and justice and fair play which no government, however powerful, can hope to effectively recast within the space of a single or even multiple tenures in office.

Mistakenly, however, this lengthy founding document of the Indian Republic is believed to have been completed solely by the Constituent Assembly, working flat out in just two years, eleven months and 17 days. In fact, the Constitution's long history stretches to over 40 years before its enactment, going all the way back to the Indian Councils Act of 1909. This law, for the first time, brought Indians into governance at central and provincial levels, albeit in a very limited way, through a highly restricted and unrepresentative electorate split on communal lines.

The Government of India Act, 1919 was a vast improvement on the Indian Councils Act but remained unrepresentative. It also persisted with communal representation, which had earlier been endorsed by the Congress and the Muslim League through the Lucknow Pact of 1916. In its report submitted in 1930, the Simon Commission, constituted to evaluate the Government of India Act of 1919, recommended much greater Indian involvement in the governance of the country. What followed its report were three extraordinary roundtable conferences - in 1930, 1931 and 1932 - all held in London to see how best Indians could administer their country.

Deliberations in these conferences brought out the concerns of different communities, especially the Depressed Classes of which Ambedkar was the de facto leader, and the Muslims led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

Except the second conference, which Gandhi attended, the other two were boycotted by the Congress. These conferences gave voice to other interest groups too -those representing women and Anglo-Indians, for instance - and led to the passage of the Government of India Act of 1935, much of which found its way into the Constitution.

Q. Which of the following is a quality that the world admires about India?

The world marvels at how well the Indian Constitution has kept a diverse country together for more than 70 years. Its robustness and durability rest on its many built-in safeguards securing citizens' rights to freedom and justice and fair play which no government, however powerful, can hope to effectively recast within the space of a single or even multiple tenures in office.

Mistakenly, however, this lengthy founding document of the Indian Republic is believed to have been completed solely by the Constituent Assembly, working flat out in just two years, eleven months and 17 days. In fact, the Constitution's long history stretches to over 40 years before its enactment, going all the way back to the Indian Councils Act of 1909. This law, for the first time, brought Indians into governance at central and provincial levels, albeit in a very limited way, through a highly restricted and unrepresentative electorate split on communal lines.

The Government of India Act, 1919 was a vast improvement on the Indian Councils Act but remained unrepresentative. It also persisted with communal representation, which had earlier been endorsed by the Congress and the Muslim League through the Lucknow Pact of 1916. In its report submitted in 1930, the Simon Commission, constituted to evaluate the Government of India Act of 1919, recommended much greater Indian involvement in the governance of the country. What followed its report were three extraordinary roundtable conferences - in 1930, 1931 and 1932 - all held in London to see how best Indians could administer their country.

Deliberations in these conferences brought out the concerns of different communities, especially the Depressed Classes of which Ambedkar was the de facto leader, and the Muslims led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

Except the second conference, which Gandhi attended, the other two were boycotted by the Congress. These conferences gave voice to other interest groups too -those representing women and Anglo-Indians, for instance - and led to the passage of the Government of India Act of 1935, much of which found its way into the Constitution.

Q. Which of the following was one of the major flaws of the "Government of India Act, 1919"?

The world marvels at how well the Indian Constitution has kept a diverse country together for more than 70 years. Its robustness and durability rest on its many built-in safeguards securing citizens' rights to freedom and justice and fair play which no government, however powerful, can hope to effectively recast within the space of a single or even multiple tenures in office.

Mistakenly, however, this lengthy founding document of the Indian Republic is believed to have been completed solely by the Constituent Assembly, working flat out in just two years, eleven months and 17 days. In fact, the Constitution's long history stretches to over 40 years before its enactment, going all the way back to the Indian Councils Act of 1909. This law, for the first time, brought Indians into governance at central and provincial levels, albeit in a very limited way, through a highly restricted and unrepresentative electorate split on communal lines.

The Government of India Act, 1919 was a vast improvement on the Indian Councils Act but remained unrepresentative. It also persisted with communal representation, which had earlier been endorsed by the Congress and the Muslim League through the Lucknow Pact of 1916. In its report submitted in 1930, the Simon Commission, constituted to evaluate the Government of India Act of 1919, recommended much greater Indian involvement in the governance of the country. What followed its report were three extraordinary roundtable conferences - in 1930, 1931 and 1932 - all held in London to see how best Indians could administer their country.

Deliberations in these conferences brought out the concerns of different communities, especially the Depressed Classes of which Ambedkar was the de facto leader, and the Muslims led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

Except the second conference, which Gandhi attended, the other two were boycotted by the Congress. These conferences gave voice to other interest groups too -those representing women and Anglo-Indians, for instance - and led to the passage of the Government of India Act of 1935, much of which found its way into the Constitution.

Q. Which of the following chiefly advocates the primary idea of the passage?

The world marvels at how well the Indian Constitution has kept a diverse country together for more than 70 years. Its robustness and durability rest on its many built-in safeguards securing citizens' rights to freedom and justice and fair play which no government, however powerful, can hope to effectively recast within the space of a single or even multiple tenures in office.

Mistakenly, however, this lengthy founding document of the Indian Republic is believed to have been completed solely by the Constituent Assembly, working flat out in just two years, eleven months and 17 days. In fact, the Constitution's long history stretches to over 40 years before its enactment, going all the way back to the Indian Councils Act of 1909. This law, for the first time, brought Indians into governance at central and provincial levels, albeit in a very limited way, through a highly restricted and unrepresentative electorate split on communal lines.

The Government of India Act, 1919 was a vast improvement on the Indian Councils Act but remained unrepresentative. It also persisted with communal representation, which had earlier been endorsed by the Congress and the Muslim League through the Lucknow Pact of 1916. In its report submitted in 1930, the Simon Commission, constituted to evaluate the Government of India Act of 1919, recommended much greater Indian involvement in the governance of the country. What followed its report were three extraordinary roundtable conferences - in 1930, 1931 and 1932 - all held in London to see how best Indians could administer their country.

Deliberations in these conferences brought out the concerns of different communities, especially the Depressed Classes of which Ambedkar was the de facto leader, and the Muslims led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

Except the second conference, which Gandhi attended, the other two were boycotted by the Congress. These conferences gave voice to other interest groups too -those representing women and Anglo-Indians, for instance - and led to the passage of the Government of India Act of 1935, much of which found its way into the Constitution.

Q. What does the phase "working flat out" as used in the passage mean?

The world marvels at how well the Indian Constitution has kept a diverse country together for more than 70 years. Its robustness and durability rest on its many built-in safeguards securing citizens' rights to freedom and justice and fair play which no government, however powerful, can hope to effectively recast within the space of a single or even multiple tenures in office.

Mistakenly, however, this lengthy founding document of the Indian Republic is believed to have been completed solely by the Constituent Assembly, working flat out in just two years, eleven months and 17 days. In fact, the Constitution's long history stretches to over 40 years before its enactment, going all the way back to the Indian Councils Act of 1909. This law, for the first time, brought Indians into governance at central and provincial levels, albeit in a very limited way, through a highly restricted and unrepresentative electorate split on communal lines.

The Government of India Act, 1919 was a vast improvement on the Indian Councils Act but remained unrepresentative. It also persisted with communal representation, which had earlier been endorsed by the Congress and the Muslim League through the Lucknow Pact of 1916. In its report submitted in 1930, the Simon Commission, constituted to evaluate the Government of India Act of 1919, recommended much greater Indian involvement in the governance of the country. What followed its report were three extraordinary roundtable conferences - in 1930, 1931 and 1932 - all held in London to see how best Indians could administer their country.

Deliberations in these conferences brought out the concerns of different communities, especially the Depressed Classes of which Ambedkar was the de facto leader, and the Muslims led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

Except the second conference, which Gandhi attended, the other two were boycotted by the Congress. These conferences gave voice to other interest groups too -those representing women and Anglo-Indians, for instance - and led to the passage of the Government of India Act of 1935, much of which found its way into the Constitution.

Q. Which of the following serves as an evidence for the participation of the Congress in the second conference?

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. The passage is primarily concerned with

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. Which of the following suggests that the NIP has done its work quite thoroughly?

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. Which of the following factor has been a major cause of the derailment of economic growth?

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. As used in the passage, the word "perilous" is synonymous to

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. As mentioned in the passage, the word "window" most nearly means

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. The government's investment in infrastructure has been welcomed by the author from which point of view?

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. Which of the following indicated that the NIP wants the centre and states to completely cooperate on this investment plan?

For an economy that is tottering, a big bang announcement from the government can sometimes work to turn around sentiment. The unveiling by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday of a mega push to infrastructure investment adding up to Rs. 102 lakh crore over the next five years belongs in this category.

Projects in energy, roads, railways and urban infrastructure under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) have been identified by a task force. About 42% of such identified projects are already under implementation, 19% are under development and 31% are at the conceptual stage.

The NIP task force appears to have gone project-byproject, assessing each for viability and relevance in consultation with the States. Considering that the NIP will be like a window to the future, a constant review becomes paramount if this is not to degenerate into a mere collation and listing of projects. A periodic review, as promised by the Finance Ministry, is necessary. The government's push on infrastructure development will not only enable ease of living - such as metro trains in cities and towns - but also create jobs and increase demand for primary commodities such as cement and steel. From this perspective, this push to invest in infrastructure is welcome.

Identifying the projects to be put on the pipeline is the easy part. Implementing and commissioning them will be the more difficult one. There are a few hurdles that the NIP task force needs to watch out for. First, the financing plan assumes that the Centre and the States will fund 39% each while the private sector will chip in with 22% of the outlay. Going by the present fiscal situation, it will be no small challenge for the Centre to raise Rs.39 lakh crore, even if it is over the next five years.

The financial position of States is even more perilous.

Second, the Rs.22 lakh crore expected from private investment also looks steep considering the lack of appetite for fresh investment by the private sector in the last few years. In fact, this factor has been a major drag on economic growth. Given the scale of investment, debt will play an important role and it remains to be seen if banks have gotten over their apprehensions on infrastructure financing as a major part of their bad loans originated there. Finally, cooperation from States becomes very important in implementing infrastructure projects. The experience on this count has not been very happy till now. While these are genuine obstacles that the task force needs to manage, these should not detract from the need for a concerted effort to invest in infrastructure. The key will be following up and reviewing the pipeline at regular intervals.

Q. Why could financing be a problem for this infrastructure investment push?

The growth in the index of industrial production (IIP) fell to 1.7 per cent in January compared with 7.5 per cent a year ago. The growth fell because of a subdued performance by the manufacturing sector, especially capital and consumer goods. The growth was also lower on a sequential basis from 2.4 per cent in December to 1.7 per cent in January, according to CSO data.

Manufacturing output expanded 1.3 per cent on a yearly basis, mining grew 3.9 per cent and electricity generation rose 0.8 per cent in January. Electricity had grown 7.6 per cent in the year-ago period. Rating agency CARE said lower growth in manufacturing was expected because of a high base effect. Besides, production was less because of a higher stock built-up from the second quarter as demand did not materialise fully in the third quarter.

CARE expects IIP growth for the year "to be around 5 per cent from 4.4 percent cumulative till January. While base effect will be there, it will diminish in size as companies also expand on production to meet annual targets". Data showed 11 of the 23 industry groups in the manufacturing sector witnessed positive growth.

However, furniture and paper products, excluding machines and equipment, declined the most. The production of infrastructure goods rose 7.9 per cent compared with 10.1 per cent in December. The output of intermediate goods contracted 3 per cent in January compared with a 5.4 per cent rise in the year-ago period.

Consumer as well as non-consumer durables output rose 1.8 per cent compared with a 7.6 per cent rise in January 2018. IIP growth stood at 4.4 per cent compared with 4.1 per cent in the same period a year ago.

Economic growth slowed to a five-quarter low of 6.6 per cent in the October-December period. The government estimate for the financial year ending this month has been revised down to a five-year low of 7 per cent from 7.2 percent. The IIP numbers come ahead of the RBI's monetary policy statement on April 4 and may increase the clamour for a cut in interest rates to boost economic activity.

Q. Out of the following options, which one can be inferred from the passage?

The growth in the index of industrial production (IIP) fell to 1.7 per cent in January compared with 7.5 per cent a year ago. The growth fell because of a subdued performance by the manufacturing sector, especially capital and consumer goods. The growth was also lower on a sequential basis from 2.4 per cent in December to 1.7 per cent in January, according to CSO data.

Manufacturing output expanded 1.3 per cent on a yearly basis, mining grew 3.9 per cent and electricity generation rose 0.8 per cent in January. Electricity had grown 7.6 per cent in the year-ago period. Rating agency CARE said lower growth in manufacturing was expected because of a high base effect. Besides, production was less because of a higher stock built-up from the second quarter as demand did not materialise fully in the third quarter.

CARE expects IIP growth for the year "to be around 5 per cent from 4.4 percent cumulative till January. While base effect will be there, it will diminish in size as companies also expand on production to meet annual targets". Data showed 11 of the 23 industry groups in the manufacturing sector witnessed positive growth.

However, furniture and paper products, excluding machines and equipment, declined the most. The production of infrastructure goods rose 7.9 per cent compared with 10.1 per cent in December. The output of intermediate goods contracted 3 per cent in January compared with a 5.4 per cent rise in the year-ago period.

Consumer as well as non-consumer durables output rose 1.8 per cent compared with a 7.6 per cent rise in January 2018. IIP growth stood at 4.4 per cent compared with 4.1 per cent in the same period a year ago.

Economic growth slowed to a five-quarter low of 6.6 per cent in the October-December period. The government estimate for the financial year ending this month has been revised down to a five-year low of 7 per cent from 7.2 percent. The IIP numbers come ahead of the RBI's monetary policy statement on April 4 and may increase the clamour for a cut in interest rates to boost economic activity.

Q. Out of the following options, which one can be inferred from the passage?

The growth in the index of industrial production (IIP) fell to 1.7 per cent in January compared with 7.5 per cent a year ago. The growth fell because of a subdued performance by the manufacturing sector, especially capital and consumer goods. The growth was also lower on a sequential basis from 2.4 per cent in December to 1.7 per cent in January, according to CSO data.

Manufacturing output expanded 1.3 per cent on a yearly basis, mining grew 3.9 per cent and electricity generation rose 0.8 per cent in January. Electricity had grown 7.6 per cent in the year-ago period. Rating agency CARE said lower growth in manufacturing was expected because of a high base effect. Besides, production was less because of a higher stock built-up from the second quarter as demand did not materialise fully in the third quarter.

CARE expects IIP growth for the year "to be around 5 per cent from 4.4 percent cumulative till January. While base effect will be there, it will diminish in size as companies also expand on production to meet annual targets". Data showed 11 of the 23 industry groups in the manufacturing sector witnessed positive growth.

However, furniture and paper products, excluding machines and equipment, declined the most. The production of infrastructure goods rose 7.9 per cent compared with 10.1 per cent in December. The output of intermediate goods contracted 3 per cent in January compared with a 5.4 per cent rise in the year-ago period.

Consumer as well as non-consumer durables output rose 1.8 per cent compared with a 7.6 per cent rise in January 2018. IIP growth stood at 4.4 per cent compared with 4.1 per cent in the same period a year ago.

Economic growth slowed to a five-quarter low of 6.6 per cent in the October-December period. The government estimate for the financial year ending this month has been revised down to a five-year low of 7 per cent from 7.2 percent. The IIP numbers come ahead of the RBI's monetary policy statement on April 4 and may increase the clamour for a cut in interest rates to boost economic activity.

Q. The author of the passage is most likely to agree with which of the following.

The growth in the index of industrial production (IIP) fell to 1.7 per cent in January compared with 7.5 per cent a year ago. The growth fell because of a subdued performance by the manufacturing sector, especially capital and consumer goods. The growth was also lower on a sequential basis from 2.4 per cent in December to 1.7 per cent in January, according to CSO data.

Manufacturing output expanded 1.3 per cent on a yearly basis, mining grew 3.9 per cent and electricity generation rose 0.8 per cent in January. Electricity had grown 7.6 per cent in the year-ago period. Rating agency CARE said lower growth in manufacturing was expected because of a high base effect. Besides, production was less because of a higher stock built-up from the second quarter as demand did not materialise fully in the third quarter.

CARE expects IIP growth for the year "to be around 5 per cent from 4.4 percent cumulative till January. While base effect will be there, it will diminish in size as companies also expand on production to meet annual targets". Data showed 11 of the 23 industry groups in the manufacturing sector witnessed positive growth.

However, furniture and paper products, excluding machines and equipment, declined the most. The production of infrastructure goods rose 7.9 per cent compared with 10.1 per cent in December. The output of intermediate goods contracted 3 per cent in January compared with a 5.4 per cent rise in the year-ago period.

Consumer as well as non-consumer durables output rose 1.8 per cent compared with a 7.6 per cent rise in January 2018. IIP growth stood at 4.4 per cent compared with 4.1 per cent in the same period a year ago.

Economic growth slowed to a five-quarter low of 6.6 per cent in the October-December period. The government estimate for the financial year ending this month has been revised down to a five-year low of 7 per cent from 7.2 percent. The IIP numbers come ahead of the RBI's monetary policy statement on April 4 and may increase the clamour for a cut in interest rates to boost economic activity.

Q. Out of the following options, which one is an appropriate title of the given passage?

Since 2005, the NGO Pratham's Annual Status of Education Reports (ASER) have shone a light on a critical failure of India's education system: A large number of school-going children across the country are short on basic learning skills. These reports have led to debates on seminal policy interventions such as the Right to Education Act and have been catalysts for meaningful conversations on the pedagogical deficiencies of the formal school system. The latest edition of ASER, released on Tuesday, directs attention to children between four and eight years of age, and suggests that India's learning crisis could be linked to the weakness of the country's pre-primary system.

More than 20 per cent of students in Standard I are less than six, ASER 2019 reveals - they should ideally be in pre-school. At the same time, 36 per cent students in Standard 1 are older than the RTE-mandated age of six. "Even within Standard I, children's performance on cognitive, early language, early numeracy, and social and emotional learning tasks is strongly related to their age. Older children do better on all tasks," the report says. This is a significant finding and should be the starting point for a substantive debate on the ideal entrylevel age to primary school. In this context, policymakers would also do well to go back to the pedagogical axiom which underlines that children between four and eight are best taught cognitive skills through play-based activities. The emphasis, as ASER 2019 emphasises, should be on "developing problem-solving faculties and building memory of children, and not content knowledge".

ASER 2019 talks about leveraging the existing network of anganwadi centres to implement school readiness.

The core structure of the anganwadis was developed more than 40 years ago as part of the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS). Pre-school education is part of their mandate. But at the best of times, these centres do no more than implement the government's child nutrition schemes. A number of health crises -including last year's AES outbreak in Bihar - have bared the inadequacies of the system. A growing body of scholarly work has also shown that the anganwadi worker is poorly-paid, demoralised and lacks the autonomy to be an effective nurturer. The ASER report is alive to such shortcomings. "There is a need to expand and upgrade anganwadis to ensure that children get adequate and correct educational inputs of the kind that are not modeled after the formal school," it notes. The government would do well to act on this recommendation - especially since the Draft Education Policy that was put up for public discussion last year, also stresses on the pre-school system.

Q. Each of the following is a reason as to why anganwadi workers are not as effective as they should be EXCEPT.

Since 2005, the NGO Pratham's Annual Status of Education Reports (ASER) have shone a light on a critical failure of India's education system: A large number of school-going children across the country are short on basic learning skills. These reports have led to debates on seminal policy interventions such as the Right to Education Act and have been catalysts for meaningful conversations on the pedagogical deficiencies of the formal school system. The latest edition of ASER, released on Tuesday, directs attention to children between four and eight years of age, and suggests that India's learning crisis could be linked to the weakness of the country's pre-primary system.

More than 20 per cent of students in Standard I are less than six, ASER 2019 reveals - they should ideally be in pre-school. At the same time, 36 per cent students in Standard 1 are older than the RTE-mandated age of six. "Even within Standard I, children's performance on cognitive, early language, early numeracy, and social and emotional learning tasks is strongly related to their age. Older children do better on all tasks," the report says. This is a significant finding and should be the starting point for a substantive debate on the ideal entrylevel age to primary school. In this context, policymakers would also do well to go back to the pedagogical axiom which underlines that children between four and eight are best taught cognitive skills through play-based activities. The emphasis, as ASER 2019 emphasises, should be on "developing problem-solving faculties and building memory of children, and not content knowledge".

ASER 2019 talks about leveraging the existing network of anganwadi centres to implement school readiness.

The core structure of the anganwadis was developed more than 40 years ago as part of the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS). Pre-school education is part of their mandate. But at the best of times, these centres do no more than implement the government's child nutrition schemes. A number of health crises -including last year's AES outbreak in Bihar - have bared the inadequacies of the system. A growing body of scholarly work has also shown that the anganwadi worker is poorly-paid, demoralised and lacks the autonomy to be an effective nurturer. The ASER report is alive to such shortcomings. "There is a need to expand and upgrade anganwadis to ensure that children get adequate and correct educational inputs of the kind that are not modeled after the formal school," it notes. The government would do well to act on this recommendation - especially since the Draft Education Policy that was put up for public discussion last year, also stresses on the pre-school system.

Q. Which one of the following statements is the author most likely to agree with?

Since 2005, the NGO Pratham's Annual Status of Education Reports (ASER) have shone a light on a critical failure of India's education system: A large number of school-going children across the country are short on basic learning skills. These reports have led to debates on seminal policy interventions such as the Right to Education Act and have been catalysts for meaningful conversations on the pedagogical deficiencies of the formal school system. The latest edition of ASER, released on Tuesday, directs attention to children between four and eight years of age, and suggests that India's learning crisis could be linked to the weakness of the country's pre-primary system.

More than 20 per cent of students in Standard I are less than six, ASER 2019 reveals - they should ideally be in pre-school. At the same time, 36 per cent students in Standard 1 are older than the RTE-mandated age of six. "Even within Standard I, children's performance on cognitive, early language, early numeracy, and social and emotional learning tasks is strongly related to their age. Older children do better on all tasks," the report says. This is a significant finding and should be the starting point for a substantive debate on the ideal entrylevel age to primary school. In this context, policymakers would also do well to go back to the pedagogical axiom which underlines that children between four and eight are best taught cognitive skills through play-based activities. The emphasis, as ASER 2019 emphasises, should be on "developing problem-solving faculties and building memory of children, and not content knowledge".

ASER 2019 talks about leveraging the existing network of anganwadi centres to implement school readiness.

The core structure of the anganwadis was developed more than 40 years ago as part of the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS). Pre-school education is part of their mandate. But at the best of times, these centres do no more than implement the government's child nutrition schemes. A number of health crises -including last year's AES outbreak in Bihar - have bared the inadequacies of the system. A growing body of scholarly work has also shown that the anganwadi worker is poorly-paid, demoralised and lacks the autonomy to be an effective nurturer. The ASER report is alive to such shortcomings. "There is a need to expand and upgrade anganwadis to ensure that children get adequate and correct educational inputs of the kind that are not modeled after the formal school," it notes. The government would do well to act on this recommendation - especially since the Draft Education Policy that was put up for public discussion last year, also stresses on the pre-school system.

Q. What does the word "seminal" mean as used in the first paragraph passage?