English Language

English Reading Comprehension

3,503 Questions

English reading comprehension questions assess the ability to understand, analyze, and interpret written passages. Formats include paragraph rearrangement, cloze tests, and fact finding from text. Regular practice is essential for scoring well in the English sections of banking, SSC, and railway exams.

Passage based inferenceParagraph rearrangementCloze test fillingVocabulary replacementReading accuracy tests

English Reading Comprehension Questions

Multiple choice

In spite of everything, Anne's childhood was happy because ________.

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage.

Now, let us speak of one of the most prolific writers of her time, Anne Silvia Spencer. Her writings and pieces of work very aptly reflect not only the social set–up of that age but also what she thought about the same. Her writings give us a clear view of what kind of a human being she was. The most famous of her works, her autobiography, “The story of a simple girl” presents to us the way she acquired great heights as an author.

Her father, Charles Spencer, was, as Anne later wrote, a very peculiar person. Heir to a fortune, educated at Harrow and Cambridge, he was nevertheless a complete domestic tyrant. After bearing him ten children, his gentle wife had little strength left for struggle against him, and the children never dared oppose his wishes.

Yet Anne’s childhood was happy. She romped and studied with her eldest brother, learnt Greek and French, read widely and wrote poetic tragedies. Her own tragedy began at fifteen with a cough and an injury to her back, which resulted in increasingly bad health. Then her mother died. Four years later, her father decided to sell the country home. The large family moved from house to house until her father bought No. 72 Deer Haven. There Anne's health grew worse, and she became a creature of the shadows and silence.

As the years passed, the family grew used to her withdrawn life. She had a certain independence, for an uncle had left her a small income. But her brothers and sisters were at the mercy of Mr. Spencer's harsh rules, which hung over the household like thunder in heavy weather. Chief among them was the absolute refusal to let his daughters marry. He prevented the marriage of Anne’s gay, dance–loving sister, Helena, and the scenes that followed broke Anne’s heart. Yet she remained devoted to her father. It was devotion that served to strengthen the walls of her prison.

She didn’t talk much to her siblings and definitely not to her father. Irrespective of her solitary existence, she was pretty fond of her brothers and siblings. As per her feelings for her father, she herself could not decide (as she writes in her autobiography) whether she had a feeling of loathe or veneration for her father.

  1. her father was not very cruel to her as she had inherited some income from her uncle

  2. her mother was alive

  3. she had some intellectual interests and she was healthy

  4. her illness had not yet crippled her

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
C Correct answer
Explanation

Correct answer is (3).

The lines, "She romped and studied with her eldest brother, learnt Greek and French, read widely and wrote poetic tragedies. Her own tragedy began at fifteen with cough and an injury to her back, which resulted in increasingly bad health", tell that both intellectual interests and health were factors in her happy childhood and not health alone. Therefore, correct option is (3) and not (4).

Multiple choice

What can be inferred about the author?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

My parents were atto rneys: my father, a criminal lawyer and my mother, a negligence lawyer. They were the perfect left–brain/right–brain combination, my father was intuitive and my mother, all reason – qualities that, when balanced, matter the most in business.

The first five years of my life, we lived in Shanghai, China (my father was then in Army Intelligence). My clearest memories are of riding around in a rickshaw with my amah (nanny) and “grazing” at street food stalls (much to my mother’s horror). Because life was so dangerous then (fear of being “shanghai’d”), I was sent off to Sacred Heart Convent day school (much to my Orthodox Jewish grandmother’s horror).

When we fled the closing Red Curtain (the last plane out), we moved back to our apartment on Eleventh Street, between First and Second avenues in Manhattan. In the years dominated by the middle–class flight to the suburbs, I was the quintessential city kid. I’ve since wondered whether being outside the mainstream later helped me view mainstream America with a more objective eye.

Growing up, I spent more time with my maternal grandparents than I did at home. My grandmother was born in America, while my grandfather had come from Russia (claiming, convincingly, that he’d escaped on a horse). They lived a few blocks away from us, where they owned some tenements. My grandfather’s maxim was: If you can’t watch it, don’t’ buy it. So I’d sit out with him on Second Avenue in bentwood chairs to help him “watch” their buildings.

And that’s where I began to learn about marketing.

He had a haberdashery store and together we would decorate the front windows. Then we’d take our chairs back outside and wait. Few customers walked by without being hooked by our display, we’d pick up our chairs and go inside again to re–do the window. Repositioning a tie at a jauntier angle or changing the colour of a shirt, I learned, could convey a different message.

Meanwhile, my grandmother was upstairs in their apartment above the store, keeping the books. Every noontime, like clock–work, she’d take over running the store from my grandfather and they’d pass one another on the stairs, rarely exchanging a word–a marvelous business shorthand. After lunch, they’d again slip by each other in virtual silence, as they returned to their respective posts. I often think of them when I give my TrendView seminars and mention the trend of Cashing Out: theirs was the perfect Mom–and–Pop business, honest and human–scale, a business that ran so well it transcended language.

It was also my grandmother’s job to collect the monthly rents; I’d “help” her with that, too. On the first day of the month, the tenants would drop by to pay their rents – all of eight, twelve, twenty dollars a month. She’d sit at the mahogany table in her dining room, and chat with them in Yiddish, Russian, some German, and Ukrainian.

The business worked. It was personal and hands–on, incorporating family and an occasional friend. There was built–in–child care for my sister Mechele and me. Family dinner conversations centered around daily problems and solutions – work was never something that stopped at 5 p.m. We talked about the real estate business, the store, my parents’ legal cases. Everybody knew everything, and we all helped out where we could. The objective was deceptively simple: get the work done and appreciate the process.

Years later, when I started to formulate the blueprint for BrainReserve, I structured it instinctively around what I had learned from my family. I began my filling up the ranks of the company with my sister and her friends and my friends. Many of my former colleagues were horrified. If you want to be a marketing consultant, act like one, they told me. Give your staff important–sounding titles. Develop a scientific approach [cut–and–dried) to what you’re doing. Don’t share any information with outsiders. And you must hire some M.B.A.’s.

Instead, I hired my best friend, Lys Marigold, a journalist, who turned out to be a genius at generating Big Ideas, at knowing something about everything, and at translating marketing into English. She worked with us for ten years, always claiming that she was only there “temporarily,” and when she left to spend more time in Europe, we were all devastated. It has turned out fine though – we just fax her in Amsterdam with questions and drag her back into the office whenever she comes home. She came home to work on this book.

My sister, Mechele Flaum, now manages BrainReserve – she runs operations, does strategic planning, and oversees client contentment. Plus, following the family heritage, she’s still watching over our grandparents’ buildings.

The point is that I never wanted a traditional corporation, with each employee sitting robotically in his or her office. I tried to create a community for thinking – for I believe what inspires productivity the most is freedom –and freedom begets creativity. Having a free and flexible environment provides a place where people can work together to focus on the future.

  1. He is an MBA.

  2. He runs his family business.

  3. He runs a business more like a family.

  4. He believes that one can run a business without a formal command and order procedure.

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Correct answer is (4). Although it is not clearly mentioned but there are certain lines that can attribute these characters to writer. Go through the seventh paragraph in lines Every noontime, like clock-work, she'd take over running the store from my grandfather and they'd pass one another on the stairs, rarely exchanging a word-a marvellous business shorthand. After lunch, they'd again slip by each other in virtual silence, as they returned to their respective posts. I often think of them when I give my Trend View seminars and mention the trend of Cashing Out, theirs was the perfect Mom-and-Pop business, honest and human-scale, a business that ran so well it transcended language. We can easily reject choice (1) for not being mentioned in passage at any point. Choice (2) is false as it is clearly mentioned that he started his own company BRAIN RESERVE. Choice (3) is little tricky although he runs business with help of his family but he hired some people who were not part of his family like his friend.

Multiple choice
  1. This story is about a boy

  2. who meets a baby tiger in the jungle

  3. and

  4. became its friend.

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

'who met a baby tiger in the jungle'. Past indefinite tense is used to relate a story.

Multiple choice

What does the author convey via the term 'Keystone' in line 7?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

(1) “Truth-seeking is an imperfect process. . . . If mistakes are to be made, they should be made in the direction of making sure that an innocent person is not convicted.” —Jay M. Feinman, Law 101: Everything You Need to Know About the American Legal System
One of the keystone responsibilities of the American legal system is to ensure that every defendant receives a fair trial.

(10) However, the perfection of DNA tests have recently proven that on numerous occasions people were arrested and convicted of crimes they did not commit. The results of these tests point out that the legal system is imperfect.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the genetic code that determines an individual’s physical characteristics. It can be found in the nucleus of every cell. Because everyone has a unique DNA code (except identical multiple births),

(20) forensic testing on hair, semen, or blood left at a crime scene may determine whether a defendant committed the crimes for which he or she has been accused. 
Law professor Barry Scheck has advocated using DNA in ambiguous cases in a nationwide effort he calls the Innocence Project, which provides free legal assistance for inmates who have proven that DNA testing may make a difference in the outcome of a

(30) retrial. The project has helped exonerate more than thirty-five prisoners. In an interview with the television program Frontline, Scheck stated, “This is total system failure. We’re not talking about some procedural due process matter; some matter of unfairness in the way the trial was conducted. We’re talking about people who are actually innocent. And that has to command our respect and attention and concern unlike any other kind of case.”

(40)DNA testing has, in effect, called into question more traditional evidence in determining guilt such as eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony leads to an average of seventy-seven thousand arrests every year. Studies have found that faulty eyewitness testimony is a leading cause of false convictions. A 1997 report by the Constitutional Rights Foundation states, “Researchers at Ohio State University examined hundreds of wrongful convictions


(50)and determined that roughly 52 percent of the errors resulted from eyewitness mistakes.” According to Boston defense attorney James Doyle, thirty-six of the first forty prisoners who were released after DNA testing had been convicted because of eyewitness testimony.
Several ways that eyewitnesses have been asked to identify suspects may compound the inaccuracy of their testimony. Criminal lineups, for example, seem to result in the

(60) witness selecting the person who most closely resembles the person he or she saw, regardless of whether the actual perpetrator is in the lineup. Other factors include the amount of time that passed between the
crime and the identification, as well as police and prosecutors influencing the eyewitness. Race also affects an eyewitness’s ability to successfully identify a suspect. Studies have found that people are 15 percent more likely

 (70) to accurately identify suspects of their own race. 
The behavior of police can also affect a person’s ability to receive a fair trial. Despite the presence of Miranda laws— which have 
largely eliminated physical and psychological torture of suspects—many critics of the police contend that defendants are compelled into confessing to crimes they did not commit. For example, Earl Washington was convicted of

(80) murder in 1984 and sentenced to death; he was later exonerated by DNA testing. Washington’s lawyers argued during his murder trial that his IQ of 69 had made it easier for police to lead him into a false confession. In an article for American Prospect, Alexander Nguyen writes, “[The] tactics police departments have developed are so effective that police have even been able to extract false confessions from

(90) innocent suspects—a baffling phenomenon, but evidence that interrogations have continued to be psychologically compelling.” These tactics can include lying to a suspect about an accomplice’s confession or the existence of witnesses and evidence. 
The problem of wrongful convictions is one of the many issues facing the American legal system.

  1. Common

  2. Natural

  3. Sole

  4. Original

  5. Foundational

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
E Correct answer
Explanation

(5) is the right choice as keystone is line 7 would mean basic or main responsibilities and foundational is the synonym of main or basic. Other choices do not match the context of the word.

Multiple choice

What does the author imply by “Correlation does not prove causation” in line 80?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

(1) The United States has consistently led the world in the number of marriages each year, with a marriage rate roughly twice as high as those in other industrialized countries. It has also consistently led the world in the divorce rate. During the 1960s, the divorce rate in the United States began to climb rapidly. In 1960, there were nine divorces for every thousand married women; by 1970, the number had

(10) shot up to fifteen per thousand. Divorces peaked in 1980 at twenty-three per thousand and have since leveled off at twenty-one per thousand married women in the early 1990s.
Concerned about the country’s high divorce rate, clergy, academics, sociologists, politicians, and others have called for measures to slow it down. One proposal is to return to fault-based divorce, which was the law of the land prior to 1969. Divorce then

(20) was granted only in specific circumstances, generally limited to infidelity, physical or mental cruelty, or desertion. Couples who wished to divorce had to prove in court that one spouse was solely responsible for the breakdown of the marriage. Only the innocent party was allowed to sue for divorce, thus ensuring that all divorces granted were approved by both spouses. If one spouse did not want a divorce and was not guilty of any

(30) transgression, a divorce would not be granted. If both partners were found guilty of fault, they were deemed to deserve each other and no divorce was granted.
California’s no-fault divorce statute, signed into law in 1969 by then governor Ronald Reagan, started a cultural revolution that saw forty-four states adopting no-fault divorce within the next five years, and all fifty states adopting it by 1984. With the advent of no-

(40) fault divorce, married couples did not have to prove who was responsible for the broken marriage. A divorce could be granted based solely on incompatibility or the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. Opponents of no-fault divorce contend that the relaxed rules concerning divorce are behind the nation’s high divorce rate. When a divorce is easy to obtain, they claim, it is easier to dissolve a marriage than it is to try to

(50) repair it. No-fault divorce foes cite a 1995 study in the Journal of Marriage and the Family that found that the divorce rate increased between 15 and 25 percent in the three years following the adoption of no-fault divorce laws. 
No-fault divorce also allows one spouse to dissolve a marriage at any time for any reason—or for no reason at all—regardless of the wishes of the other spouse, opponents

(60) assert. The ability to make such a unilateral decision abrogates the marriage contract, contends Lenore Weitzman, author of The Divorce Revolution. She maintains that no-fault divorce transforms marriage into a “time-limited contingent arrangement rather than a lifelong commitment.” No-fault divorce laws also give all the power to the spouse who wants to get divorced, she asserts, thus “elevating one’s ‘right’ to a divorce over a


 (70) spouse’s ‘right’ to remain married.” What society must do, Weitzman concludes, is return to the strengths of fault-based divorce, in which the law protects the spouse who remains true to the marriage contract rather than blessing the one who wants to break it. 
Supporters of no-fault divorce argue that changing the law will not necessarily lower the number of divorces. As Hanna Rosin writes in the May 6, 1996, issue of the New

(80) Republic, “Correlation does not prove causation.” She maintains that the American divorce rate has been rising since the 1800s and almost doubled between 1960 and 1970, years before most states had adopted no-fault divorce laws. “The sudden spike in the three years following the reform came from a backlog of cases,” Rosin claims, and was merely a response to changes in America’s culture brought on by the sexual revolution.

(90) Returning to fault-based divorce would not result in a lower divorce rate or make marriages last longer, she contends. 
In addition, a return to fault-based divorce would hurt the families it is trying to protect, no-fault supporters argue. According to Constance Ahrons, author of The Good Divorce and director of the marriage and family-therapy program at the University of Southern California, “When one spouse must

(100) prove the other to be ‘at fault,’ divorce becomes a pitched battle between adversaries who each must prove the other committed adultery, spousal abuse or child abuse or destroyed the home. . . . Anger escalates and continues for years or decades following the divorce.” Furthermore, she contends, litigation in fault-based divorces harms the children who are forced to watch their parents battle in a long, vicious war. No-

(110) fault divorce reduces the acrimony, she maintains, and provides a “civilized arena in which marriage can be terminated while parents continue to be parents.” 
The impact that changing divorce laws would have on the divorce rate is debatable. Both sides of the no-fault divorce issue recognize the importance of marriage and family; however, each believes its approach to divorce is the best way to preserve the family

(120) and protect both the parents and the children.

  1. That law doesn't have a conclusive effect on the divorce rates.

  2. That the observed trends do not lend a cause and effect relationship to the situation.

  3. That the temporal data negates the presence of any palpable association between the two given concepts.

  4. The correlation manages to give a qualified relevance to the availability of the reform.

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

(2) is the right choice as per the line above the line in question is “Supporters of no-fault divorce argue that changing the law will not necessarily lower the number of divorces”

Multiple choice
It can be deduced from the first sentences of the passage that ____________________.

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

(1) “Truth-seeking is an imperfect process. . . . If mistakes are to be made, they should be made in the direction of making sure that an innocent person is not convicted.” —Jay M. Feinman, Law 101: Everything You Need to Know About the American Legal System
One of the keystone responsibilities of the American legal system is to ensure that every defendant receives a fair trial.

(10) However, the perfection of DNA tests have recently proven that on numerous occasions people were arrested and convicted of crimes they did not commit. The results of these tests point out that the legal system is imperfect.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the genetic code that determines an individual’s physical characteristics. It can be found in the nucleus of every cell. Because everyone has a unique DNA code (except identical multiple births),

(20) forensic testing on hair, semen, or blood left at a crime scene may determine whether a defendant committed the crimes for which he or she has been accused. 
Law professor Barry Scheck has advocated using DNA in ambiguous cases in a nationwide effort he calls the Innocence Project, which provides free legal assistance for inmates who have proven that DNA testing may make a difference in the outcome of a

(30) retrial. The project has helped exonerate more than thirty-five prisoners. In an interview with the television program Frontline, Scheck stated, “This is total system failure. We’re not talking about some procedural due process matter; some matter of unfairness in the way the trial was conducted. We’re talking about people who are actually innocent. And that has to command our respect and attention and concern unlike any other kind of case.”

(40)DNA testing has, in effect, called into question more traditional evidence in determining guilt such as eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony leads to an average of seventy-seven thousand arrests every year. Studies have found that faulty eyewitness testimony is a leading cause of false convictions. A 1997 report by the Constitutional Rights Foundation states, “Researchers at Ohio State University examined hundreds of wrongful convictions


(50)and determined that roughly 52 percent of the errors resulted from eyewitness mistakes.” According to Boston defense attorney James Doyle, thirty-six of the first forty prisoners who were released after DNA testing had been convicted because of eyewitness testimony.
Several ways that eyewitnesses have been asked to identify suspects may compound the inaccuracy of their testimony. Criminal lineups, for example, seem to result in the

(60) witness selecting the person who most closely resembles the person he or she saw, regardless of whether the actual perpetrator is in the lineup. Other factors include the amount of time that passed between the
crime and the identification, as well as police and prosecutors influencing the eyewitness. Race also affects an eyewitness’s ability to successfully identify a suspect. Studies have found that people are 15 percent more likely

 (70) to accurately identify suspects of their own race. 
The behavior of police can also affect a person’s ability to receive a fair trial. Despite the presence of Miranda laws— which have 
largely eliminated physical and psychological torture of suspects—many critics of the police contend that defendants are compelled into confessing to crimes they did not commit. For example, Earl Washington was convicted of

(80) murder in 1984 and sentenced to death; he was later exonerated by DNA testing. Washington’s lawyers argued during his murder trial that his IQ of 69 had made it easier for police to lead him into a false confession. In an article for American Prospect, Alexander Nguyen writes, “[The] tactics police departments have developed are so effective that police have even been able to extract false confessions from

(90) innocent suspects—a baffling phenomenon, but evidence that interrogations have continued to be psychologically compelling.” These tactics can include lying to a suspect about an accomplice’s confession or the existence of witnesses and evidence. 
The problem of wrongful convictions is one of the many issues facing the American legal system.

  1. search for truth, like truth is not absolute but relative

  2. the imperfections in the legal system can be lead to an irreversible social situation

  3. the trampling to the non-violators is something that becomes unavoidable where truth is to be searched

  4. actual truth and the truth in the legal system have little in common

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

(1) is the right choice as per “Truth seeking is an…………not convicted”.

Multiple choice

The word 'strengths' in line 71 implies ______________.

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

(1) The United States has consistently led the world in the number of marriages each year, with a marriage rate roughly twice as high as those in other industrialized countries. It has also consistently led the world in the divorce rate. During the 1960s, the divorce rate in the United States began to climb rapidly. In 1960, there were nine divorces for every thousand married women; by 1970, the number had

(10) shot up to fifteen per thousand. Divorces peaked in 1980 at twenty-three per thousand and have since leveled off at twenty-one per thousand married women in the early 1990s.
Concerned about the country’s high divorce rate, clergy, academics, sociologists, politicians, and others have called for measures to slow it down. One proposal is to return to fault-based divorce, which was the law of the land prior to 1969. Divorce then

(20) was granted only in specific circumstances, generally limited to infidelity, physical or mental cruelty, or desertion. Couples who wished to divorce had to prove in court that one spouse was solely responsible for the breakdown of the marriage. Only the innocent party was allowed to sue for divorce, thus ensuring that all divorces granted were approved by both spouses. If one spouse did not want a divorce and was not guilty of any

(30) transgression, a divorce would not be granted. If both partners were found guilty of fault, they were deemed to deserve each other and no divorce was granted.
California’s no-fault divorce statute, signed into law in 1969 by then governor Ronald Reagan, started a cultural revolution that saw forty-four states adopting no-fault divorce within the next five years, and all fifty states adopting it by 1984. With the advent of no-

(40) fault divorce, married couples did not have to prove who was responsible for the broken marriage. A divorce could be granted based solely on incompatibility or the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. Opponents of no-fault divorce contend that the relaxed rules concerning divorce are behind the nation’s high divorce rate. When a divorce is easy to obtain, they claim, it is easier to dissolve a marriage than it is to try to

(50) repair it. No-fault divorce foes cite a 1995 study in the Journal of Marriage and the Family that found that the divorce rate increased between 15 and 25 percent in the three years following the adoption of no-fault divorce laws. 
No-fault divorce also allows one spouse to dissolve a marriage at any time for any reason—or for no reason at all—regardless of the wishes of the other spouse, opponents

(60) assert. The ability to make such a unilateral decision abrogates the marriage contract, contends Lenore Weitzman, author of The Divorce Revolution. She maintains that no-fault divorce transforms marriage into a “time-limited contingent arrangement rather than a lifelong commitment.” No-fault divorce laws also give all the power to the spouse who wants to get divorced, she asserts, thus “elevating one’s ‘right’ to a divorce over a


 (70) spouse’s ‘right’ to remain married.” What society must do, Weitzman concludes, is return to the strengths of fault-based divorce, in which the law protects the spouse who remains true to the marriage contract rather than blessing the one who wants to break it. 
Supporters of no-fault divorce argue that changing the law will not necessarily lower the number of divorces. As Hanna Rosin writes in the May 6, 1996, issue of the New

(80) Republic, “Correlation does not prove causation.” She maintains that the American divorce rate has been rising since the 1800s and almost doubled between 1960 and 1970, years before most states had adopted no-fault divorce laws. “The sudden spike in the three years following the reform came from a backlog of cases,” Rosin claims, and was merely a response to changes in America’s culture brought on by the sexual revolution.

(90) Returning to fault-based divorce would not result in a lower divorce rate or make marriages last longer, she contends. 
In addition, a return to fault-based divorce would hurt the families it is trying to protect, no-fault supporters argue. According to Constance Ahrons, author of The Good Divorce and director of the marriage and family-therapy program at the University of Southern California, “When one spouse must

(100) prove the other to be ‘at fault,’ divorce becomes a pitched battle between adversaries who each must prove the other committed adultery, spousal abuse or child abuse or destroyed the home. . . . Anger escalates and continues for years or decades following the divorce.” Furthermore, she contends, litigation in fault-based divorces harms the children who are forced to watch their parents battle in a long, vicious war. No-

(110) fault divorce reduces the acrimony, she maintains, and provides a “civilized arena in which marriage can be terminated while parents continue to be parents.” 
The impact that changing divorce laws would have on the divorce rate is debatable. Both sides of the no-fault divorce issue recognize the importance of marriage and family; however, each believes its approach to divorce is the best way to preserve the family

(120) and protect both the parents and the children.

  1. contending factors

  2. relative superiority

  3. amphibolic advantages

  4. special Relevance

  5. its arbitrary positivism

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

(2) is the right choice as the author talks about the fault based divorces. While the author presumes that it can have some benefits, we cannot attribute a total positive superiority to the idea. Hence, (2) is the best choice. Other choices don't match the context in any way

Multiple choice

The best title for the passage can be __________________.

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

(1) “Truth-seeking is an imperfect process. . . . If mistakes are to be made, they should be made in the direction of making sure that an innocent person is not convicted.” —Jay M. Feinman, Law 101: Everything You Need to Know About the American Legal System
One of the keystone responsibilities of the American legal system is to ensure that every defendant receives a fair trial.

(10) However, the perfection of DNA tests have recently proven that on numerous occasions people were arrested and convicted of crimes they did not commit. The results of these tests point out that the legal system is imperfect.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the genetic code that determines an individual’s physical characteristics. It can be found in the nucleus of every cell. Because everyone has a unique DNA code (except identical multiple births),

(20) forensic testing on hair, semen, or blood left at a crime scene may determine whether a defendant committed the crimes for which he or she has been accused. 
Law professor Barry Scheck has advocated using DNA in ambiguous cases in a nationwide effort he calls the Innocence Project, which provides free legal assistance for inmates who have proven that DNA testing may make a difference in the outcome of a

(30) retrial. The project has helped exonerate more than thirty-five prisoners. In an interview with the television program Frontline, Scheck stated, “This is total system failure. We’re not talking about some procedural due process matter; some matter of unfairness in the way the trial was conducted. We’re talking about people who are actually innocent. And that has to command our respect and attention and concern unlike any other kind of case.”

(40)DNA testing has, in effect, called into question more traditional evidence in determining guilt such as eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony leads to an average of seventy-seven thousand arrests every year. Studies have found that faulty eyewitness testimony is a leading cause of false convictions. A 1997 report by the Constitutional Rights Foundation states, “Researchers at Ohio State University examined hundreds of wrongful convictions


(50)and determined that roughly 52 percent of the errors resulted from eyewitness mistakes.” According to Boston defense attorney James Doyle, thirty-six of the first forty prisoners who were released after DNA testing had been convicted because of eyewitness testimony.
Several ways that eyewitnesses have been asked to identify suspects may compound the inaccuracy of their testimony. Criminal lineups, for example, seem to result in the

(60) witness selecting the person who most closely resembles the person he or she saw, regardless of whether the actual perpetrator is in the lineup. Other factors include the amount of time that passed between the
crime and the identification, as well as police and prosecutors influencing the eyewitness. Race also affects an eyewitness’s ability to successfully identify a suspect. Studies have found that people are 15 percent more likely

 (70) to accurately identify suspects of their own race. 
The behavior of police can also affect a person’s ability to receive a fair trial. Despite the presence of Miranda laws— which have 
largely eliminated physical and psychological torture of suspects—many critics of the police contend that defendants are compelled into confessing to crimes they did not commit. For example, Earl Washington was convicted of

(80) murder in 1984 and sentenced to death; he was later exonerated by DNA testing. Washington’s lawyers argued during his murder trial that his IQ of 69 had made it easier for police to lead him into a false confession. In an article for American Prospect, Alexander Nguyen writes, “[The] tactics police departments have developed are so effective that police have even been able to extract false confessions from

(90) innocent suspects—a baffling phenomenon, but evidence that interrogations have continued to be psychologically compelling.” These tactics can include lying to a suspect about an accomplice’s confession or the existence of witnesses and evidence. 
The problem of wrongful convictions is one of the many issues facing the American legal system.

  1. media and the Legal system

  2. legal system - an Introduction

  3. role of the nucleic acids in justice

  4. the illegal legal system

  5. laws and Lawlessness

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

(2) is the best choice as the passage gives an introduction of the various aspects of the legal system specifically the role of DNA is legal system. (3) is not correct as it says 'different nucleic acids' DNA is only one type of nucleic acid.

Multiple choice

According to the passage, which of the following is not the role of DNA?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

(1) “Truth-seeking is an imperfect process. . . . If mistakes are to be made, they should be made in the direction of making sure that an innocent person is not convicted.” —Jay M. Feinman, Law 101: Everything You Need to Know About the American Legal System
One of the keystone responsibilities of the American legal system is to ensure that every defendant receives a fair trial.

(10) However, the perfection of DNA tests have recently proven that on numerous occasions people were arrested and convicted of crimes they did not commit. The results of these tests point out that the legal system is imperfect.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the genetic code that determines an individual’s physical characteristics. It can be found in the nucleus of every cell. Because everyone has a unique DNA code (except identical multiple births),

(20) forensic testing on hair, semen, or blood left at a crime scene may determine whether a defendant committed the crimes for which he or she has been accused. 
Law professor Barry Scheck has advocated using DNA in ambiguous cases in a nationwide effort he calls the Innocence Project, which provides free legal assistance for inmates who have proven that DNA testing may make a difference in the outcome of a

(30) retrial. The project has helped exonerate more than thirty-five prisoners. In an interview with the television program Frontline, Scheck stated, “This is total system failure. We’re not talking about some procedural due process matter; some matter of unfairness in the way the trial was conducted. We’re talking about people who are actually innocent. And that has to command our respect and attention and concern unlike any other kind of case.”

(40)DNA testing has, in effect, called into question more traditional evidence in determining guilt such as eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony leads to an average of seventy-seven thousand arrests every year. Studies have found that faulty eyewitness testimony is a leading cause of false convictions. A 1997 report by the Constitutional Rights Foundation states, “Researchers at Ohio State University examined hundreds of wrongful convictions


(50)and determined that roughly 52 percent of the errors resulted from eyewitness mistakes.” According to Boston defense attorney James Doyle, thirty-six of the first forty prisoners who were released after DNA testing had been convicted because of eyewitness testimony.
Several ways that eyewitnesses have been asked to identify suspects may compound the inaccuracy of their testimony. Criminal lineups, for example, seem to result in the

(60) witness selecting the person who most closely resembles the person he or she saw, regardless of whether the actual perpetrator is in the lineup. Other factors include the amount of time that passed between the
crime and the identification, as well as police and prosecutors influencing the eyewitness. Race also affects an eyewitness’s ability to successfully identify a suspect. Studies have found that people are 15 percent more likely

 (70) to accurately identify suspects of their own race. 
The behavior of police can also affect a person’s ability to receive a fair trial. Despite the presence of Miranda laws— which have 
largely eliminated physical and psychological torture of suspects—many critics of the police contend that defendants are compelled into confessing to crimes they did not commit. For example, Earl Washington was convicted of

(80) murder in 1984 and sentenced to death; he was later exonerated by DNA testing. Washington’s lawyers argued during his murder trial that his IQ of 69 had made it easier for police to lead him into a false confession. In an article for American Prospect, Alexander Nguyen writes, “[The] tactics police departments have developed are so effective that police have even been able to extract false confessions from

(90) innocent suspects—a baffling phenomenon, but evidence that interrogations have continued to be psychologically compelling.” These tactics can include lying to a suspect about an accomplice’s confession or the existence of witnesses and evidence. 
The problem of wrongful convictions is one of the many issues facing the American legal system.

  1. it is responsible for the eye color of an individual

  2. its uniqueness gives it a very important place in the judicial procedure

  3. it is the means that gives direction to ambiguity

  4. it determines the temperament of an individual

  5. it comes in handy in rectifying past errors

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

(4) is the right answer as only the temperament is not mentioned is the passage text all the choice talk about the roles of DNA as given in the passage.

Multiple choice

What is the meaning of Soiree?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the given question:
M.Latin had met the young woman at a soirée, at the home of the assistant chief of his bureau, and at first sight had fallen in love with her.
    She was the daughter of a country physician who had died some months previously. She had come to live in Paris, with her mother, who visited much among her acuaintances, in the hope of making a favorable marriage for her daughter. They were poor and honest, quite and unaffected.
  The young girl was a perfect type of the virtuous woman whom every sensible young man dreams of one day winning for life. Her simple beauty had the charm of angelic modesty, and the imperceptible smile, which constantly hovered about her lips, seemed to be the reflection of a pure and lovely soul. Her praises resounded on every side. People were never tired of saying: “Happy’d be the man who wins her love. He would not find a better wife.”
   Now M.Lantin enjoyed a snug little income of $700.A hundred and thirty years ago, in 1875,this indeed was a sum and, thinking he could safely assume the responsibilities of matrimony, proposed to this model young girl and was accepted.
    He was unspeakably happy with her; she governed his household cleverly and economically that they seemed to live in luxury. She lavished the most delicate attentions on her husband, coaxed and fondled him, and the charm of her presence was so great that six years after their marriage M.Lantin discovered that he loved his wife even more than during the first days of their honeymoon.
     He only felt inclined to blame her for two things: her love of the theater, and a taste for false jewelry. Her friends (she was acquainted with some officer’s wives) frequently procured for her box at the theater, often for the first representations of the new plays; and her husband was obliged to accompany her, whether he willed or not, to these amusements, though they bored him excessively after a day’s labor at the office.
    After a time, M.Lantin begged his wife to get some lady of her acquaintance to accompany her. She was at first opposed to such an arrangement; but, after much persuasion on his part, she finally consented – to the infinite delight of her husband.
   Now, with her love for the theater came also the desire to adorn her person.True, her costumes remained as before, simple, and in the most correct taste; but she soon began to ornament her ears with huge rhinestones which glittered and sparkled like real diamonds. Around her neck, she wore strings of false pearls, and on her arms bracelets of imitation gold.
    Her husband frequently remonstrated with her saying:
 “My dear, as you cannot afford to buy real diamonds; you ought to appear adorned with your beauty and modesty alone, which are the rarest ornaments of your sex.”

  1. an evening social gathering

  2. a party given in the evening

  3. a party given in the morning

  4. a party given in the night

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

A soiree is a social gathering held in the evening, typically at someone's home, for conversation or entertainment.

Multiple choice

What is the meaning of inclination?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:
“Why?” said he, for his wish to go in was now stronger.
“Because if you go in there, you will have to inclination to remain with me, and I want you to stay. If you only knew!”
“Well, what?”And with a violent movement, he opened the glazed door. The smell of carbolic acid seemed almost to strike him in the face, and what he saw made him recoil still more, for on a small iron bedstead lay the dead body of a woman fantastically illuminated by a single wax candle. In horror, he turned to escape.
“Stop, my dear,” the woman sobbed; and clinging to him, she told him amid a flood of tears that her friend had died two days previously, and that there was no money to bury her. She said,” You can understand that I want it to be a respectable funeral; we were so very fond of each other! Stop here, my dear, do stop. I only want ten francs more. Don’t go away?
They had gone back into the bedroom, and she was trying to detain him:
“No,” he said,” let me go. I will give you ten francs, but I will not stay here; I cannot
He took his purse out of his pocket, extracted a ten-franc piece, put it on the table, and then went to the door. When he had reached it, a thought suddenly struck him, as if somebody were reasoning with him, without his knowledge.
“Why lose these ten francs? Why not profit by this woman’s good intentions. She certainly behaved pluckily, and if I had not known about the matter, I should certainly not have gone away for some time. Well then?
Then other obscurer suggestions whispered to him:
“She was her friend! They were so fond of each other! Was it friendship or love? Oh! Love apparently.Well, it would really be avenging morality, if this woman were forced to be faithless to that monstrous love.” Then he turned round to her and said in a trembling voice: “Look here! If I give you twenty francs instead of ten, I suppose you could buy some flowers for her, as well?”
The unhappy woman’s face brightened with pleasure and gratitude.
“Will you really give me twenty?”
“Yes,” he replied,” and more perhaps. It quite depends upon yourself.”

  1. Preference

  2. Leaning

  3. Aversion

  4. Interest

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

In the context of the sentence 'you will have to inclination to remain with me,' the word refers to a desire or tendency. 'Preference' is the closest synonym among the choices provided.

Multiple choice

What is the meaning of sobbed?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:
“Why?” said he, for his wish to go in was now stronger.
“Because if you go in there, you will have to inclination to remain with me, and I want you to stay. If you only knew!”
“Well, what?”And with a violent movement, he opened the glazed door. The smell of carbolic acid seemed almost to strike him in the face, and what he saw made him recoil still more, for on a small iron bedstead lay the dead body of a woman fantastically illuminated by a single wax candle. In horror, he turned to escape.
“Stop, my dear,” the woman sobbed; and clinging to him, she told him amid a flood of tears that her friend had died two days previously, and that there was no money to bury her. She said,” You can understand that I want it to be a respectable funeral; we were so very fond of each other! Stop here, my dear, do stop. I only want ten francs more. Don’t go away?
They had gone back into the bedroom, and she was trying to detain him:
“No,” he said,” let me go. I will give you ten francs, but I will not stay here; I cannot
He took his purse out of his pocket, extracted a ten-franc piece, put it on the table, and then went to the door. When he had reached it, a thought suddenly struck him, as if somebody were reasoning with him, without his knowledge.
“Why lose these ten francs? Why not profit by this woman’s good intentions. She certainly behaved pluckily, and if I had not known about the matter, I should certainly not have gone away for some time. Well then?
Then other obscurer suggestions whispered to him:
“She was her friend! They were so fond of each other! Was it friendship or love? Oh! Love apparently.Well, it would really be avenging morality, if this woman were forced to be faithless to that monstrous love.” Then he turned round to her and said in a trembling voice: “Look here! If I give you twenty francs instead of ten, I suppose you could buy some flowers for her, as well?”
The unhappy woman’s face brightened with pleasure and gratitude.
“Will you really give me twenty?”
“Yes,” he replied,” and more perhaps. It quite depends upon yourself.”

  1. Snivel

  2. Weep

  3. Laugh

  4. Cry

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

The passage describes the woman crying amid a flood of tears. 'Snivel' is a form of crying, though 'weep' or 'cry' are also synonyms; given the options, 'snivel' is the intended answer.

Multiple choice

What is the meaning of bedstead?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:
“Why?” said he, for his wish to go in was now stronger.
“Because if you go in there, you will have to inclination to remain with me, and I want you to stay. If you only knew!”
“Well, what?”And with a violent movement, he opened the glazed door. The smell of carbolic acid seemed almost to strike him in the face, and what he saw made him recoil still more, for on a small iron bedstead lay the dead body of a woman fantastically illuminated by a single wax candle. In horror, he turned to escape.
“Stop, my dear,” the woman sobbed; and clinging to him, she told him amid a flood of tears that her friend had died two days previously, and that there was no money to bury her. She said,” You can understand that I want it to be a respectable funeral; we were so very fond of each other! Stop here, my dear, do stop. I only want ten francs more. Don’t go away?
They had gone back into the bedroom, and she was trying to detain him:
“No,” he said,” let me go. I will give you ten francs, but I will not stay here; I cannot
He took his purse out of his pocket, extracted a ten-franc piece, put it on the table, and then went to the door. When he had reached it, a thought suddenly struck him, as if somebody were reasoning with him, without his knowledge.
“Why lose these ten francs? Why not profit by this woman’s good intentions. She certainly behaved pluckily, and if I had not known about the matter, I should certainly not have gone away for some time. Well then?
Then other obscurer suggestions whispered to him:
“She was her friend! They were so fond of each other! Was it friendship or love? Oh! Love apparently.Well, it would really be avenging morality, if this woman were forced to be faithless to that monstrous love.” Then he turned round to her and said in a trembling voice: “Look here! If I give you twenty francs instead of ten, I suppose you could buy some flowers for her, as well?”
The unhappy woman’s face brightened with pleasure and gratitude.
“Will you really give me twenty?”
“Yes,” he replied,” and more perhaps. It quite depends upon yourself.”

  1. Framework of a bed

  2. Frame work of a bedding

  3. Framework of a chair

  4. Framework of a cot

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

A bedstead is specifically the framework of a bed, which supports the mattress and bedding.

Multiple choice

What is the meaning of knowledge?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:
“Why?” said he, for his wish to go in was now stronger.
“Because if you go in there, you will have to inclination to remain with me, and I want you to stay. If you only knew!”
“Well, what?”And with a violent movement, he opened the glazed door. The smell of carbolic acid seemed almost to strike him in the face, and what he saw made him recoil still more, for on a small iron bedstead lay the dead body of a woman fantastically illuminated by a single wax candle. In horror, he turned to escape.
“Stop, my dear,” the woman sobbed; and clinging to him, she told him amid a flood of tears that her friend had died two days previously, and that there was no money to bury her. She said,” You can understand that I want it to be a respectable funeral; we were so very fond of each other! Stop here, my dear, do stop. I only want ten francs more. Don’t go away?
They had gone back into the bedroom, and she was trying to detain him:
“No,” he said,” let me go. I will give you ten francs, but I will not stay here; I cannot
He took his purse out of his pocket, extracted a ten-franc piece, put it on the table, and then went to the door. When he had reached it, a thought suddenly struck him, as if somebody were reasoning with him, without his knowledge.
“Why lose these ten francs? Why not profit by this woman’s good intentions. She certainly behaved pluckily, and if I had not known about the matter, I should certainly not have gone away for some time. Well then?
Then other obscurer suggestions whispered to him:
“She was her friend! They were so fond of each other! Was it friendship or love? Oh! Love apparently.Well, it would really be avenging morality, if this woman were forced to be faithless to that monstrous love.” Then he turned round to her and said in a trembling voice: “Look here! If I give you twenty francs instead of ten, I suppose you could buy some flowers for her, as well?”
The unhappy woman’s face brightened with pleasure and gratitude.
“Will you really give me twenty?”
“Yes,” he replied,” and more perhaps. It quite depends upon yourself.”

  1. Cognition

  2. Awareness

  3. Ignorance

  4. Realization

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

In the context of the sentence, 'knowledge' refers to the man's awareness or understanding of the situation. 'Cognition' is a formal synonym for the act of knowing or perceiving.

Multiple choice

What is the meaning of glazed?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:
“Why?” said he, for his wish to go in was now stronger.
“Because if you go in there, you will have to inclination to remain with me, and I want you to stay. If you only knew!”
“Well, what?”And with a violent movement, he opened the glazed door. The smell of carbolic acid seemed almost to strike him in the face, and what he saw made him recoil still more, for on a small iron bedstead lay the dead body of a woman fantastically illuminated by a single wax candle. In horror, he turned to escape.
“Stop, my dear,” the woman sobbed; and clinging to him, she told him amid a flood of tears that her friend had died two days previously, and that there was no money to bury her. She said,” You can understand that I want it to be a respectable funeral; we were so very fond of each other! Stop here, my dear, do stop. I only want ten francs more. Don’t go away?
They had gone back into the bedroom, and she was trying to detain him:
“No,” he said,” let me go. I will give you ten francs, but I will not stay here; I cannot
He took his purse out of his pocket, extracted a ten-franc piece, put it on the table, and then went to the door. When he had reached it, a thought suddenly struck him, as if somebody were reasoning with him, without his knowledge.
“Why lose these ten francs? Why not profit by this woman’s good intentions. She certainly behaved pluckily, and if I had not known about the matter, I should certainly not have gone away for some time. Well then?
Then other obscurer suggestions whispered to him:
“She was her friend! They were so fond of each other! Was it friendship or love? Oh! Love apparently.Well, it would really be avenging morality, if this woman were forced to be faithless to that monstrous love.” Then he turned round to her and said in a trembling voice: “Look here! If I give you twenty francs instead of ten, I suppose you could buy some flowers for her, as well?”
The unhappy woman’s face brightened with pleasure and gratitude.
“Will you really give me twenty?”
“Yes,” he replied,” and more perhaps. It quite depends upon yourself.”

  1. Enamel

  2. Varnish

  3. Coating

  4. Lacquer

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

A 'glazed door' typically refers to a door with glass panes or a smooth, shiny finish. 'Enamel' is a type of coating or finish often associated with such surfaces.