It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. 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 > It is often said that the hyena is an aggress...

It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.

a)
more vicious
b)
so vicious that
c)
as viciously as
d)
so vicious as
e)
more viciously than

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

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact i...

The correct answer is D) so vicious as. This is because A, B, C, and E do not grammatically make sense in the sentence, and do not sound right if you say it out loud.

It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not so vicious as many people believe.

Free Test

FREE

Adjectives/Adverbs - Test (MCQ)
10 Ques | 10 Min

Start Free Test

View all free Verbal tests

Community Answer

It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact i...

Explanation:
The given statement compares the actual aggression of hyenas with the perception of people about their aggression. It suggests that people generally believe hyenas to be very aggressive, but in reality, they are not as vicious as people think. This comparison is made using the structure "so...as" or "as...as". Let's analyze all the options to find out which one is the correct answer.

Option A: more vicious
This option compares the aggression of hyenas with some other animal or a previous state of hyenas themselves. However, the sentence does not provide any such comparison. Therefore, option A is incorrect.

Option B: so vicious that
This option suggests that hyenas are extremely aggressive, which is not the intended meaning of the sentence. The sentence aims to say that people overestimate the aggression of hyenas. Therefore, option B is incorrect.

Option C: as viciously as
This option uses the correct structure "as...as" to compare the aggression of hyenas with people's perception. However, the adverb "viciously" is not suitable in this context. The sentence does not require an adverb of manner to make the comparison. Therefore, option C is incorrect.

Option D: so vicious as
This option uses the correct structure "so...as" to make the comparison. It also uses the correct adjective "vicious" to describe the aggression of hyenas. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

Option E: more viciously than
This option compares the aggression of hyenas with some other animal or a previous state of hyenas themselves. However, the sentence does not provide any such comparison. Therefore, option E is incorrect.

In conclusion, the correct answer is option D, "so vicious as".

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for Verbal exam

Similar Verbal Doubts

By regarding the expanding universe as a motion picture, you can easily imagine running the film backward. If you do so, you find the universe getting smaller and smaller, and eventually you come to the moment when its whole mass is crammed into an infinitely dense point. Before that time it didnt exist, or at least it didnt exist in its present form. Though there is some controversy about its exact age, most cosmologists would be inclined to agree that the universe has existed for about ten to twenty billion years. For scale, this can be compared to the four-and-a-half-billion-year age of the solar system, the time since the disappearance of the dinosaurs (sixty-five million years), and the age of the human race (about three million years). The event that marked the beginning of the universe was christened the Big Bang; the term has now entered the vernacular of our culture. Originally the name referred only to the single initiating event; now, however, astronomers have come to use it to mean the entire developmental process of the birth and expansion of the cosmos. The simple statement that the universe had a beginning in time is by now so obvious to astrophysicists that few give it a second thought. Yet it is a statement that has profound implications. Most civilizations embrace one of two opposite concepts of time. Linear time has a beginning, a duration, and an end; cyclical time, as its name suggests, continues around and around forever. In a universe that functions through cyclical time, the question of creation never arises; the universe always was and always will be. The minute you switch to linear time you immediately confront the vexing question not only of creation, but also of the Creator. Although there is no logical reason for the assumption, many people believe that if something comes into existence, it must do so in response to the actions of some rational being. Because of that belief, astronomers, even though they resist becoming involved in theological discussion, find themselves in one when they posit the Big Bang universe. It puts them squarely in the middle of an age-old debate. One common misconception about the Big Bang that should be disposed of immediately is the notion that the universal expansion is analogous to the explosion of an artillery shell. The galaxies are not like bits of shrapnel speeding away from a central explosion. The raisin-indough analogy is a more satisfactory way to think about the whole process. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.According to the passage, which of the following statements is NOT true?

View answer

By regarding the expanding universe as a motion picture, you can easily imagine running the film backward. If you do so, you find the universe getting smaller and smaller, and eventually you come to the moment when its whole mass is crammed into an infinitely dense point. Before that time it didnt exist, or at least it didnt exist in its present form. Though there is some controversy about its exact age, most cosmologists would be inclined to agree that the universe has existed for about ten to twenty billion years. For scale, this can be compared to the four-and-a-half-billion-year age of the solar system, the time since the disappearance of the dinosaurs (sixty-five million years), and the age of the human race (about three million years). The event that marked the beginning of the universe was christened the Big Bang; the term has now entered the vernacular of our culture. Originally the name referred only to the single initiating event; now, however, astronomers have come to use it to mean the entire developmental process of the birth and expansion of the cosmos.The simple statement that the universe had a beginning in time is by now so obvious to astrophysicists that few give it a second thought. Yet it is a statement that has profound implications. Most civilizations embrace one of two opposite concepts of time. Linear time has a beginning, a duration, and an end; cyclical time, as its name suggests, continues around and around forever. In a universe that functions through cyclical time, the question of creation never arises; the universe always was and always will be. The minute you switch to linear time you immediately confront the vexing question not only of creation, but also of the Creator. Although there is no logical reason for the assumption, many people believe that if something comes into existence, it must do so in response to the actions of some rational being. Because of that belief, astronomers, even though they resist becoming involved in theological discussion, find themselves in one when they posit the Big Bang universe. It puts them squarely in the middle of an age-old debate. One common misconception about the Big Bang that should be disposed of immediately is the notion that the universal expansion is analogous to the explosion of an artillery shell. The galaxies are not like bits of shrapnel speeding away from a central explosion. The raisin-indough analogy is a more satisfactory way to think about the whole process. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.Why does the author compare the universe to a motion picture?

View answer

As formal organizations, business corporations are distinguished by their particular goals, which include maximization of profits, growth, and survival. Providing goods and services is a means to this end. If, for example, a number of individuals (outsiders or even insiders) believe that a company‘s aggressive marketing of infant formula in third world countries is morally wrong, the company is unlikely to be moved by arguments based on ethos alone as long as what it is doing remains profitable. But if those opposed to the company‘s practice organize a highly effective boycott of the company‘s products, their moral views will soon enter into the company‘s deliberations indirectly as limiting operating conditions. They can, at this point, no more be ignored than a prohibitive increase in the costs of certain raw materials. Although the concepts and categories of ethics may be applied to the conduct of corporations, there are important differences between the values and principles underlying corporate behaviour and those underlying the actions of most individuals. If corporations are by their nature end- or goal-directed how can they acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves? Is it possible to hold one criminally responsible for acts that if performed by a human person would result in criminal liability? The first case of this type to achieve widespread public attention was the attempt to prosecute the Ford Motor Company for manslaughter as the result of alleged negligent or reckless decision making concerning the safety engineering of the Pinto vehicle. Although the defendant corporation and its officers were found innocent after trial, the case can serve as an exemplar for our purposes. In essence, the prosecution in this case attempted to show that the corporation had produced and distributed a vehicle that was known to be defective at the time of production and sale, and that even after a great deal of additional information accumulated regarding the nature of the problems, the corporation took no action to correct them. The obvious non-corporate analogy would be the prosecution of a person who was driving a car with brakes known to be faulty, who does not have them repaired because it would cost too much, and who kills someone when the brakes eventually fail and the car does not stop in time. Such cases involving individuals are prosecuted and won regularly. If corporations have no concept of right or wrong because they are exclusively goal-directed, can they be convicted in cases of this type, and what purpose would be served by such a conviction? Perhaps we can make a utilitarian argument for convicting corporations of such crimes. The argument would be that of deterrence; conviction and punishment would deter other corporations from taking similar actions under similar circumstances. However, there appears to be considerable evidence that deterrence does not work on corporations, even if, arguably, it works on individuals. The possibility of being discovered and the potential magnitude of the fine merely become more data to be included in the analysis of limiting conditions. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following: Q. If a company that produced shampoo products opted to stop the routine testing of its products on animals because it decided that it is wrong to cause the animals pain, what effect would this have on the argument made in the passage?

View answer

The paradox of tolerance admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the constitutions and laws of Western European democracies that adhere to the principle of freedom of speech all heed the warning of this conundrum and do not afford legal protection to extremist speech. While in Western European democracies, the speech of nondemocratic extremists has been successfully outlawed, in the United States the first amendment right to freedom of speech has been interpreted to encompass radical oration. The traditional justifications of this American stance originate in the belief that speech is entitled to greater tolerance than other kinds of activity. They are based on the belief that speech itself is valuable, and thus ascribe positive value to a very broad range of speech.According to the classical model, freedom of speech serves an indispensable function in the process of democratic self-government. From this perspective, the free speech principle need only protect political speech, comprised of all the facts, theories, and opinions relating to any issue on which the citizens must vote. Proponents of this view insist that even extremist views cannot be concealed from voting citizens, if these views bear on any public issue before them.Protection of free speech serves the collective self-interests of a selfgoverning society made up of all rational, equal, and fully participating citizens who take their civic duties seriously. The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. At its deepest level, the fortress model values freedom of speech as a necessary precondition to the discovery and preservation of truth, but even at this level the function of speech remains primarily negative. From this perspective, the government and a majority of the people pose a great danger of intolerance. In spite of the high probability that their beliefs will eventually prove to be false, it is argued, people nonetheless tend to feel certain about them and, consequently, feel justified in requiring others to conform. Thus, the fortress models prescription for combating the tendency to censor nonconforming views is to overprotect speech by providing a broad buffer zone that encompasses extremist speech because its protection substantially diminishes the probability that inherently valuable speech will be suppressed. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. Based on information in the passage, each of the following statements is a view held by those who believe in the fortress model of free speech EXCEPT

View answer

The tendency to eat late, though it has never been tested properly, many nutritionists believe, as a factor in putting on weight.

View answer

It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. 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 It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Verbal 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. 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 It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice It is often said that the hyena is an aggressive animal, but in fact it is not ---- many people believe.a)more viciousb)so vicious thatc)as viciously asd)so vicious ase)more viciously thanCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Verbal tests.

Explore Courses for Verbal exam