Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CAT Exam > CAT Questions > Read the given passage carefully and answer ...

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.

Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?

a)
These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.
b)
A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.
c)
These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.
d)
A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.

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

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow...

Option (a) is incorrect since the passage says that the ancient languages (Greek and Latin) were mechanical systems. It is the modern language that depends upon logical relationships Options (c) and (d) are incorrect because the passage does not tell us if and how the ancient languages can be mastered. Option (b) can be directly inferred from the passage. Hence, option (b) is the correct answer.

Answered by Wizius Careers · View profile

Free Test

FREE

IPMAT Mock Test - 6 (New Pattern)
100 Ques | 90 Min

Start Free Test

View all free CAT tests

Community Answer

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow...

Understanding the Correct Answer: Option B
The passage discusses the differences in language study methods, particularly focusing on Latin, Greek, and English. Here’s why option B is the correct answer:
Key Point: Depth of Understanding
- The passage emphasizes that mastering English requires a deeper understanding of the "logic of sentence structure or word relations."
- In contrast, Latin and Greek can be learned through their mechanical systems of endings, which do not necessitate a comprehensive grasp of logical relationships.
Comparison of Language Mastery
- For Latin and Greek:
- Mastery is achievable through familiarity with their mechanical forms.
- Knowledge of forms enables substantial accuracy in writing.
- For English:
- A deeper, more logical approach is mandatory for true mastery.
- The study must begin from understanding relationships rather than mere forms.
Conclusion
- The passage critiques the outdated methods of language study that do not align with the logical structure necessary for mastering English.
- Hence, option B accurately reflects that a person must indeed go deeper to master English compared to the more mechanical approach suitable for Latin and Greek.
This analysis highlights the critical distinction made in the passage about the necessity of understanding logic in language mastery, reinforcing why option B is the correct choice.

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Why has the method, by which we may master any subject, not been applied to language?

View answer

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following held a low place in literature for a very long time?

View answer

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. What has been described as a horrifying task in the passage?

View answer

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have baulked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following is the meaning of ‘splitting hairs', as used in the passage?

View answer

Direction: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows:In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devils Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between natures flora and fauna.Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.The "Devils Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planets biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that natures workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.Q. What is the primary focus of the passage?

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

Top Courses for CAT

View all

Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2025 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.Modern science has provided us with a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well-fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course, the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on the arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?a)These languages stress upon logical relationship rather than mechanical form.b)A person must go deeper in order to master the English language.c)These languages cannot be mastered since they are fixed method of language study.d)A person can master these languages even if he does not master the logic of word relations.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.

Explore Courses for CAT exam