Melissa ate the cake that I ______.a)bakedb)have bakec)baked)had bakedCorrect 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

CAT Exam > CAT Questions > Melissa ate the cake that I ______.a)bakedb)h...

Melissa ate the cake that I ______.

a)
baked
b)
have bake
c)
bake
d)
had baked

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

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Melissa ate the cake that I ______.a)bakedb)have bakec)baked)had baked...

Explanation:
The correct answer is option 'D' - "had baked".

Explanation of the options:
- Option 'A' - "baked" is incorrect because it is in the simple past tense, which does not match the context of the sentence. The sentence requires a past perfect tense.
- Option 'B' - "have baked" is incorrect because it is in the present perfect tense, which does not match the context of the sentence. The sentence requires a past perfect tense.
- Option 'C' - "baked" is incorrect because it is in the simple past tense, which does not match the context of the sentence. The sentence requires a past perfect tense.

Explanation of the correct answer:
The correct answer is option 'D' - "had baked", which is in the past perfect tense. The past perfect tense is used to indicate an action that happened before another past action or point in time.

In the given sentence, the action of baking the cake (the first action) happened before the action of Melissa eating the cake (the second action). Therefore, we need to use the past perfect tense to show the sequence of events.

Example sentence:
To understand the usage of the past perfect tense in this context, let's look at an example sentence:
- "I had baked the cake before Melissa ate it."

In this example, the past perfect tense "had baked" is used to indicate that the action of baking the cake happened before the action of Melissa eating it. The same logic applies to the original sentence.

Final explanation:
Hence, the correct answer is option 'D' - "had baked", which correctly shows the sequence of events in the past.

Answered by Wizius Careers · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Past Perfect Tense - Practice (MCQ)
10 Ques | 10 Min

Start Free Test

View all free CAT tests

Community Answer

Melissa ate the cake that I ______.a)bakedb)have bakec)baked)had baked...

Option D (making procedure is in past use of past tense)

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Group QuestionAnswer the following question based on the information given below.A King once had a lake made in the courtyard for the young princes to play in. They swam about in it, and sailed their boats and rafts on it. One day the king told them he had asked the men to put some fishes into the lake. Off the boys ran to see the fishes. Now, along with the fishes, there was a Turtle. The boys were delighted with the fishes, but they had never seen a Turtle, and they were afraid of it, thinking it was a demon. They ran back to their father, crying, There is a demon on the bank of the lake. The king ordered his men to catch the demon, and to bring it to the palace. When the Turtle was brought in, the boys cried and ran away. The king always liked turtles but was also very fond of his sons, so he ordered the men who had brought the Turtle to kill it. How shall we kill it? they asked. Pound it to powder, said someone. Bake it in hot coals, said another. So one plan after another was spoken of. Then an old man who had always been afraid of the water said: Throw the thing into the lake where it flows out over the rocks into the river. Then it will surely be killed. When the Turtle heard what the old man said, he thrust out his head and asked: Friend, what have I done that you should do such a dreadful thing as that to me? The other plans were bad enough, but to throw me into the lake! Dont speak of such a cruel thing! When the king heard what the Turtle said, he told his men to take the Turtle at once and throw it into the lake. The Turtle laughed to himself as he slid away down the river to his old home.Q. The turtle tweaked the situation in order to save its life. Was it ethicalof him to do so?

View answer

Read the passage and answer the questions that followMany readers, I suspect, will take the title of this article [Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things] as suggesting that women, fire, and dangerous things have something in common—say, that women are fiery and dangerous. Most feminists I’ve mentioned it to have loved the title for that reason, though some have hated it for the same reason. But the chain of inference—from conjunction to categorization to commonality—is the norm. The inference is based on the common idea of what it means to be in the same category: things are categorized together on the basis of what they have in common. The idea that categories are defined by common properties is not only our everyday folk theory of what a category is, it is also the principle technical theory—one that has been with us for more than two thousand years.The classical view that categories are based on shared properties is not entirely wrong. We often do categorize things on that basis. But that is only a small part of the story. In recent years it has become clear that categorization is far more complex than that. A new theory of categorization, called prototype theory, has emerged. It shows that human categorization is based on principles that extend far beyond those envisioned in the classical theory. One of our goals is to survey the complexities of the way people really categorize. For example, the title of this book was inspired by the Australian aboriginal language Dyirbal, which has a category, balan, that actually includes women, fire, and dangerous things. It also includes birds that are not dangerous, as well as exceptional animals, such as the platypus, bandicoot, and echidna. This is not simply a matter of categorization by common properties.Categorization is not a matter to be taken lightly. There is nothing more basic than categorization to our thought, perception, action and speech. Every time we see something as a kind of thing, for example, a tree, we are categorizing. Whenever we reason about kinds of things—chairs, nations, illnesses, emotions, any kind of thing at all—we are employing categories. Whenever we intentionally perform any kind of action, say something as mundane as writing with a pencil, hammering with a hammer, or ironing clothes, we are using categories. The particular action we perform on that occasion is a kind of motor activity, that is, it is in a particular category of motor actions. They are never done in exactly the same way, yet despite the differences in particular movements, they are all movements of a kind, and we know how to make movements of that kind. And any time we either produce or understand any utterance of any reasonable length, we are employing dozens if not hundreds of categories: categories of speech sounds, of words, of phrases and clauses, as well as conceptual categories. Without the ability to categorize, we could not function at all, either in the physical world or in our social and intellectual lives.If linguistic experts cannot perceive how women, fire, and dangerous things in the category balan have at least one thing in common, it follows that

View answer

The scientific validity of schizophrenia, and its defining symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations, have been criticised. In 2006, a group of consumers and mental health professionals from the UK, under the banner of Campaign for Abolition of the Schizophrenia Label, argued for a rejection of the diagnosis of schizophrenia based on its heterogeneity and associated stigma, and called for the adoption of a biopsychosocial model. Other UK psychiatrists opposed the move arguing that the term schizophrenia is a useful, even if provisional concept.Similarly, there is an argument that the underlying issues would be better addressed as a spectrum of conditions or as individual dimensions along which everyone varies rather than by a diagnostic category based on an arbitrary cut-off between normal and ill. This approach appears consistent with research on schizotypy, and with a relatively high prevalence of psychotic experiences, mostly nondistressing delusional beliefs, among the general public. In concordance with this observation, psychologist Edgar Jones, and psychiatrists Tony David and Nassir Ghaemi, surveying the existing literature on delusions, pointed out that the consistency and completeness of the definition of delusion have been found wanting by many; delusions are neither necessarily fixed, nor false, nor involve the presence of incontrovertible evidence.Nancy Andreasen, a leading figure in schizophrenia research, has criticized the current DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria for sacrificing diagnostic validity for the sake of artificially improving reliability. She argues that overemphasis on psychosis in the diagnostic criteria, while improving diagnostic reliability, ignores more fundamental cognitive impairments that are harder to assess due to large variations in presentation. This view is supported by other psychiatrists. In the same vein, Ming Tsuang and colleagues argue that psychotic symptoms may be a common end-state in a variety of disorders, including schizophrenia, rather than a reflection of the specific etiology of schizophrenia, and warn that there is little basis for regarding DSMs operational definition as the true construct of schizophrenia. Neuropsychologist Michael Foster Green went further in suggesting the presence of specific neurocognitive deficits may be used to construct phenotypes that are alternatives to those that are purely symptom-based. These deficits take the form of areduction or impairment in basic psychological functions such as memory, attention, executive function and problem solving.Q. What are scientists problems with delusions?

View answer

The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.All humans make decisions based on one or a combination of two factors. This is either intuition or information. Decisions made through intuition are usually fast, people don’t even think about the problem. It is quite philosophical, meaning that someone who made a decision based on intuition will have difficulty explaining the reasoning behind it. The decision-maker would often utilize her senses in drawing conclusions, which again is based on some experience in the field of study. On the other side of the spectrum, we have decisions made based on information. These decisions are rational — it is based on facts and figures, which unfortunately also means that it can be quite slow. The decision-maker would frequently use reports, analyses, and indicators to form her conclusion. This methodology results in accurate, quantifiable decisions, meaning that a person can clearly explain the rationale behind it.

View answer

Read the following passage and answer the questions associated with each of them.Pieces of behavior, beliefs, arguments, policies, and other exercises of the human mind may all be described as rational. To accept something as rational is to accept it as making sense, as appropriate, or required, or in accordance with some acknowledged goal, such as aiming at truth or aiming at the good.The contrast between "rational coherence" and "reason", might be questioned. In principle, the answer to this question might perfectly coincide: that what agents have reason, or ought, to do just is what it would be rationally coherent for them to do, and vice versa. In several ways, however, the answers might be expected to diverge.First, even if what one ought to do is just to make one's responses globally coherent, what it takes to make one's responses locally coherent might differ from what it takes to make them globally coherent. By Subjective Desire-Based Theory, what agents have reason, or ought, to do or intend is just what, liven what they believe their circumstances to be, would best satisfy their strongest, present intrinsic desires. Suppose that the agent's strongest, present intrinsic desire is for health. Nevertheless, he intends to have a smoke, believing that lighting up is a necessary means. By Subjective Desire-Based Theory Theory, it is not the case that he ought to intend to light up. If he were globally coherent, the agent would not intend to light up. But if he does form an intention to light up, he achieves a kind local coherence.Second, what the agent has reason, or ought, to do or intend may depend not on what she believes her circumstances to be, but on something more "objective." What an agent has reason, or ought, to do, might be what the evidence (where this depends on something other than her attitudes) available to the agent suggests about her circumstances, what the evidence of the person making the reason- or ought-claim suggests about the agent's circumstances, what the evidence of the person assessing the claim suggests about the agent's circumstances, or all of the relevant facts about the agent's circumstances. Consider the Objective Desire-Based Theory-agents have reason, or ought, to do or intend just what, given what their circumstances actually are, would best satisfy their strongest, present intrinsic desires taken as a whole. Suppose the agent's strongest, present intrinsic desire is to drink a gin and tonic, and she so intends. However, she mistakenly believes that the stuff in this bottle is gin, when it is in fact petrol. So she believes that mixing the stuff with tonic is a means to drinking a gin and tonic. According to the Objective Desire-Based Theory, she does not have reason to intend to mix the stuff with tonic and drink it. But if she does so intend, she might be said to have achieved a kind of rational coherence, both local and global.Third, one might hold not a Desire-Based Theory, but a Value-Based Theory-whatever ultimate ends an agent has reason, or ought, to achieve depend not on what she desires or wills, but instead on what is of independent value. Suppose the madman's strongest, present intrinsic desire is to set off a nuclear war, and he so intends. Moreover, the madman knows that intending to press this button is a necessary and sufficient means to setting off a nuclear war. In intending to press this button, the madman would achieve a kind of coherence, both local and global. By Desire-Based Theories, the madman ought so to intend. By Value-Based Theory, this is not the case.There are several reasons to expect at least some divergence between what one has reason, or ought, to do or intend, and what it would be rationality coherent for one to do or intend. But that is perfectly compatible with partial convergence. Among the things that agents have reason, or ought, to do or intend is precisely to make their responses rationally coherent. Just as we ought not to torture, or ought to care for our children, we ought to be rationally coherent.Q. Which of the following statements best summarizes the difference between the value based theory and the desire based theory?

View answer

Top Courses for CATView all

Quantitative Aptitude (Quant)

CAT Mock Test Series 2025

Crash Course for CAT

Mock Test Series for SNAP

Mock Test Series for XAT