All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my ... Start Learning for Free
I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.
Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your GMAT doubts with EduRev
Verified Answer
I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home...

The correct answer for the given sentence is "had lost." Here's a detailed explanation:
Explanation:
The sentence is in the past tense, and it describes an action that happened before another past action. In such cases, we use the past perfect tense.
- The past perfect tense is formed by using "had" + past participle of the verb.
- In this case, the verb is "lose," and its past participle form is "lost."
Breaking down the sentence:
"I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home."
- The first part of the sentence implies that the speaker was not aware of losing their keys.
- The second part of the sentence indicates that the realization of losing the keys occurred when the speaker arrived home.
Putting it together:
To express the idea that the action of losing the keys happened before the speaker arrived home, we need to use the past perfect tense. Therefore, the correct form of the verb "lose" in the sentence is "had lost."
Final answer:
"I didn’t realize that I had lost my keys until I arrived home."
View all questions of this test
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.I remember the astonishment I felt when I first read Shakespeare. I expected to receive a powerful aesthetic pleasure, but having read, one after the other, works regarded as his best: “King Lear,” “Romeo and Juliet,” “Hamlet” and “Macbeth,” not only did I feel no delight, but I also felt an irresistible repulsion and tedium, and doubted as to whether I was senseless in feeling works regarded as the summit of perfection by the whole of the civilized world to be trivial and positively bad, or whether the significance which this civilized world attributes to the works of Shakespeare was itself senseless. My consternation was increased by the fact that I always keenly felt the beauties of poetry in every form; then why should artistic works recognized by the whole world as those of a genius not just fail to please me, but in fact be disagreeable to me?For a long time I could not believe in myself, and during fifty years, in order to test myself, I several times recommenced reading Shakespeare in every possible form, in Russian, in English, in German and in Schlegel’s translation, as I was advised. Several times I read the dramas and the comedies and historical plays, and I invariably underwent the same feelings: repulsion, weariness, and bewilderment. At the present time, before writing this preface, being desirous once more to test myself, I have, as an old man of seventy-five, again read the whole of Shakespeare, including the historical plays, the “Henrys,” “Troilus and Cressida,” the “Tempest,” “Cymbeline,” and I have felt, with even greater force, the same feelings, this time, however, not of bewilderment, but of firm, indubitable conviction that the unquestionable glory of a great genius which Shakespeare enjoys, and which compels writers of our time to imitate him and readers and spectators to discover in him non-existent merits,—thereby distorting their aesthetic and ethical understanding,—is a great evil, as is every untruth.Although I know that the majority of people so firmly believe in the greatness of Shakespeare that in reading this judgment of mine they will not admit even to the possibility of its justice, and will not give it the slightest attention, nevertheless I will endeavour, as well as I can, to show why I believe that Shakespeare cannot be recognized either as a great genius, or even as an average author.Q.In context of the passage, what does the line—‘artistic works recognized by the whole world as those of a genius’—refer to?

In the 1950s, reading was taught to young children primarily through the use of simple primers depicting the middle-class non-adventures of “Dick and Jane.” Rudolph Fletch’s bestselling 1955 book Why Johnny Can’t Read attacked these primers, calling them “horrible, stupid, insipid, … tasteless little readers” and asserting that such boring stories gave no incentive for children to read on their own and learn to “sound out” each word phonetically.Fletch also bemoaned the fact that there was not a single book in bookstores that first and second graders could read by themselves.In response, a publisher commissioned Theodore Geisel, who wrote children’s books under the pen name “Dr.Seuss,” to write a book that “a first grader can’t put down.” Geisel was given a list of a few hundred words considered important and asked to make a book out of them. Nine months later, Geisel, using only 220 different words, delivered The Cat in the Hat, a whimsical story about two bored children left at home with their talking fish who are suddenly visited by a havoc-creating six-foot-tall talking cat. In addition, Geisel wrote the entire book in a rhyming verse, making it fun to read aloud. The Cat in the Hat was a tremendous success and vaulted Geisel into instant celebrity. Another publisher bet Geisel that he could not write an entire book using only 50 different words. Geisel won the bet by publishing the classic Green Eggs and Ham.The Dr. Seuss books revolutionized the children’s book industry by proving that it was possible to create engaging books with a limited vocabulary. Geisel has been credited with killing off “Dick and Jane,” replacing them with clever rhymes, plot twists and rebellious heroes who do the unexpected. Now one in four American children receives a Dr. Seuss title as his or her first book.Q.The main function of the first paragraph is

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow:Nine days of state mourning at the passing away of Britain’s queen mother will mark a unique era because the racehorse loving, gin and tonic drinking ‘grand old mum’, as the Brits called her, literally lived through the entire 20th century. While TV channels put out some black and white archival footage from another age, the formerly reverential BBC attracted criticism from the people because its newscasters did not wear black ties and they discussed the event with a frankness that would have been unthinkable a few years ago.She was widowed 50 years ago. A relic I still have in my possession amongst my naval memorabilia is a black, mourning armband issued to us when King George VI died on February 6, 1952. It was dispatched by Messrs Gieves of Old Bond Street in London, the naval tailors ‘By appointment to the King’. I recall listening to the last Christmas day broadcast of King George VI, with his consort by his side, while having dinner with a friend in Surrey. Then, a few weeks later, we were to receive news of his death while we were at sea on board our training cruiser, HMS Devonshire, headed for the Caribbean. As we proceeded to drop anchor in Barbados harbour, we were struck first, by the magnificent sight of flying fish which kept darting across the placid blue waters, and then, by the great alacrity with which mourning bands were delivered to us for the funeral ceremonies. Inevitably, we were billed by ‘Messrs Thieves’ for five shillings, a princely sum then, because our pay was four shillings a day.Brought up, as I was, in a family known for thrift, I had put that piece of uniform safely away and which, as it happened, came in handy a year later following the death of the then queen mother, Mary. Our pay had doubled to eight shillings by then, we having been promoted as midshipmen, and the commander-in-chief in Malta was Louis Mountbatten. He was a close member of the royal family, a cousin of George VI and, of course, he and his wife Edwina flew to London for the funeral service in Westminster Abbey. But the formalities connected with a royal funeral were meticulously observed by all ships of the Mediterranean fleet and thus that black armband became an absolute necessity.Q.3. At theend of the second paragraph, the author refers to ‘Messrs Gieves ofOld Bond Street’ as ‘Messrs Thieves’. This most likely suggests thatthe author

Direction: Read the following Passage and Answer the following Question.“Strange Bedfellows!” lamented the title of a recent letter to Museum News, in which a certain Harriet Sherman excoriated the National Gallery of Art in Washington for its handling of tickets to the much-ballyhooed “Van Gogh’s van Goghs” exhibit. A huge proportion of the 200,000 free tickets were snatched up by the opportunists in the dead of winter, who then scalped those tickets at $85 apiece to less hardy connoiseurs.Yet, Sherman’s bedfellows are far from strange. Art, despite its religious and magical origins, very soon became a commercial venture. From bourgeois patrons funding art they barely understood in order to share their protegee’s prestige, to museum curators stage-managing the cult of artists in order to enhance the market value of museum holdings, entrepreneurs have found validation and profit in big-name art. Speculators, thieves, and promoters long ago created and fed a market where cultural icons could be traded like commodities.This trend toward commodification of high-brow art took an ominous, if predictable, turn in the 1980s during the Japanese “bubble economy.” At a time when Japanese share prices more than doubled, individual tycoons and industrial giants alike invested record amounts in some of the West’s greatest masterpieces. Ryoei Saito, for example, purchased van Gogh’s Portrait of Dr. Gachet for a record-breaking $82.5 million. The work, then on loan to the Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art, suddenly vanished from the public domain. Later learning that he owed the Japanese government $24 million in taxes, Saito remarked that he would have the paining cremated with him to spare his heirs the inheritance tax. This statement, which he later dismissed as a joke, alarmed and enraged many. A representative of the Van Gogh museum, conceding that he had no legal redress, made an ethical appeal to Mr. Saito, asserting, “a work of art remains the possession of the world at large.”Ethical appeals notwithstanding, great art will increasingly devolve into big business. Firstly, great art can only be certified by its market value. Moreover, the “world at large” hasn’t the means of acquisition. Only one museum currently has the funding to contend for the best pieces–the J. Paul Getty Museum, founded by the billionaire oilman. The art may disappear into private hands, but its transfer will disseminate once static fortunes into the hands of various investors, collectors, and occasionally the artist.Q.The passage supplies information for answering which of the following questions?

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2025 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice I didn’t realize that I ---- (lose) my keys until I arrived home.Correct answer is 'had lost'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses
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