This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 15 August 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.
Affiliated
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Described
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Exposing
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Prominent
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Accused
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Desperate
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Attempt
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Condemnation
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Connected with or controlled by a group or organization.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
A person or group of people who are charged with or on trial for a crime.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Make an effort to achieve or complete (something difficult).
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Identify (someone or something) from having encountered them before; know again.
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.
____ it stopped raining when we started our journey.
Explanation: If there is 'when' then the sentence will start with 'Hardly'. <br> Hardly had it stopped raining when we started our journey.
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.
Run fast ____ get your ticket.
Explanation: Solution: <br> Defining Coordinating Conjunctions: <br> Coordinating conjunctions are words like 'and,' 'but,' 'or,' 'nor,' 'for,' 'so,' and 'yet.' They connect words, phrases, or clauses of equal grammatical rank. <br> Option Analysis: <br> Option A: but - 'But' indicates contrast. The sentence implies a cause-and-effect relationship, not a contrast. 'Run fast, but get your ticket' suggests running fast *despite* getting a ticket, which is illogical. <br> Option B: as - 'As' can indicate a cause-and-effect relationship, but usually implies simultaneity. 'Run fast as get your ticket' doesn't make grammatical sense. It would need to be something like, 'Run fast as you get your ticket'. <br> Option C: otherwise - 'Otherwise' introduces an alternative consequence. The sentence needs a consequence of *not* running fast, not an alternative. 'Run fast, otherwise you won't get your ticket' is grammatically correct, but does not fit the implied meaning of the prompt. <br> Option D: and - 'And' indicates addition or a continuation. The sentence structure implies a cause-and-effect relationship: running fast will lead to getting a ticket. 'Run fast and get your ticket' perfectly expresses that relationship - running fast is the action to take to get the ticket. <br> Correct Answer: Option D (and) <br> The conjunction 'and' appropriately links the two clauses, showing that running fast is the action required to achieve the desired outcome (getting the ticket). The sentence is grammatically correct and logically sound with 'and'.
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.
She did not sing so ____ as her friend.
Explanation: She did not sing so well as her friend.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Many people called on the minister when he was ill.
Explanation: called on: pay a visit to (someone).
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Only strict laws make the evil of dowry die out.
Explanation: die out: to cease to exist; become extinct.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
We should abstain from casting aspersions on the character of our colleagues.
Explanation: casting aspersions: to call into question someone's integrity, to criticize someone's character, to slander someone.
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.
The Prime Minister has made a fervant appeal to the people (a)/ to help the flood affected victims and I am sure you will rise for the occasion (b)/ and donate generously to the public fund created especially for the purpose (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: I am sure you will rise to the occasion
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.
Some persons think that (a)/ I am averse from smoking (b)/ but little do they realise that I love smoking in private (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: I am averse to smoking
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 told the story in details (a)/ and the chidren listened to it (b)/ with great interest (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: He told the story in detail
Directions: Please read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> There was a time when Pete Sampras's tally of 14 Grand Slam singles titles - the last of which came at the U.S. Open in 2002 - seemed like the acme of sporting achievement in men's tennis. Little did anybody expect that in the next 16 years, across 64 Majors, not one or two but three players would stand shoulder to shoulder with the American great. On Sunday, Novak Djokovic became that third man, defeating Argentine Juan Martin del Potro, for his third U.S. Open title at Flushing Meadows. The 31-year-old Serb has never been considered a once-in-a-generation talent, as have Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the ones above him in the trophy count. But nobody represents the modern-day game as well as Djokovic. He is the ultimate practitioner of the attrition-based baseline tennis, and at his best, with his supremely efficient patrolling of the court, is near invincible. Over two weeks in New York he hit this high many times over. In fact, the 95-minute second set in the final was a microcosm of Djokovic's last two years. It was long and weary as fortunes swung back and forth. But adversity energised him, and he found a level which his opponent couldn't match. Coming after his triumphant return at Wimbledon in July, the latest success is evidence enough that technically, tactically and physically Djokovic is back to his best. <br><br> If it was about the restoration of the old order on the men's side, it was the continuation of the new in the women's section. There has been a first-time winner in four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments, and 20-year-old Naomi Osaka added to the eclectic mix by becoming the first Japanese to win a Major. In Serena Williams, the winner of 23 singles Slams, the most by any player in the Open Era, Osaka faced the ultimate challenge. It was also an inter-generational battle like none other. The 16-year age gap between Williams and Osaka was the second biggest in the Open Era for a women's final, next only to Monica Seles (17) vs. Martina Navratilova (34) at the 1991 U.S. Open. To her immense credit, Osaka wasn't awed by the stage. While growing up, she had revered Williams. After all, this is someone who chose Williams as her subject for a school essay in third grade. On Saturday she played like she knew the 36-year-old's game like the back of her hand, absorbing everything the American threw at her, and redirecting them with much more panache. The magnitude of her achievement was nearly drowned out by the chaos in the aftermath of Williams's tirade against the chair umpire. Yet, the manner in which Osaka, at an impressionable young age, closed out the match with a cold relentlessness showed she is here to stay.
Consider the following statements. <br><br> I. The achievement of Novak Djokovic is not as good as that of Pete Sampras because the competition was tougher at that time. <br><br> II. Nobody would ever think that the record set by Pete Sampras could be broken by anybody in the years to come. <br><br> III. Novak Djokovic is not a very talented player but he can win the match with his dedication and technique. <br><br> Which among the above statements is/ are true according to the passage?
Explanation: Statement I cannot be considered as true because nowhere in the passage it is mentioned that the achievement by Novak Djokovic is not as great as that of Pete Sampras. It has been said time and again that this achievement of being on the same level as Pete Sampras could not have been though before by anybody. <br><br> Statement II is true since it is correct that it used to be considered as impossible to break the record of Pete Sampras in tennis even till few years ago though now it is the reality that the record has been broken by more than one person. Refer to, 'There was a time when Pete Sampras's tally of 14 Grand Slam singles titles - the last of which came at the U.S. Open in 2002 - seemed like the acme of sporting achievement in men's tennis. Little did anybody expect that in the next 16 years, across 64 Majors, not one or two but three players would stand shoulder to shoulder with the American great.' <br><br> Statement III is also true according to the passage since Novak Djokovic is not considered as a talent that comes once in a generation like Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal but he is considered as the epitome of modern tennis. Refer to, 'The 31-year-old Serb has never been considered a once-in-a-generation talent, as have Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the ones above him in the trophy count. But nobody represents the modern-day game as well as Djokovic. He is the ultimate practitioner of the attritionbased baseline tennis, and at his best, with his supremely efficient patrolling of the court, is near invincible.' <br><br> So, both statements II and III are correct according to the information given in the passage. <br><br> This makes option B the correct choice among the given options.
Directions: Please read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> There was a time when Pete Sampras's tally of 14 Grand Slam singles titles - the last of which came at the U.S. Open in 2002 - seemed like the acme of sporting achievement in men's tennis. Little did anybody expect that in the next 16 years, across 64 Majors, not one or two but three players would stand shoulder to shoulder with the American great. On Sunday, Novak Djokovic became that third man, defeating Argentine Juan Martin del Potro, for his third U.S. Open title at Flushing Meadows. The 31-year-old Serb has never been considered a once-in-a-generation talent, as have Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the ones above him in the trophy count. But nobody represents the modern-day game as well as Djokovic. He is the ultimate practitioner of the attrition-based baseline tennis, and at his best, with his supremely efficient patrolling of the court, is near invincible. Over two weeks in New York he hit this high many times over. In fact, the 95-minute second set in the final was a microcosm of Djokovic's last two years. It was long and weary as fortunes swung back and forth. But adversity energised him, and he found a level which his opponent couldn't match. Coming after his triumphant return at Wimbledon in July, the latest success is evidence enough that technically, tactically and physically Djokovic is back to his best. <br><br> If it was about the restoration of the old order on the men's side, it was the continuation of the new in the women's section. There has been a first-time winner in four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments, and 20-year-old Naomi Osaka added to the eclectic mix by becoming the first Japanese to win a Major. In Serena Williams, the winner of 23 singles Slams, the most by any player in the Open Era, Osaka faced the ultimate challenge. It was also an inter-generational battle like none other. The 16-year age gap between Williams and Osaka was the second biggest in the Open Era for a women's final, next only to Monica Seles (17) vs. Martina Navratilova (34) at the 1991 U.S. Open. To her immense credit, Osaka wasn't awed by the stage. While growing up, she had revered Williams. After all, this is someone who chose Williams as her subject for a school essay in third grade. On Saturday she played like she knew the 36-year-old's game like the back of her hand, absorbing everything the American threw at her, and redirecting them with much more panache. The magnitude of her achievement was nearly drowned out by the chaos in the aftermath of Williams's tirade against the chair umpire. Yet, the manner in which Osaka, at an impressionable young age, closed out the match with a cold relentlessness showed she is here to stay.
Why is the success of Novak Djokovic considered as his statement that he is back again in the court?
Explanation: Refer to, 'It was long and weary as fortunes swung back and forth. But adversity energised him, and he found a level which his opponent couldn't match. Coming after his triumphant return at Wimbledon in July, the latest success is evidence enough that technically, tactically and physically Djokovic is back to his best.' <br><br> It is very clear that Djokovic could not win many matches in the last few years and his luck has not always been with him. He has tried but he has not succeeded in many tournaments. Now that he has clinched one of the grand slam tournaments, it actually announces his back to form in the international tennis. <br><br> Among the given options, only A and E can imply the point made above. Now, A cannot be the option since there is no reference to injury in the passage to Djokovic and it is also not said that he could not perform because of injury. That is why this option is eliminated. Option E makes the correct choice since this statement is about the detailed reason behind the assumption that Djokovic is back in form. <br><br> This makes option E the correct choice among the given options.
Directions: Please read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> There was a time when Pete Sampras's tally of 14 Grand Slam singles titles - the last of which came at the U.S. Open in 2002 - seemed like the acme of sporting achievement in men's tennis. Little did anybody expect that in the next 16 years, across 64 Majors, not one or two but three players would stand shoulder to shoulder with the American great. On Sunday, Novak Djokovic became that third man, defeating Argentine Juan Martin del Potro, for his third U.S. Open title at Flushing Meadows. The 31-year-old Serb has never been considered a once-in-a-generation talent, as have Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the ones above him in the trophy count. But nobody represents the modern-day game as well as Djokovic. He is the ultimate practitioner of the attrition-based baseline tennis, and at his best, with his supremely efficient patrolling of the court, is near invincible. Over two weeks in New York he hit this high many times over. In fact, the 95-minute second set in the final was a microcosm of Djokovic's last two years. It was long and weary as fortunes swung back and forth. But adversity energised him, and he found a level which his opponent couldn't match. Coming after his triumphant return at Wimbledon in July, the latest success is evidence enough that technically, tactically and physically Djokovic is back to his best. <br><br> If it was about the restoration of the old order on the men's side, it was the continuation of the new in the women's section. There has been a first-time winner in four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments, and 20-year-old Naomi Osaka added to the eclectic mix by becoming the first Japanese to win a Major. In Serena Williams, the winner of 23 singles Slams, the most by any player in the Open Era, Osaka faced the ultimate challenge. It was also an inter-generational battle like none other. The 16-year age gap between Williams and Osaka was the second biggest in the Open Era for a women's final, next only to Monica Seles (17) vs. Martina Navratilova (34) at the 1991 U.S. Open. To her immense credit, Osaka wasn't awed by the stage. While growing up, she had revered Williams. After all, this is someone who chose Williams as her subject for a school essay in third grade. On Saturday she played like she knew the 36-year-old's game like the back of her hand, absorbing everything the American threw at her, and redirecting them with much more panache. The magnitude of her achievement was nearly drowned out by the chaos in the aftermath of Williams's tirade against the chair umpire. Yet, the manner in which Osaka, at an impressionable young age, closed out the match with a cold relentlessness showed she is here to stay.
Which among the following is true regarding the women's singles final in the US Open in the year 2018?
Explanation: Statement A is true since in the passage it has been explained that most of the recent women's singles finals in the grand slam tournaments have seen new and young talent competing and also winning the battle over the seasoned players. The same took place in the US Open also and that is how this tournament carried forward the tradition of the emerging talents in major tennis tournaments. Refer to, 'If it was about the restoration of the old order on the men's side, it was the continuation of the new in the women's section. There has been a first-time winner in four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments, and 20-year-old Naomi Osaka added to the eclectic mix by becoming the first Japanese to win a Major.' <br><br> Statement B is also correct since the US Open Final was the ultimate battle for Naomi Osaka who was facing her idol Serena Williams who is the winner of the highest number of grand slam titles in the open era of tennis. This was the final battle for the young player in a tournament like the US Open. Refer to, 'In Serena Williams, the winner of 23 singles Slams, the most by any player in the Open Era, Osaka faced the ultimate challenge.' <br><br> Statement C is also correct since the age gap between Osaka and Serena is second only to the gap of Monica Seles and Martina Navratilova in the 1991 US Open. It is 16 years for this duo whereas in 1991, this gap was 17 years. Refer to, 'The 16-year age gap between Williams and Osaka was the second biggest in the Open Era for a women's final, next only to Monica Seles (17) vs. Martina Navratilova (34) at the 1991 U.S. Open.' <br><br> So, all the statements A, B and C are correct. <br><br> It makes option E the correct choice among the given options.
Directions: Please read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> There was a time when Pete Sampras's tally of 14 Grand Slam singles titles - the last of which came at the U.S. Open in 2002 - seemed like the acme of sporting achievement in men's tennis. Little did anybody expect that in the next 16 years, across 64 Majors, not one or two but three players would stand shoulder to shoulder with the American great. On Sunday, Novak Djokovic became that third man, defeating Argentine Juan Martin del Potro, for his third U.S. Open title at Flushing Meadows. The 31-year-old Serb has never been considered a once-in-a-generation talent, as have Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the ones above him in the trophy count. But nobody represents the modern-day game as well as Djokovic. He is the ultimate practitioner of the attrition-based baseline tennis, and at his best, with his supremely efficient patrolling of the court, is near invincible. Over two weeks in New York he hit this high many times over. In fact, the 95-minute second set in the final was a microcosm of Djokovic's last two years. It was long and weary as fortunes swung back and forth. But adversity energised him, and he found a level which his opponent couldn't match. Coming after his triumphant return at Wimbledon in July, the latest success is evidence enough that technically, tactically and physically Djokovic is back to his best. <br><br> If it was about the restoration of the old order on the men's side, it was the continuation of the new in the women's section. There has been a first-time winner in four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments, and 20-year-old Naomi Osaka added to the eclectic mix by becoming the first Japanese to win a Major. In Serena Williams, the winner of 23 singles Slams, the most by any player in the Open Era, Osaka faced the ultimate challenge. It was also an inter-generational battle like none other. The 16-year age gap between Williams and Osaka was the second biggest in the Open Era for a women's final, next only to Monica Seles (17) vs. Martina Navratilova (34) at the 1991 U.S. Open. To her immense credit, Osaka wasn't awed by the stage. While growing up, she had revered Williams. After all, this is someone who chose Williams as her subject for a school essay in third grade. On Saturday she played like she knew the 36-year-old's game like the back of her hand, absorbing everything the American threw at her, and redirecting them with much more panache. The magnitude of her achievement was nearly drowned out by the chaos in the aftermath of Williams's tirade against the chair umpire. Yet, the manner in which Osaka, at an impressionable young age, closed out the match with a cold relentlessness showed she is here to stay.
Which among the following is true regarding Naomi Osaka that made everyone believe that 'she is here to stay'?
Explanation: Refer to, 'Yet, the manner in which Osaka, at an impressionable young age, closed out the match with a cold relentlessness showed she is here to stay.' <br><br> It is very clear that the composure showed by a youngster against a seasoned veteran like Serena Williams in a grand slam final is something special and she has also managed to win the match against none other than Serena Williams, who is the winner of the highest number of grand slam titles in the Open era of tennis. <br><br> Among the given options, others are completely out of context since none of them is referred to in the passage apart from option C, which implies that the nerves shown by Naomi Osaka in the US Open Final is something special and she is a rare talent who is here to stay for a long term. <br><br> This makes option C the correct choice among the given options.
Directions: Please read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> There was a time when Pete Sampras's tally of 14 Grand Slam singles titles - the last of which came at the U.S. Open in 2002 - seemed like the acme of sporting achievement in men's tennis. Little did anybody expect that in the next 16 years, across 64 Majors, not one or two but three players would stand shoulder to shoulder with the American great. On Sunday, Novak Djokovic became that third man, defeating Argentine Juan Martin del Potro, for his third U.S. Open title at Flushing Meadows. The 31-year-old Serb has never been considered a once-in-a-generation talent, as have Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the ones above him in the trophy count. But nobody represents the modern-day game as well as Djokovic. He is the ultimate practitioner of the attrition-based baseline tennis, and at his best, with his supremely efficient patrolling of the court, is near invincible. Over two weeks in New York he hit this high many times over. In fact, the 95-minute second set in the final was a microcosm of Djokovic's last two years. It was long and weary as fortunes swung back and forth. But adversity energised him, and he found a level which his opponent couldn't match. Coming after his triumphant return at Wimbledon in July, the latest success is evidence enough that technically, tactically and physically Djokovic is back to his best. <br><br> If it was about the restoration of the old order on the men's side, it was the continuation of the new in the women's section. There has been a first-time winner in four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments, and 20-year-old Naomi Osaka added to the eclectic mix by becoming the first Japanese to win a Major. In Serena Williams, the winner of 23 singles Slams, the most by any player in the Open Era, Osaka faced the ultimate challenge. It was also an inter-generational battle like none other. The 16-year age gap between Williams and Osaka was the second biggest in the Open Era for a women's final, next only to Monica Seles (17) vs. Martina Navratilova (34) at the 1991 U.S. Open. To her immense credit, Osaka wasn't awed by the stage. While growing up, she had revered Williams. After all, this is someone who chose Williams as her subject for a school essay in third grade. On Saturday she played like she knew the 36-year-old's game like the back of her hand, absorbing everything the American threw at her, and redirecting them with much more panache. The magnitude of her achievement was nearly drowned out by the chaos in the aftermath of Williams's tirade against the chair umpire. Yet, the manner in which Osaka, at an impressionable young age, closed out the match with a cold relentlessness showed she is here to stay.
Which among the following is similar in meaning to the word Eclectic as used in the passage?
Explanation: The word Eclectic has been used in the passage to imply that Naomi Osaka has actually added to the multifaceted mix of players who has won the grand slam titles in the last few major tournaments and Naomi is another of them and she is also the first such player from Japan to win a major title in tennis. <br><br> Among the given options, single-handed implies that managing without the help of others whereas laxity refers to negligence and lacunae refers to drawbacks on the part of a person. Only heterogeneous implies that Naomi Osaka has actually added to the already varied mix of players who have managed victory in the recent grand slam tournaments. <br><br> This makes option B 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.
