|1.||A||The passage is talking about aluminium ores. It says that corundum is the best ore – but it is not found extensively. It goes on to recommend bauxite over silicates. These hydrated oxides are first converted to alumina – which is then smelted to form aluminum.
2 – is correct, but it is only talking about an intermediate step.
3 – is a hypothesis which is not stated in the passage.
4 – is true, but very specific as it does not talk about bauxite.
|2.||D||This is where you need to be careful about the context of the given paragraph. Remember the key concepts in the paragraph are:
globalization and pluralization
opening up every local, national or regional culture
role of English as a global language (many worlds opened up by globalization are increasingly likely to be known through that single language alone.)
Keeping this in mind, we can see that option 4 is the apt answer here.
Option 1 highlights a negative not mentioned in the paragraph.
The paragraph does not talk about English escaping anything, hence, option 2 is rejected.
Option 3 is incorrect as English as a tool for communication is a narrow sentiment and the passage adopts a much broader outlook.
|3.||B||Options 1 and 4 are illogical in the given case.
refer to the lines: When a man produces a greater quantity of any commodity than he desires for himself, it can only be on one account; namely, that he desires some other commodity which he can obtain in exchange for the surplus of what he himself has produced.
Option 2 is the perfect summary derived from the above lines.
Remember, the focus in the paragraph is on producing something extra for exchanging something; not just simply producing something. This makes option 2 the answer and helps us rule out option 3.
|4.||D||The choice in this case is between option 3 and 4. If you read the two options closely, you will see that the two options represent similar ideas, though they adopt slightly different ways to portray the same. Option 4 is far more inclusive in its ambit as it talks of the general economic climate whereas option 3 only talks of unemployment. Which is the more apt choice? In this case, option 4 represents the more general of the two answers and fits the context better. Also, option 3 adopts a harsher tone than required.|
|5.||D||The only option that provides the complete picture and takes care of the two important aspects of the paragraph is option 4. Yes, failure is ugly but it is also something which is not looked at closely (last line of the paragraph). This sentiment finds a mention only in option 4.|
|6.||C||In the given case, 3 options can be clubbed in the ‘extreme’ category: option 1, 2 and 4. Each of these options is too extreme (even though you might find the odd line to support these ideas) and presents scenarios which are lopsided. Remember this line from the paragraph: Nothing is more harmful than, by dint of continual reading, to strengthen the current of other people's thoughts.
This is the case the author is worried about (one of the outcomes of reading) and this is when reading is harmful. This is only one situation under which reading is harmful and this makes option 3 the best answer in the given case.
|7.||B||What we need to decide is whether business and economics have some relation (minor) or not. From the given context, we can see that business and economics refer to two dimensions of the same: one is theoretical and the other is practical. Though different, a minor relation between the two can be deduced. In the given case, it is clear that option 1 cannot be the answer rather 2 is most appropriate. Option 4 might confuse you but its extreme nature makes it incorrect. The option states that the two are completely unrelated and completely misunderstood; this is an extreme sentiment we cannot derive from the context as statement ' After all, they're both about money, aren't they?' states the similarity.|
|8.||C||The given paragraph tells us one thing: how the Labour party acted in the 1990s, and how it used the centrist viewpoints to win both sides of the political spectrum. By using measures that were sold to both the left and the right, the Labour party was able to win favour with the voters. This sentiment is best reflected in option 3, which points out that the Labour party was effective by not taking extreme viewpoints and adopting an equivocal stance (synonymous with the centrist viewpoint mentioned in the paragraph).|
|9.||D||In the given paragraph, the author of the passage just emphasis one simple point: a medical practitioner should be able to identify and cure diseases; this is the only consideration of the author of the passage. Which option only focuses on this element? Option 4. The other options commit the following mistakes:
Option 1: the author does not state medical science to be complicated.
Option 2: the author does not say anything about doctors forgetting the basic precept.
Option 3: the author does not focus on individual gains.
|10.||C||The first thing you need to notice about the question: it asks you which of the following is not an apt summary for the paragraph. So be careful about this little fact. Secondly, options 1, 2 and 4 are similar in nature, each pointing out the fact that depression cannot be viewed through a singular lens. Option 3 is the correct answer and in order to identify this, you need to know the meaning of the word risqué: Suggestive of sexual impropriety. These clearly does not fit in the given case. Risqué does not mean risky.|
|11.||D||Option 4 is the apt answer in the given case. It contains all the points in the passage. Remember, the subject of the passage is sexism (discriminatory or abusive behaviour towards members of the opposite sex) and this only finds a mention in option 4. Option 1, though close to option 4, leaves out the sexism bit and rather places focus on 'women friendly approach'. This is clearly not mentioned in the passage.
Option 2 only picks up one point of the passage. Option 3 again only analyses the given issue from one perspective and misses the main point. Also, the phrase 'actual role of women in society' is ambiguous in the given context.
|12.||D||Option 4 is the best answer.
In this question, you need to carefully evaluate the options and identify the one which is most applicable in the given case:
Option 1: too strong an option; losses of plutocrats not mentioned.
Option 2: the paragraph does not mention maximum possible help to any particular group
Option 3: the paragraph does not mention that measures of the past have been continued
Option 4: this is the apt choice which highlights the significant points of the paragraph.
|13.||C||The key to this question is the meaning of the word ‘exacerbated’ in option 3. It means ‘make worse’. Option three essentially talks about how the coming together of viewpoints has lead to common approach to deal with conservation issues. This is the central viewpoint of the author of the passage as well.
Option 1 incorrectly highlights a ‘long established need’. This is not mentioned in the passage.
Option 2 emphasis the scientists and the science of resilience yet misses out the major points.
Option 4 talks about ‘all issues related to the ethnosphere and biosphere’. This is an extreme viewpoint not expressed by the paragraph.
|14.||D||The author of the paragraph illustrates how sports is actually of our past and how it reflects the combat that used to take place between human animals. It is a reflection out of genetic fitness. Keeping these sentiments in mind, we can see that option 4 is the best fit in the given case.|
|15.||B||Usually Indian movies tend to have a happy ending. In fact the trend mentioned with reference to Malayalam cinema is an aberration possibly attributable to the higher literacy rates prevalent in the society.
1 – They do have contrasting preferences but it is possibly driven by higher literacy rates in Kerala. Further it is an aberration and not the central theme of the passage.
3 – The statement is factually correct – dramas like Shakuntala and Iliad & Odyssey were written around 7th century BC. However this is not the central idea of the passage.
4 – The statement is a possible explanation as to why the audiences of Malayalam movies have a preference for tragedies. It is not the central statement of the passage.