All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >   Directions: The sentence below has two blank... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.
He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.
  • a)
    gospels, delirious
  • b)
    propaganda, utopian
  • c)
    literature, unending
  • d)
    ideology, precious
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating ...
The thought of 'lowliest peasant enjoying prosperity' is 'utopian'. So, the answer is (2). Rest of the options do not fit the sentence.
Attention CAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.If we look back at the English literature of the last ten years not so much at the literature as at the prevailing literary attitude, the thing that strikes us is that it has almost ceased to be aesthetic. Literature has been swamped by propaganda. I do not mean that all the books written during that period have been bad. But the characteristic writers of the time, people like Auden and Spender and MacNeice, have been didactic, political writers, aesthetically conscious, of course, but more interested in subject-matter than in technique.This is all the more striking because it makes a very sharp and sudden contrast with the period immediately before it. The characteristic writers of the nineteen-twenties - T. S. Eliot, for instance, Ezra Pound, Virginia Woolf - were writers who put the main emphasis on technique. They had their beliefs and prejudices, of course, but they were far more interested in technical innovations than in any moral or meaning or political implication that their work might contain. The best of them all, James Joyce, was a technician and very little else, about as near to being a 'pure' artist as a writer can be. Even D. H. Lawrence, though he was more of a 'writer with a purpose' than most of the others of his time, had not much of what we should now call social consciousness. And though I have narrowed this down to the nineteen-twenties, it had really been the same from about 1890 onwards. Throughout the whole of that period, the notion that form is more important than subject-matter, the notion of 'art for art's sake', had been taken for granted. There were writers who disagreed, of course - Bernard Shaw was one - but that was the prevailing outlook.Now, how is one to account for this very sudden change of outlook? About the end of the nineteen-twenties you get a book like Edith Sitwell's book on Pope, with a completely frivolous emphasis on technique, treating literature as a sort of embroidery, almost as though words did not have meanings: and only a few years later you get a Marxist critic like Edward Upward asserting that books can be 'good' only when they are Marxist in tendency. In a sense both Edith Sitwell and Edward Upward were representative of their period. The question is why should their outlook be so different?I think one has got to look for the reason in external circumstances. Both the aesthetic and the political attitude to literature were produced, or at any rate conditioned by the social atmosphere of a certain period. It is not that good books were not produced in that period. Several of the writers of that time, Dickens, Thackeray, Trollop and others, will probably be remembered longer than any that have come after them. But there are not literary figures in Victorian England corresponding to Flaubert, Baudelaire, Gautier and a host of others. What now appears to us as aesthetic scrupulousness hardly existed. To a mid-Victorian English writer, a book was partly something that brought him money and partly a vehicle for preaching sermons. England was changing very rapidly, a new moneyed class had come up on the ruins of the old aristocracy, contact with Europe had been severed, and a long artistic tradition had been broken. The mid-nineteenth-century English writers were barbarians, even when they happened to be gifted artists, like Dickens.Which of the following would be the most suitable title for the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.If we look back at the English literature of the last ten years not so much at the literature as at the prevailing literary attitude, the thing that strikes us is that it has almost ceased to be aesthetic. Literature has been swamped by propaganda. I do not mean that all the books written during that period have been bad. But the characteristic writers of the time, people like Auden and Spender and MacNeice, have been didactic, political writers, aesthetically conscious, of course, but more interested in subject-matter than in technique.This is all the more striking because it makes a very sharp and sudden contrast with the period immediately before it. The characteristic writers of the nineteen-twenties - T. S. Eliot, for instance, Ezra Pound, Virginia Woolf - were writers who put the main emphasis on technique. They had their beliefs and prejudices, of course, but they were far more interested in technical innovations than in any moral or meaning or political implication that their work might contain. The best of them all, James Joyce, was a technician and very little else, about as near to being a 'pure' artist as a writer can be. Even D. H. Lawrence, though he was more of a 'writer with a purpose' than most of the others of his time, had not much of what we should now call social consciousness. And though I have narrowed this down to the nineteen-twenties, it had really been the same from about 1890 onwards. Throughout the whole of that period, the notion that form is more important than subject-matter, the notion of 'art for art's sake', had been taken for granted. There were writers who disagreed, of course - Bernard Shaw was one - but that was the prevailing outlook.Now, how is one to account for this very sudden change of outlook? About the end of the nineteen-twenties you get a book like Edith Sitwell's book on Pope, with a completely frivolous emphasis on technique, treating literature as a sort of embroidery, almost as though words did not have meanings: and only a few years later you get a Marxist critic like Edward Upward asserting that books can be 'good' only when they are Marxist in tendency. In a sense both Edith Sitwell and Edward Upward were representative of their period. The question is why should their outlook be so different?I think one has got to look for the reason in external circumstances. Both the aesthetic and the political attitude to literature were produced, or at any rate conditioned by the social atmosphere of a certain period. It is not that good books were not produced in that period. Several of the writers of that time, Dickens, Thackeray, Trollop and others, will probably be remembered longer than any that have come after them. But there are not literary figures in Victorian England corresponding to Flaubert, Baudelaire, Gautier and a host of others. What now appears to us as aesthetic scrupulousness hardly existed. To a mid-Victorian English writer, a book was partly something that brought him money and partly a vehicle for preaching sermons. England was changing very rapidly, a new moneyed class had come up on the ruins of the old aristocracy, contact with Europe had been severed, and a long artistic tradition had been broken. The mid-nineteenth-century English writers were barbarians, even when they happened to be gifted artists, like Dickens.Which of the following statements can be inferred from the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.If we look back at the English literature of the last ten years not so much at the literature as at the prevailing literary attitude, the thing that strikes us is that it has almost ceased to be aesthetic. Literature has been swamped by propaganda. I do not mean that all the books written during that period have been bad. But the characteristic writers of the time, people like Auden and Spender and MacNeice, have been didactic, political writers, aesthetically conscious, of course, but more interested in subject-matter than in technique.This is all the more striking because it makes a very sharp and sudden contrast with the period immediately before it. The characteristic writers of the nineteen-twenties - T. S. Eliot, for instance, Ezra Pound, Virginia Woolf - were writers who put the main emphasis on technique. They had their beliefs and prejudices, of course, but they were far more interested in technical innovations than in any moral or meaning or political implication that their work might contain. The best of them all, James Joyce, was a technician and very little else, about as near to being a 'pure' artist as a writer can be. Even D. H. Lawrence, though he was more of a 'writer with a purpose' than most of the others of his time, had not much of what we should now call social consciousness. And though I have narrowed this down to the nineteen-twenties, it had really been the same from about 1890 onwards. Throughout the whole of that period, the notion that form is more important than subject-matter, the notion of 'art for art's sake', had been taken for granted. There were writers who disagreed, of course - Bernard Shaw was one - but that was the prevailing outlook.Now, how is one to account for this very sudden change of outlook? About the end of the nineteen-twenties you get a book like Edith Sitwell's book on Pope, with a completely frivolous emphasis on technique, treating literature as a sort of embroidery, almost as though words did not have meanings: and only a few years later you get a Marxist critic like Edward Upward asserting that books can be 'good' only when they are Marxist in tendency. In a sense both Edith Sitwell and Edward Upward were representative of their period. The question is why should their outlook be so different?I think one has got to look for the reason in external circumstances. Both the aesthetic and the political attitude to literature were produced, or at any rate conditioned by the social atmosphere of a certain period. It is not that good books were not produced in that period. Several of the writers of that time, Dickens, Thackeray, Trollop and others, will probably be remembered longer than any that have come after them. But there are not literary figures in Victorian England corresponding to Flaubert, Baudelaire, Gautier and a host of others. What now appears to us as aesthetic scrupulousness hardly existed. To a mid-Victorian English writer, a book was partly something that brought him money and partly a vehicle for preaching sermons. England was changing very rapidly, a new moneyed class had come up on the ruins of the old aristocracy, contact with Europe had been severed, and a long artistic tradition had been broken. The mid-nineteenth-century English writers were barbarians, even when they happened to be gifted artists, like Dickens.According to the passage, why does the author call the mid-nineteenth-century English writers, barbarians?

The question has a set of sentences, which when properly sequenced, forms a coherent paragraph. Enter the most logical order of the sentences from among the given options.1. In discussing the period preceding the revolution of 1917, Terras links the literary movements with parallel developments in theater, music, and the visual arts, explaining that these all placed Russia in the forefront of European modernism.2. He wraps up his survey with the dissident movement that followed Stalins death, arguing that the movement again made literature a leader in the struggle for freedom of thought, genuine relevance, and communion with Western culture.3. Terras traces a rich literary heritage that encompasses Russian folklore of the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, medieval literature that in style and substances drew on the Byzantine tradition and literature of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when Russia passed through a succession of literary schools - neoclassicism, sentimentalism, romanticism, and realism - imported from the West.4. Terras divides Russian literature after the revolution into emigre and Soviet writing, and he demonstrates how the latter acted as a propaganda tool of the Communist party.5. Terras moves on to the masterful realist fiction of Turgenev, Dostoevsky, and Tolstoi during the second half of the nineteenth century, showing how it was a catalyst for the social and cultural advances following the reforms of Alexander II. Correct answer is '35142'. Can you explain this answer?

Top Courses for CATView all

Top Courses for CAT

Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect 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 Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The sentence below has two blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. The sentence is followed by four sets of words. Choose the set of words that, when inserted in the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.He absorbed the communist _________ of an ideal society where the lowliest peasants would enjoy ______ prosperity.a)gospels, deliriousb)propaganda, utopianc)literature, unendingd)ideology, preciousCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

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