All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
Verbal Exam  >  Verbal Questions  >  Why does he always blame others?a)Why others ... Start Learning for Free
Why does he always blame others?
  • a)
    Why others always blamed by him?
  • b)
    Why do others always blamed by him?
  • c)
    Why are others always blamed by him?
  • d)
    Why is others always blamed by him.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your Verbal doubts with EduRev
Verified Answer
Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Wh...
Passive voice is :
Why are others always blamed by him?
 
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Wh...
Explanation:

The correct sentence is "Why are others always blamed by him?" which is option C. Let's understand the explanation behind it.

Subject-Verb Agreement:

The question is about the subject-verb agreement. The subject is "others" which is a plural noun, and it requires the verb in plural form. The verb "are" is in the plural form, which means it agrees with the subject "others." So, the correct sentence should be "Why are others always blamed by him?"

Passive Voice:

The sentence is in the passive voice because the action is happening to the subject "others." The subject is not performing any action, but it is being acted upon. The verb "blamed" is in the passive voice because the subject "others" is receiving the action. The sentence is not in the active voice because the subject is not performing any action.

Blaming Others:

The sentence is about a person who always blames others. The subject "him" is the person who is always blaming others. The sentence is asking the reason behind this behavior. This sentence can mean that the person is not taking responsibility for his actions and is blaming others for his mistakes.

Conclusion:

The sentence "Why are others always blamed by him?" is the correct sentence because it follows the subject-verb agreement rules, it is in the passive voice, and it asks the reason behind a person who always blames others.
Explore Courses for Verbal exam

Similar Verbal Doubts

Those who opine lose their impunity when the circumstances in which they pontificate are such that generate from their expression a positive instigation of some mischievous act. An opinion that corn dealers are starvers of the poor, or that owning private property is robbery, ought to be unmolested when simply circulated through the press, but may justly incur punishment when delivered orally to an excited mob assembled before the house of a corn dealer, or when handed about among the same mob in the form of a placard. Acts, of whatever kind, which without justifiable cause do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases are absolutely required to be, controlled by the unfavourable sentiments, and, when needful, by the active interference of mankind. The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in matters that concern them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and judgment in matters which concern himself he should be allowed, without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own cost. As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so it is that there should be different experiments of living, that free scope should be given to varieties of character, short of injury to others, and that the worth of different modes of life should be proved practically, when anyone thinks fit to try them. Where not the persons own character but the traditions and customs of other people are the rule of conduct, there is wanting one of the principal ingredients of individual and social progress. It would be absurd to pretend that people ought to live as if nothing whatever had been known in the world before they came into it; as if experience had as yet done nothing toward showing that one mode of existence, or of conduct, is preferable to another. Nobody denies that people should be so taught and trained in youth as to know and benefit by the ascertained results of human experience. But it is the privilege and proper condition of a human being, arrived at the maturity of his faculties, to use and interpret experience in his own way. It is for him to find out what part of recorded experience is properly applicable to his own circumstances and character. The traditions and customs of other people are, to a certain extent, evidence of what their experience has taught thempresumptive evidence, and as such, have a claim to his deferencebut, in the first place, their experience may be too narrow, or they may have not interpreted it rightly. Secondly, their interpretation of experience may be correct, but unsuited to him. Customs are made for customary circumstances and customary characters, and his circumstances or his character may be uncustomary. Thirdly, though the customs be both good as customs and suitable to him, yet to conform to custom merely as custom does not educate him or develop in him any of the qualities which are the distinctive endowments of a human being. He gains no practice either in discerning or desiring what is best.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.Based on information in the passage, with which of the following statements about opinions would the author most likely NOT disagree?

Those who opine lose their impunity when the circumstances in which they pontificate are such that generate from their expression a positive instigation of some mischievous act. An opinion that corn dealers are starvers of the poor, or that owning private property is robbery, ought to be unmolested when simply circulated through the press, but may justly incur punishment when delivered orally to an excited mob assembled before the house of a corn dealer, or when handed about among the same mob in the form of a placard. Acts, of whatever kind, which without justifiable cause do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases are absolutely required to be, controlled by the unfavourable sentiments, and, when needful, by the active interference of mankind. The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in matters that concern them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and judgment in matters which concern himself he should be allowed, without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own cost. As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so it is that there should be different experiments of living, that free scope should be given to varieties of character, short of injury to others, and that the worth of different modes of life should be proved practically, when anyone thinks fit to try them. Where not the persons own character but the traditions and customs of other people are the rule of conduct, there is wanting one of the principal ingredients of individual and social progress. It would be absurd to pretend that people ought to live as if nothing whatever had been known in the world before they came into it; as if experience had as yet done nothing toward showing that one mode of existence, or of conduct, is preferable to another. Nobody denies that people should be so taught and trained in youth as to know and benefit by the ascertained results of human experience. But it is the privilege and proper condition of a human being, arrived at the maturity of his faculties, to use and interpret experience in his own way. It is for him to find out what part of recorded experience is properly applicable to his own circumstances and character. The traditions and customs of other people are, to a certain extent, evidence of what their experience has taught thempresumptive evidence, and as such, have a claim to his deferencebut, in the first place, their experience may be too narrow, or they may have not interpreted it rightly. Secondly, their interpretation of experience may be correct, but unsuited to him. Customs are made for customary circumstances and customary characters, and his circumstances or his character may be uncustomary. Thirdly, though the customs be both good as customs and suitable to him, yet to conform to custom merely as custom does not educate him or develop in him any of the qualities which are the distinctive endowments of a human being. He gains no practice either in discerning or desiring what is best.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.The author holds that one should not necessarily defer to the traditions and customs of other people. The author supports his position by arguing that: I. traditions and customs are usually the result of misinterpreted experiences. II. customs are based on experiences in the past, which are different from modern experiences.III. customs can stifle ones individual development.

Those who opine lose their impunity when the circumstances in which they pontificate are such that generate from their expression a positive instigation of some mischievous act. An opinion that corn dealers are starvers of the poor, or that owning private property is robbery, ought to be unmolested when simply circulated through the press, but may justly incur punishment when delivered orally to an excited mob assembled before the house of a corn dealer, or when handed about among the same mob in the form of a placard. Acts, of whatever kind, which without justifiable cause do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases are absolutely required to be, controlled by the unfavourable sentiments, and, when needful, by the active interference of mankind. The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in matters that concern them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and judgment in matters which concern himself he should be allowed, without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own cost. As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so it is that there should be different experiments of living, that free scope should be given to varieties of character, short of injury to others, and that the worth of different modes of life should be proved practically, when anyone thinks fit to try them. Where not the persons own character but the traditions and customs of other people are the rule of conduct, there is wanting one of the principal ingredients of individual and social progress. It would be absurd to pretend that people ought to live as if nothing whatever had been known in the world before they came into it; as if experience had as yet done nothing toward showing that one mode of existence, or of conduct, is preferable to another. Nobody denies that people should be so taught and trained in youth as to know and benefit by the ascertained results of human experience. But it is the privilege and proper condition of a human being, arrived at the maturity of his faculties, to use and interpret experience in his own way. It is for him to find out what part of recorded experience is properly applicable to his own circumstances and character. The traditions and customs of other people are, to a certain extent, evidence of what their experience has taught thempresumptive evidence, and as such, have a claim to his deferencebut, in the first place, their experience may be too narrow, or they may have not interpreted it rightly. Secondly, their interpretation of experience may be correct, but unsuited to him. Customs are made for customary circumstances and customary characters, and his circumstances or his character may be uncustomary. Thirdly, though the customs be both good as customs and suitable to him, yet to conform to custom merely as custom does not educate him or develop in him any of the qualities which are the distinctive endowments of a human being. He gains no practice either in discerning or desiring what is best.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. The existence of which of the following phenomena would most strongly challenge the authors argument about conforming to custom merely as custom?

In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others views familiar to his hearers. The oratorys immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they made the worse appear the better cause, and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigants while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.If the author of the passage travelled to a political convention and saw various candidates speak he would most likely have the highest regard for an orator who

In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others views familiar to his hearers. The oratorys immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they made the worse appear the better cause, and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigants while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.Implicit in the statement that the exaltation of virtuosity was not due mainly to Isocrates because public display was normal in a world that talked far more than it read is the assumption that

Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.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 Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.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 Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.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 Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Why does he always blame others?a)Why others always blamed by him?b)Why do others always blamed by him?c)Why are others always blamed by him?d)Why is others always blamed by him.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Verbal tests.
Explore Courses for Verbal exam
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup