This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 25 June 2025, the same 30 questions the app served that day, on the day's vocabulary and editorial. One mark for a right answer, minus 0.25 for a wrong one; the explanation opens as soon as you tap.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Integration
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Access
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Assist
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Lack
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Effectively
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Procuring
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Prevalent
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Deficiency
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To be able to get to or get inside a place.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
The fact that something is not available or that there is not enough of it.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Successful in producing a desired or intended result.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
The state of not having enough of something.
A statement with one blank is given below. Choose the set of words from the given options which can be used to fill the given blank.
____ breakfast is in tin, go and take it.
Explanation: Few is a quantifier used with plural countable nouns. Little is used with singular uncountable nouns. Breakfast are singular uncountable nouns. 'A little' means small in amount. Option A is correct. <br> A little breakfast is in tin, go and take it.
A statement with one blank is given below. Choose the set of words from the given options which can be used to fill the given blank.
____ clever you are, you can't solve this puzzle.
Explanation: However -- in whatever way; regardless of how. <br> However clever you are, you can't solve this puzzle.
A statement with one blank is given below. Choose the set of words from the given options which can be used to fill the given blank.
____ know computer operating among us.
Explanation: The correct sentence is: 'A few know computer operating among us.' <br> The phrase 'A few' is used with countable nouns and means a small number of people in this context. Since 'people' is implied in the sentence, this choice correctly quantifies the number of people who know computer operating. <br> Option A: 'A little' is incorrect because it is used with uncountable nouns, not countable ones like 'people.' <br> Option B: 'Jayesh' is a name and not a quantifier, making it incorrect. <br> Option D: 'One of' is grammatically correct but refers to a single person within a group, which does not match the intended meaning of multiple people knowing computer operating. <br> Thus, the best choice is Option C: A few.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Despite being under debt, Amit still keeps a good table.
Explanation: keeps a good table: to be a good host.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
He has reached present position in his job through elbow grease.
Explanation: Elbow grease: hard physical work, especially vigorous polishing or cleaning.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Some of us are really in a Catch-22 situation.
Explanation: In a Catch-22: an impossible situation where you are prevented from doing one thing until you have done another.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the correct spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the correct spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the correct spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the correct spelling.
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
He is latter (a)/ than (b)/ I expected (c)/ No Error (d)
Explanation: He is later
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
The distinction of being the major cause (a)/ pollution definitely (b)/ belong to government itself (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: belongs
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
He entertained all of us with lively descriptions of his adventures (a)/ in travelling and very interesting stories of (b)/ adventurous people who he had met in his foreign tours (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: adventurous people whom
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament - 'abrogating' Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories - has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State's trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The 'abrogation' of Article 370, being hailed as a 'glorious' move, is itself a misnomer. 'Amending' or 'abrogating' Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State's legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly. The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth. <br><br> What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China. <br><br> By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganizing a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.
Which among the following is correct regarding the Article 368 in the Constitution of India, as stated in the passage
Explanation: Refer to, 'the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State's legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly.' It is stated in the passage that the Article 368 of the Indian Constitution is regarding the amendment of any law in the country. Any law will only be applicable in Jammu and Kashmir if the state legislature also accepts the same. The Presidential Order should also be in force regarding this. Among the given options, we can see that Option C gives us the correct information regarding the Article 368 of the Indian Constitution whereas the rest can be eliminated from consideration as they do not follow from the passage. This makes Option C the correct choice among the given options.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament - 'abrogating' Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories - has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State's trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The 'abrogation' of Article 370, being hailed as a 'glorious' move, is itself a misnomer. 'Amending' or 'abrogating' Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State's legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly. The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth. <br><br> What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China. <br><br> By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganizing a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.
Which among the following is correct regarding Scotland and Wales as stated in the passage?
Explanation: Refer to, 'This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain.' It is stated in the passage that the area of Scotland and Wales are within the jurisdiction of Great Britain and the areas are governed by the autonomous bodies. This is actually similar to the status of Jammu and Kashmir in India because till now Jammu and Kashmir also enjoyed similar autonomy in India. Among the given options, we can choose Option C since it provides us the correct information regarding similarity between Jammu and Kashmir and Scotland and Wales. Other options can be eliminated since they do not follow from the passage. This makes Option C the correct choice among the given options.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament - 'abrogating' Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories - has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State's trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The 'abrogation' of Article 370, being hailed as a 'glorious' move, is itself a misnomer. 'Amending' or 'abrogating' Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State's legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly. The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth. <br><br> What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China. <br><br> By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganizing a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.
Which among the following is correct regarding the possible consequence of the decision taken by the centre to abrogate Section 370?
Explanation: It is clear from the passage that the decision by the government to revoke Section 370 without discussing anything with the local political parties will have far reaching impact on the relationship between India and Jammu & Kashmir. Therefore the people in the area will not feel that Indian government is working to fulfill their interests but they are only working in the interests of the mainland country. It will definitely increase the trust deficit between the people in India and the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Among the given options, we can easily choose Option B since it provides us the correct information whereas the rest can be eliminated from consideration since they do not follow from the passage. This makes Option B the correct choice among the given options.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament - 'abrogating' Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories - has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State's trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The 'abrogation' of Article 370, being hailed as a 'glorious' move, is itself a misnomer. 'Amending' or 'abrogating' Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State's legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly. The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth. <br><br> What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China. <br><br> By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganizing a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.
Which among the following is/are correct regarding the decision taken by the Government of India to revoke Article 370 of the Indian Constitution? <br> I. Jammu and Kashmir will be a Union Territory with a legislature whereas Ladakh will not have the same. <br> II. This decision will help the separatists in the valley to portray India as a force working against the interests of the valley people. <br> III. This decision will not stand in the court of law and there has already been petition in the Supreme Court against it.
Explanation: Statement I is correct since it has been stated in the passage that J & K will not be a state anymore and it will only be a UT. Apart from that, Ladakh will also be a UT but there will not be any legislative assembly there unlike Jammu and Kashmir. Refer to, 'Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it.' Statement II is correct since it has been stated in the passage that the decision taken unilaterally by the Indian government is actually going to hurt the sentiment of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The separatists there will take this opportunity to brainwash the people there against the interests of the valley people. Refer to, 'It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force.' Statement III is not correct since there are references that the government has not done it in the correct manner but it cannot be said that there have been applications already in the Supreme Court. Therefore it cannot be considered as correct. This makes Option A the correct choice among the given options.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament - 'abrogating' Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories - has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State's trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The 'abrogation' of Article 370, being hailed as a 'glorious' move, is itself a misnomer. 'Amending' or 'abrogating' Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State's legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly. The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth. <br><br> What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China. <br><br> By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganizing a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.
Which among the following is SIMILAR in meaning to the word Misnomer as used in the passage?
Explanation: The word misnomer has been used in the passage in the sense that the image that is being created of abrogation of Section 370 being a bold decision is actually wrong since the government has not done it in the correct manner. It should have consulted the local political leaders before taking such a decision. This will have long lasting impact on the area and its people. Among the given options, it is easy to point out C as the correct meaning of the given word. Other words are not correct and can be eliminated. This makes Option C the correct choice among the given options.
One Prime for the website and the app, same login. Videos play in the app.
30 questions in 15 minutes, All India rank, streak and explanations. Free: play it here after logging in, or in the app.
Free. Mobile number + OTP, no password.
