CUET Exam  >  CUET Tests  >  English Language Preparation for CUET  >  Languages: Mock Test - 2 - CUET MCQ

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - CUET MCQ


Test Description

40 Questions MCQ Test English Language Preparation for CUET - Languages: Mock Test - 2

Languages: Mock Test - 2 for CUET 2024 is part of English Language Preparation for CUET preparation. The Languages: Mock Test - 2 questions and answers have been prepared according to the CUET exam syllabus.The Languages: Mock Test - 2 MCQs are made for CUET 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Languages: Mock Test - 2 below.
Solutions of Languages: Mock Test - 2 questions in English are available as part of our English Language Preparation for CUET for CUET & Languages: Mock Test - 2 solutions in Hindi for English Language Preparation for CUET course. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CUET Exam by signing up for free. Attempt Languages: Mock Test - 2 | 40 questions in 45 minutes | Mock test for CUET preparation | Free important questions MCQ to study English Language Preparation for CUET for CUET Exam | Download free PDF with solutions
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App
Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 1

There have been 11 earls of Sandwich. The first, bestowed the title in 1660, was a celebrated British naval commander. Others have been politicians, statesmen, authors, and supporters of the arts. They were important people.

But even now, all anyone seems to know about this proud lineage is that one of them as it turns out, the fourth one, born in 1718 apparently had a liking for meat and bread, or maybe cheese and bread, and he ate it while playing poker because he was a degenerate gambler unable to stop for a meal, or he ate it because he was so busy being a war hero that he had no time for a knife and fork, or he instructed his soldiers to eat it because it traveled well, or you know what? It doesn't matter. Nobody is quite sure what happened, but we can all agree that, although meat and bread were entered into the historical record as far back as Babylon, humankind's greatest lazy meal became known as the Earl of Sandwich's domain, and so it's been sandwiches all the way down.

Everyone has to be known for something. But the earls busied themselves with more stately things, until the current earl, whose actual name is John Edward Hollister Montagu, needed money to maintain the old family estate, because carrying a fancy title today doesn't pay nearly as much as it did 300 years ago, and a previous earl gave away much of the family wealth. And so hold your noses, ye ghosts of olde: It was time to cash in on the family name, to finally cede history to the hoi polloi.

It was time to open up a sandwich shop, and call it Earl of Sandwich.

Q. Why did John Edward Hollister Montagu need money?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 1

Option (c) is the right answer as it is mentioned in the passage, in line numbers 13 and 14.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 2

 

There have been 11 earls of Sandwich. The first, bestowed the title in 1660, was a celebrated British naval commander. Others have been politicians, statesmen, authors, and supporters of the arts. They were important people.

But even now, all anyone seems to know about this proud lineage is that one of them as it turns out, the fourth one, born in 1718 apparently had a liking for meat and bread, or maybe cheese and bread, and he ate it while playing poker because he was a degenerate gambler unable to stop for a meal, or he ate it because he was so busy being a war hero that he had no time for a knife and fork, or he instructed his soldiers to eat it because it traveled well, or you know what? It doesn't matter. Nobody is quite sure what happened, but we can all agree that, although meat and bread were entered into the historical record as far back as Babylon, humankind's greatest lazy meal became known as the Earl of Sandwich's domain, and so it's been sandwiches all the way down.

Everyone has to be known for something. But the earls busied themselves with more stately things, until the current earl, whose actual name is John Edward Hollister Montagu, needed money to maintain the old family estate, because carrying a fancy title today doesn't pay nearly as much as it did 300 years ago, and a previous earl gave away much of the family wealth. And so hold your noses, ye ghosts of olde: It was time to cash in on the family name, to finally cede history to the hoi polloi.

It was time to open up a sandwich shop, and call it Earl of Sandwich.

Q. Which of the following definitions best explains the word 'lineage', as used in the passage?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 2

Option (a) is the right answer as lineage means pedigree.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 3

There have been 11 earls of Sandwich. The first, bestowed the title in 1660, was a celebrated British naval commander. Others have been politicians, statesmen, authors, and supporters of the arts. They were important people.

But even now, all anyone seems to know about this proud lineage is that one of them as it turns out, the fourth one, born in 1718 apparently had a liking for meat and bread, or maybe cheese and bread, and he ate it while playing poker because he was a degenerate gambler unable to stop for a meal, or he ate it because he was so busy being a war hero that he had no time for a knife and fork, or he instructed his soldiers to eat it because it traveled well, or you know what? It doesn't matter. Nobody is quite sure what happened, but we can all agree that, although meat and bread were entered into the historical record as far back as Babylon, humankind's greatest lazy meal became known as the Earl of Sandwich's domain, and so it's been sandwiches all the way down.

Everyone has to be known for something. But the earls busied themselves with more stately things, until the current earl, whose actual name is John Edward Hollister Montagu, needed money to maintain the old family estate, because carrying a fancy title today doesn't pay nearly as much as it did 300 years ago, and a previous earl gave away much of the family wealth. And so hold your noses, ye ghosts of olde: It was time to cash in on the family name, to finally cede history to the hoi polloi.

It was time to open up a sandwich shop, and call it Earl of Sandwich.

Q. What kind of people used to be given the title of earl, other than naval commanders?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 3

Option (d) is the right answer as it is mentioned in the passage, in line number 2

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 4

There have been 11 earls of Sandwich. The first, bestowed the title in 1660, was a celebrated British naval commander. Others have been politicians, statesmen, authors, and supporters of the arts. They were important people.

But even now, all anyone seems to know about this proud lineage is that one of them as it turns out, the fourth one, born in 1718 apparently had a liking for meat and bread, or maybe cheese and bread, and he ate it while playing poker because he was a degenerate gambler unable to stop for a meal, or he ate it because he was so busy being a war hero that he had no time for a knife and fork, or he instructed his soldiers to eat it because it traveled well, or you know what? It doesn't matter. Nobody is quite sure what happened, but we can all agree that, although meat and bread were entered into the historical record as far back as Babylon, humankind's greatest lazy meal became known as the Earl of Sandwich's domain, and so it's been sandwiches all the way down.

Everyone has to be known for something. But the earls busied themselves with more stately things, until the current earl, whose actual name is John Edward Hollister Montagu, needed money to maintain the old family estate, because carrying a fancy title today doesn't pay nearly as much as it did 300 years ago, and a previous earl gave away much of the family wealth. And so hold your noses, ye ghosts of olde: It was time to cash in on the family name, to finally cede history to the hoi polloi.

It was time to open up a sandwich shop, and call it Earl of Sandwich.

Q. What can be said about the exact point of time 'meat and bread' came to be called a Sandwich?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 4

Option d is the right answer as it is mentioned in the passage, in line numbers 10 and 11.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 5

There have been 11 earls of Sandwich. The first, bestowed the title in 1660, was a celebrated British naval commander. Others have been politicians, statesmen, authors, and supporters of the arts. They were important people.

But even now, all anyone seems to know about this proud lineage is that one of them as it turns out, the fourth one, born in 1718 apparently had a liking for meat and bread, or maybe cheese and bread, and he ate it while playing poker because he was a degenerate gambler unable to stop for a meal, or he ate it because he was so busy being a war hero that he had no time for a knife and fork, or he instructed his soldiers to eat it because it traveled well, or you know what? It doesn't matter. Nobody is quite sure what happened, but we can all agree that, although meat and bread were entered into the historical record as far back as Babylon, humankind's greatest lazy meal became known as the Earl of Sandwich's domain, and so it's been sandwiches all the way down.

Everyone has to be known for something. But the earls busied themselves with more stately things, until the current earl, whose actual name is John Edward Hollister Montagu, needed money to maintain the old family estate, because carrying a fancy title today doesn't pay nearly as much as it did 300 years ago, and a previous earl gave away much of the family wealth. And so hold your noses, ye ghosts of olde: It was time to cash in on the family name, to finally cede history to the hoi polloi.

It was time to open up a sandwich shop, and call it Earl of Sandwich.

Q. What is 'humankind's greatest lazy meal'?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 5

Option (b) is the right answer as it is mentioned in the passage, in line number 10.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 6

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. It can be inferred from the passage that

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 6

The third paragraph explains the procedure that brokers follow in order to help their clients to show black money as earnings or to evade tax. The paragraph clearly mentions that brokers keep conducting “buy” and “sell” trades in their own fictitious accounts. They then use these accounts when the clients approach them. The paragraph also states that clients approach brokers in order to purchase a profit or a loss deal. Option (a) is correct. Option (b) is eliminated as it is clear from the information in the passage that brokers themselves create the fictitious accounts for potential clients. Option (c) can also be ruled out on this basis. Option (d) is incorrect because it suggests that the clients sell (vend) a “profit” or “loss” deal. However, from the information in the passage, this is untrue.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 7

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. What is a ‘punching error' as per the passage?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 7

The answer can be inferred from the first and the last paragraph of the passage. A punching error happens when something ordered by client X is mistakenly placed in client Y's account. According to the passage, many stockbrokers use the excuse of "punching errors" to transfer funds to fictitious accounts. So, a punching error by definition is not a transfer of funds to a fictitious account. It is simply used as an excuse by tax evaders in some cases.

This eliminates options (a), (b) and (d). Option (c) is the correct answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 8

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. Which of the following options is true according to the given passage?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 8

Only option (c) is true as per the given passage. It is given in the last sentence of the last paragraph.

Options (a) and (b) are distorted information given in the first paragraph. Option (d) is also a distorted piece of information given in the second sentence of the fourth paragraph.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 9

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. In the light of the second paragraph what do people who intend to evade taxes do?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 9

This is a direct question and an easy one as well.

The answer can be found in the first sentence of the second paragraph. Options (a), (b) and (d) are not mentioned in the passage.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 10

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. Which one(s) of the following would possibly NOT be reason(s) for the prosperity of British colonies in America?

1. The colonies produced more ships and steel than Britain.

2. Transfer of large sums of money from Britain to the colonies.

3. The colonies contributed money and troops to the war effort.

4. Britain imposed tax on import of tea into the colonies.

5. Britain had a very high public debt at the end of the war.

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 10

According to the information given in the passage, statements 1, 3, 4 and 5 can all be inferred to not have been the reasons for the prosperity of British colonies in America. Thus, option (c) is the correct answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 11

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. The use of the word 'specie' in the passage denotes

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 11

The passage clearly mentions 'shipment of v ast sums of specie' both as pay for soldiers and others and also 'for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.' Thus it can be inferred that 'specie' here means money, to be used for payments of salaries and for the purchase of supplies. Thus, option (c) is the correct answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 12

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 12

The passage states that at the end of the war Britain 'was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada.' From this it can be inferred that Britain acquired political control over Canada.

Thus, option (d) is the correct answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 13

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. "Gipson described this British largesse…" What is the largesse that Gipson is referring to?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 13

The passage clearly refers to the reimbursement of £1,072, 783 by Britain to its colonies, on account of their contribution to the war effort, as 'this British largesse'. Thus, option (d) is the correct answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 14

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

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

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 14

Option (a) is incorrect since, though the passage says that the war was fought on a global scale, there is no mention that it was the first war to be so fought. Option (c) is incorrect since Britain too benefited from the war as it was 'ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada.' The passage clearly states that Britain's reimbursement of part of the war expenses to its colonies was viewed as 'unprecedented'. Thus it is not possible that such a practice was a 'well-established rule'. Thus, option (d) is also incorrect. The passage states that the explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable. In light of this statement, option (b) is the correct answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 15

India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.

That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. It's not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.

There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.

One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.

But even if there isn't all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.

Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.

Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no one's interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.

Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the world's oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.

Even if India's economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.

Q. What does the word 'precipice' as used in the passage mean?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 15

This question can be answered if you know the meaning of the word precipice - "a dangerous situation".

If you not aware of its meaning, you can infer the meaning from the context in which it is used in the passage. The passage says that the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice which should be even more alarming for policymakers. Since it should more alarming, it can be inferred that the situation is not very bright. The only answer choice that has that tone is (b).

Incorrect Answers

(a), (c) and (d) does not say the situation is negative.

In fact, each of these answer choices has a positive connotation which goes against the tone in which the sentence in the passage is framed.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 16

India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.

That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. It's not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.

There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.

One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.

But even if there isn't all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.

Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.

Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no one's interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.

Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the world's oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.

Even if India's economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.

Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 16

You are asked to identify the statement which cannot be inferred from the passage. The passage says that West Asia contributes to more than 50% of the total remittance to India. It is not necessary that more than 50% of Indians work in that region.

There is no data which can help us arrive at that claim.

[Consider this example: Say there are two countries A and B. Remittance from A is 100 and remittance from B is 50. If there are 20 people in A and 50 people in B (each person in A sends 5 and each person in B sends 1), it is possible that there can be less number of Indians working in A than in B even though the remittance from A is higher]

Since answer choice (d) cannot be inferred, it is the correct answer.

Incorrect Answers

(a) - Refer to this sentence: "Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return.". "many more will return" suggests that there have been people who have returned in the past. Answer choice (a) can be inferred.

(b) - The author states that "A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to..." The author states that the places Indians return to will be under pressure if there is a sudden jolt. Answer choice (b) can be inferred.

(c) The author states that more than 50% of all remittances to India is from West Asia. So, all the other region put together would be less than 50% and therefore it would be less than the remittance from West Asia. Answer choice (c) can be inferred.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 17

India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.

That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. It's not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.

There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.

One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.

But even if there isn't all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.

Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.

Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no one's interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.

Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the world's oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.

Even if India's economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.

Q. Which one of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 17

In the passage the author raises the concern that the US-Iran conflict will have for India. In the passage the author discusses the impact it will have on Indians working in the region and the danger it poses to Indian economy. Answer choice (c) captures this idea completely and accurately.

Incorrect Answers

(a) - This answer choice only considers the impact on Indian worker and leaves out the impact on Indian economy.

(b) - The issue of remittance is a specific issue that the author discusses in the passage. It is a supporting detail of the argument put forth by the author.

(d) - This looks to be a good option; however, it is misleading. The problem is with the word 'unnecessary'. Whether or not the military intervention is unnecessary is something that the author does not discuss. The author talks about the impact of the conflict with regards to India.

Author does not make a judgement on whether the conflict was necessary or unnecessary. This makes answer choice (d) incorrect.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 18

India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.

That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. It's not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.

There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.

One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.

But even if there isn't all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.

Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.

Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no one's interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.

Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the world's oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.

Even if India's economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.

Q. Why does the author believe that the heightened tension (fourth paragraph) could jeopardise jobs of Indian working abroad?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 18

This question asks you to identify the reason as to why the author believes that the Iran conflict could jeopardise jobs of Indians. This is mentioned in paragraph 4. Author justifies this claim by alluding to the events in the past - "inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.". The author apparently believes that since certain events in the region had hurt Indian jobs in the past, the current conflict is also likely to hurt the Indian jobs. This makes answer choice (c) the correct answer.

Incorrect Answer

(a) - The problem with this answer choice is the mention of "outright war". A possibility of outright war is mentioned by the author (paragraph 3).

However, this question specifically asks about the impact of "heightened tension" (paragraph 4). Since this answer choice does not address the question at hand, it is an incorrect answer choice.

(b) - This answer choice has the same problem as answer choice (a). The impact of oil prices is discussed much later.

(d) - Whether or not India can handle the tension is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. The question specifically asks to identify the reason for an author's claim. Author DOES NOT say that India's inability to handle the tension is the reason for the impact on jobs.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 19

India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.

That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. It's not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.

There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.

One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.

But even if there isn't all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.

Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.

Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no one's interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.

Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the world's oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.

Even if India's economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.

Q. Why do the analysts expect that the international price of oil will not increase substantially?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 19

Paragraph 6 discusses oil price. The author states that the analysts do not expect the oil price to get much further based on the assumption that it not in the interest of both US and Iran. This is captured in answer choice (a).

Incorrect Answers

(b) - The stability of the price before the war is not discussed in the passage.

(c) - The author does not specifically mention World War 3 in paragraph 6. What is mentioned is that the countries want to avoid an outright conflict. This outright conflict does not refer to World War 3.

Hence answer choice (c)is incorrect.

(d) - While it is true that an outright war would cause destabilising effect in the region, the question is specifically asking the reason why analysts believe that the price would not get much higher. Not just the destabilising effect in the region - the analyst presume that it will impact US as well. This answer does not capture the specific reason stated by the author. Hence answer choice (d) is incorrect.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 20

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. In the first line of the passage, which are the two capitals that the author is referring to?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 20

The two capitals talked about in the passage are Rome and Paris. Thus, option (b) is correct.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 21

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. Why did the French fans gather to welcome their team despite its defeat in World Cup 2006?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 21

The second paragraph of the passage states that the 50,000 French fans gathered at Champs Elysees "to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat".

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 22

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. Choose the most appropriate title for the given passage:

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 22

The passage gives equal weight age to the discussion of both - the ecstasy felt by the Italians and the mournful atmosphere in France - after Italy's victory over France in World Cup 2006. Therefore, option (a) is correct. Options (b) and (c) are inept because each of them refer to only one country -France and Italy respectively. Option (d) is incorrect because it's too general.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 23

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. What does the word 'tarnished' mean in the context of the passage?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 23

The word 'tarnished' as used in the passage means destroyed or spoiled. Therefore, option (b) is correct.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 24

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. Which of the following is incorrect with respect to the passage?

1. Zidane was excluded from the football team before the final match got over.

2. France mourned over a not-so-glorious end of Zidane's career.

3. Italy has lost a match against France.

4. Italy triumphed over France twice in World Cup 2006

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 24

Statement 2 is incorrect because the second paragraph states that the faces of the French fans were mournful "not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished". Statement 4 is incorrect because the last paragraph states that the Italian victory was a "double triumph" because they had two reasons to celebrate - one, their triumph in this match and that they "avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of French". This also proves that Italy had once been defeated by France, rendering statement 3 correct. Statement 1 is also correct because the second paragraph clearly states that Zidane was expelled in the final match.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 25

The hardest substance in the human body is the white enamel of the teeth. With age, it wears away nonetheless, allowing the softer, darker layers underneath to show through. Meanwhile, the blood supply to the pulp and the roots of the teeth atrophies, and the flow of saliva diminishes; the gums tend to become inflamed and pull away from the teeth, exposing the base, making them unstable and elongating their appearance, especially the lower ones. Experts say they can gauge a person's age to within five years from the examination of a single tooth if the person has any teeth left to examine.

Scrupulous dental care can help avert tooth loss, but growing old gets in the way. Arthritis, tremors, and small strokes, for example, make it difficult to brush and floss, and, because nerves become less sensitive with age, people may not realize that they have cavity and gum problems until it's too late. In the course of a normal lifetime, the muscles of the jaw lose about forty per cent of their mass and the bones of the mandible lose about twenty per cent, becoming porous and weak. The ability to chew declines, and people shift to softer foods, which are generally higher in fermentable carbohydrates and more likely to cause cavities. By the age of sixty, Americans have lost, on average, a third of their teeth.

After eighty-five, almost forty per cent have no teeth at all.

Even as our bones and teeth soften, the rest of our body hardens. Blood vessels, joints, the muscle and valves of the heart, and even the lungs pick up substantial deposits of calcium and turn stiff. Under a microscope, the vessels and soft tissues display the same form of calcium that you find in bone. When you reach inside an elderly patient during surgery, the aorta and other major vessels often feel crunchy under your fingers. A recent study has found that loss of bone density may be an even better predictor of death from atherosclerotic disease than cholesterol levels. As we age, it's as if the calcium flows out of our skeletons and into our tissues.

To maintain the same volume of blood flow through narrowed and stiffened blood vessels, the heart has to generate increased pressure. As a result, more than half of us develop hypertension by the age of sixty-five. The heart becomes thicker-walled from having to pump against the pressure, and less able to respond to the demands of exertion. The peak output of the heart decreases steadily from the age of thirty. People become gradually less able to run as far or as fast as they used to, or to climb a flight of stairs without becoming short of breath.

Q. The passage is most likely an extract from.

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 25

The medical information seems to be coming from an expert but the lack of technical jargons makes research paper an unlikely source. Options (c) and (d) can be ignored straightaway.

Languages: Mock Test - 2 - Question 26

The hardest substance in the human body is the white enamel of the teeth. With age, it wears away nonetheless, allowing the softer, darker layers underneath to show through. Meanwhile, the blood supply to the pulp and the roots of the teeth atrophies, and the flow of saliva diminishes; the gums tend to become inflamed and pull away from the teeth, exposing the base, making them unstable and elongating their appearance, especially the lower ones. Experts say they can gauge a person's age to within five years from the examination of a single tooth if the person has any teeth left to examine.

Scrupulous dental care can help avert tooth loss, but growing old gets in the way. Arthritis, tremors, and small strokes, for example, make it difficult to brush and floss, and, because nerves become less sensitive with age, people may not realize that they have cavity and gum problems until it's too late. In the course of a normal lifetime, the muscles of the jaw lose about forty per cent of their mass and the bones of the mandible lose about twenty per cent, becoming porous and weak. The ability to chew declines, and people shift to softer foods, which are generally higher in fermentable carbohydrates and more likely to cause cavities. By the age of sixty, Americans have lost, on average, a third of their teeth.

After eighty-five, almost forty per cent have no teeth at all.

Even as our bones and teeth soften, the rest of our body hardens. Blood vessels, joints, the muscle and valves of the heart, and even the lungs pick up substantial deposits of calcium and turn stiff. Under a microscope, the vessels and soft tissues display the same form of calcium that you find in bone. When you reach inside an elderly patient during surgery, the aorta and other major vessels often feel crunchy under your fingers. A recent study has found that loss of bone density may be an even better predictor of death from atherosclerotic disease than cholesterol levels. As we age, it's as if the calcium flows out of our skeletons and into our tissues.

To maintain the same volume of blood flow through narrowed and stiffened blood vessels, the heart has to generate increased pressure. As a result, more than half of us develop hypertension by the age of sixty-five. The heart becomes thicker-walled from having to pump against the pressure, and less able to respond to the demands of exertion. The peak output of the heart decreases steadily from the age of thirty. People become gradually less able to run as far or as fast as they used to, or to climb a flight of stairs without becoming short of breath.

Q. Which of the following example will find resonance in what the author says?