Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Verbal Exam > Verbal Questions > Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh w...

Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.

a)
Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.
b)
Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.
c)
Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.
d)
Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Verified Answer

Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by t...

The first part of the sentence is a modifying phrase (subject modifier); the correct subject is 'private sector', 'laid off' is teh correct past tense of 'lay off'.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by t...

Explanation:

The correct answer is option 'C' - "Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers."

Reasoning:

The given sentence talks about the private sector laying off 1.5 lakh workers due to their inability to cope with the losses. Let's analyze the options to understand why option 'C' is the correct answer.

a) Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.

This option is grammatically incorrect as it uses the phrase "cope up" instead of "cope with." The correct phrase is "cope with," so this option is incorrect.

b) Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.

This option changes the active voice of the sentence to passive voice, which is grammatically correct. However, it introduces a new subject "1.5 lakh private sector workers," which is not mentioned in the original sentence. Therefore, this option is incorrect.

c) Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.

This option maintains the active voice of the sentence and accurately represents the original sentence. It correctly states that the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers due to their inability to cope with the losses. Therefore, this option is the correct answer.

d) Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.

This option uses the past perfect tense ("had lain off") which is not necessary in this context. The simple past tense ("laid off") is sufficient to convey the meaning. Therefore, this option is incorrect.

Conclusion:

Option 'C' - "Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers." - is the correct answer as it accurately represents the original sentence without any grammatical errors or unnecessary changes.

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for Verbal exam

Similar Verbal Doubts

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s.The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a products total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers. The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products.Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods.American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quickto exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ.The passage suggests that compared to Japanese workers, American workers are often considered

View answer

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980sThe first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits. Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a products total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quickto exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ.Which of the following would most weaken the authors argument about the over-concentration on high technology products?

View answer

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980sThe first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace. These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a products total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quickto exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ.With which of the following general statements would the author most likely NOT agree?

View answer

Rearrange the following five sentences in proper sequence so as to for a meaningful paragraph, then answer the questions given below them. After Examining him, the doctor smiled at him mischievously and took out a syringe. Thinking that he was really sick, his father summoned the family doctor. That day, Mintu wanted to take a day off from school Immediately, Mintu jumped up from his bed and swore the he was fine Therefor; he pretended to be sick and remained in bed.Which sentence should come second in the paragraph?

View answer

Rearrange the following five sentences in proper sequence so as to for a meaningful paragraph, then answer the questions given below them. After Examining him, the doctor smiled at him mischievously and took out a syringe. Thinking that he was really sick, his father summoned the family doctor. That day, Mintu wanted to take a day off from school Immediately, Mintu jumped up from his bed and swore the he was fine Therefor; he pretended to be sick and remained in bed.Which sentence should come last in the paragraph?

View answer

Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for Verbal 2025 is part of Verbal preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Verbal exam syllabus. Information about Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Verbal 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Verbal. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Verbal Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Unable to cope up with the losses, 1.5 lakh workers were laid off by the private sector.a)Unable to cope up with the losses, the private sector lay off 1.5 lakh workers.b)Unable to cope with the losses, 1.5 lakh private sector workers were laid off.c)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector laid off 1.5 lakh workers.d)Unable to cope with the losses, the private sector had lain off 1.5 lakh workers.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Verbal tests.

Explore Courses for Verbal exam