This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 4 November 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.
Abridge
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Coherent
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Genuine
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Perilous
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Tranquil
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Sesquipedalian
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Obnubilate
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Malfeasance
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To shorten a text, speech, or piece of writing without losing its essential meaning.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Full of danger or risk; hazardous.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To darken, dim, or obscure something; make unclear or difficult to understand.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
A minor fault, sin, or offense; a small mistake or misdeed.
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.
They ____ hard all day?
Explanation: The question asks for the correct verb form to complete the sentence 'They . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . hard all day?'. The sentence requires a verb tense that indicates completed action over a period of time in the past. Let's examine each option: <br> Option A: shall work<br> 'Shall work' expresses a future intention or promise. This doesn't fit the context because the sentence refers to an action already completed in the past. <br> Option B: worked<br> 'Worked' is the simple past tense of the verb 'to work'. This is the correct answer. The simple past tense is used to describe completed actions in the past. The sentence implies that the subjects ('They') completed the action of working ('hard') throughout the entire day ('all day'). This perfectly describes a finished action in the past. <br> Option C: work<br> 'Work' is the base form or present tense of the verb 'to work'. This doesn't indicate completed action in the past. It could suggest a habitual action or a general truth, but not a completed action in the past day. <br> Option D: has been working<br> 'Has been working' is the present perfect continuous tense. This tense is used for actions that started in the past and continue up to the present moment. The sentence, however, explicitly states the action ('working hard') was completed in the past ('all day'). Therefore, this tense is inappropriate. <br> In summary, Option B: worked is the only choice that accurately reflects the completed action in the past, making it the grammatically correct answer.
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.
You ____ not stay here.
Explanation: 'need not' in one sense used to show that something is not necessary, indicating non-obligation or non-inevitability. In another sense used to indicate that something should not be done because it is futile. In the question it is used to show that staying is not necessary.
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.
Aqsa is travelling ____ the school.
Explanation: 'towards' as a preposition in a sentence is used to denote near to, just before, or around a time or place.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
A pipe dream
Explanation: A pipe dream: an idea or plan that is impossible or very unlikely to happen
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To be in abeyance
Explanation: To be in abeyance: something as pending or suspended.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To spill the beans
Explanation: To spill the beans: give away private information.
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.
We need further (a)/ information before we can (b)/ accede to your request (c)/ No error (d)
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.
Just between you (a)/ and I (b)/ these theories won't work (c)/ No error (d)
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.
If you would have gone (a)/ in to the hall (b)/ you would have met your friends (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: If you had gone
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries. Also, a similar recent doubling of import duties on electronics, including related inputs and parts, is an admission by the government of the country's lack of competence in the highly labour-intensive, low-skilled and repetitive tasks of processing or assembling dutyexempt imported inputs to produce and export finished mobile phones and TVs. And, in textiles and apparel exports, India is now being outperformed not only by China but also by Bangladesh and Vietnam. <br><br> To anyone who is aware of the panoply of India's restrictive labour regulations (about 200 labour laws, with over a fourth being central acts), it does not come as a surprise that India is unable to grasp its natural comparative advantage in labourintensive products. The Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) requires firms with 100 or more workers to seek government permission to retrench or lay off any worker. This permission is rarely granted. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 requires employers in firms with 100 or more workers (50 or more in certain states) to seek permission even for reassigning a worker from one task to another. And the Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself. Through this regulation, unions have the right to strike and represent workers in legal disputes with employers. Last but not the least, The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks. Thus, these labour regulations effectively prevent firms from using labour-intensive methods of production. Also, since these laws hold above certain threshold employment levels, firms often have an incentive to remain small and 'informal'.
Which of the following is/are true with respect to the Trade Unions Act mentioned in the passage? <br> I. As per this law, Unions have the right represent workers in legal disputes with employers. <br> II. There is restriction on use of contract workers for certain tasks. <br> III. A minimum of 5 workers are needed to form a Trade Union.
Explanation: 'And the Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself. Through this regulation, unions have the right to strike and represent workers in legal disputes with employers. Last but not the least, The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks.' <br> Clearly, I is correct. <br> As per the last highlighted fragment, II pertains to The Contract Labour (Regulation<br> And Abolition) Act, 1970 and not the Trade Unions Act. Thus, II is incorrect. <br> III is also incorrect as a minimum of 7 employees are needed to form a Union. <br> Hence, option A is correct.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries. Also, a similar recent doubling of import duties on electronics, including related inputs and parts, is an admission by the government of the country's lack of competence in the highly labour-intensive, low-skilled and repetitive tasks of processing or assembling dutyexempt imported inputs to produce and export finished mobile phones and TVs. And, in textiles and apparel exports, India is now being outperformed not only by China but also by Bangladesh and Vietnam. <br><br> To anyone who is aware of the panoply of India's restrictive labour regulations (about 200 labour laws, with over a fourth being central acts), it does not come as a surprise that India is unable to grasp its natural comparative advantage in labourintensive products. The Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) requires firms with 100 or more workers to seek government permission to retrench or lay off any worker. This permission is rarely granted. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 requires employers in firms with 100 or more workers (50 or more in certain states) to seek permission even for reassigning a worker from one task to another. And the Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself. Through this regulation, unions have the right to strike and represent workers in legal disputes with employers. Last but not the least, The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks. Thus, these labour regulations effectively prevent firms from using labour-intensive methods of production. Also, since these laws hold above certain threshold employment levels, firms often have an incentive to remain small and 'informal'.
Which of the following is/are true about India's labour laws mentioned in the passage? <br> I. They are applicable below a certain threshold level. <br> II. Most of them are central acts. <br> III. They create conditions that prevent firms from using labour intensive methods of production.
Explanation: Refer to: <br> 'To anyone who is aware of the panoply of India's restrictive labour regulations (about 200 labour laws, with over a fourth being central acts), it does not come as a surprise that India is unable to grasp its natural comparative advantage in labour intensive products. The Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) requires firms with 100 or more workers to seek government permission to retrench "¦ The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 requires employers in firms with 100 or more workers (50 or more in certain states) to seek permission "¦ Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself"¦The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks. Thus, these labour regulations effectively prevent firms from using labour-intensive methods of production. Also, since these laws hold above certain threshold employment levels, firms often have an incentive to remain small and 'informal'.' <br> As per the highlighted fragments, I and III are correct. <br> II in incorrect. The first highlighted fragment indicates that central acts constitute only a little more than one-fourth of the total labour laws. <br> Hence, option E is correct.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries. Also, a similar recent doubling of import duties on electronics, including related inputs and parts, is an admission by the government of the country's lack of competence in the highly labour-intensive, low-skilled and repetitive tasks of processing or assembling dutyexempt imported inputs to produce and export finished mobile phones and TVs. And, in textiles and apparel exports, India is now being outperformed not only by China but also by Bangladesh and Vietnam. <br><br> To anyone who is aware of the panoply of India's restrictive labour regulations (about 200 labour laws, with over a fourth being central acts), it does not come as a surprise that India is unable to grasp its natural comparative advantage in labourintensive products. The Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) requires firms with 100 or more workers to seek government permission to retrench or lay off any worker. This permission is rarely granted. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 requires employers in firms with 100 or more workers (50 or more in certain states) to seek permission even for reassigning a worker from one task to another. And the Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself. Through this regulation, unions have the right to strike and represent workers in legal disputes with employers. Last but not the least, The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks. Thus, these labour regulations effectively prevent firms from using labour-intensive methods of production. Also, since these laws hold above certain threshold employment levels, firms often have an incentive to remain small and 'informal'.
As per the passage, the government has doubled import duty on which of the following? <br> I. Kites<br> II. Electronics<br> III. Edible items
Explanation: Refer to: <br> 'The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries. Also, a similar recent doubling of import duties on electronics, including related "¦.' <br> As per the highlighted fragments, only statements I and II are correct. <br> Statement III has not been mentioned anywhere. <br> Hence, option B is correct.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries. Also, a similar recent doubling of import duties on electronics, including related inputs and parts, is an admission by the government of the country's lack of competence in the highly labour-intensive, low-skilled and repetitive tasks of processing or assembling dutyexempt imported inputs to produce and export finished mobile phones and TVs. And, in textiles and apparel exports, India is now being outperformed not only by China but also by Bangladesh and Vietnam. <br><br> To anyone who is aware of the panoply of India's restrictive labour regulations (about 200 labour laws, with over a fourth being central acts), it does not come as a surprise that India is unable to grasp its natural comparative advantage in labourintensive products. The Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) requires firms with 100 or more workers to seek government permission to retrench or lay off any worker. This permission is rarely granted. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 requires employers in firms with 100 or more workers (50 or more in certain states) to seek permission even for reassigning a worker from one task to another. And the Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself. Through this regulation, unions have the right to strike and represent workers in legal disputes with employers. Last but not the least, The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks. Thus, these labour regulations effectively prevent firms from using labour-intensive methods of production. Also, since these laws hold above certain threshold employment levels, firms often have an incentive to remain small and 'informal'.
As per the author, what could be some reasons for imposition of import duties on some products? <br> I. Lack of competitiveness<br> II. Lack of infrastructure<br> III. Restrictive government regulations
Explanation: Refer to: <br> 'The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries.' <br> II and III have not been mentioned in the passage. Only I can be seen in the highlighted fragment. <br> Hence, option A is correct.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. <br><br> The government's recent doubling of duties on imports of beauty aids, watches, toys, furniture, footwear, and, surprisingly, kites and candles shows India's lack of competitiveness even in these entry-level labour-intensive industries. Also, a similar recent doubling of import duties on electronics, including related inputs and parts, is an admission by the government of the country's lack of competence in the highly labour-intensive, low-skilled and repetitive tasks of processing or assembling dutyexempt imported inputs to produce and export finished mobile phones and TVs. And, in textiles and apparel exports, India is now being outperformed not only by China but also by Bangladesh and Vietnam. <br><br> To anyone who is aware of the panoply of India's restrictive labour regulations (about 200 labour laws, with over a fourth being central acts), it does not come as a surprise that India is unable to grasp its natural comparative advantage in labourintensive products. The Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) requires firms with 100 or more workers to seek government permission to retrench or lay off any worker. This permission is rarely granted. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 requires employers in firms with 100 or more workers (50 or more in certain states) to seek permission even for reassigning a worker from one task to another. And the Trade Unions Act allows any seven employees to form a union, thereby using up a large proportion of the firm's managerial resources in dealing with several unions within itself. Through this regulation, unions have the right to strike and represent workers in legal disputes with employers. Last but not the least, The Contract Labour (Regulation And Abolition) Act, 1970 restricts, and even prohibits, the use of contract workers for certain tasks. Thus, these labour regulations effectively prevent firms from using labour-intensive methods of production. Also, since these laws hold above certain threshold employment levels, firms often have an incentive to remain small and 'informal'.
As per the passage, what can be inferred from India not being able to 'grasp its natural comparative advantage in labour-intensive products'?
Explanation: Option A is extreme as it uses the word intense. Even though India's labour laws are restrictive, they do not give any indication of changing the production pattern so drastically. <br> Option B is opposite to what the paragraph states. If the labour regulations are restrictive, that should logically prevent India from using labour intensive production techniques. <br> Option C is the best fit here. It is moderate in tone and also logical in thought process. <br> Hence, option C is correct.
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.
