This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 11 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.
Dazzle
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Glean
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Shimmer
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Sprout
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Bustle
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Pareidolia
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Cathexis
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Prosopopoeia
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To blind or impress deeply with a brilliant light or display.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To shine with a soft, wavering light.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
A rhetorical device in which an abstract concept, inanimate object, or absent/imaginary person is given a voice or made to speak.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
A state of human flourishing or well-being achieved by living virtuously and meaningfully.
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.
The teacher made the student ____ the lesson.
Explanation: 'Repeat' itself makes a sensible sentence. Any other forms of Grammar are not required.
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.
The weather ____ very pleasant today.
Explanation: 'Today' means present. 'is' is used with singular subject and therefore is the right 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.
She is very keen ____ going abroad, for higher studies.
Explanation: The phrase 'keen on' refers to a state of the human mind where you are very enthusiastic or excited about the event.<br> It refers to a state when a person looks forward to something with all of its energy. <br> Thus, we use the preposition 'on' with keen in the given sentence as the sentence talks of an event a person is looking forward to.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To stand to one's guns
Explanation: To stand to one's guns: To remain determined, resolute, or steadfast in one's opinion, belief, or perspective.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To smell a rat
Explanation: To smell a rat: causing a feeling that something is wrong or that someone is behaving wrongly.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To get cold feet
Explanation: To get cold feet: A loss or lack of courage or confidence; an onset of uncertainty or fear.
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 coach with his (a)/ entire team (b)/ are travelling by bus (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: is travelling
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.
By his perseverance he succeeded (a)/ in overcoming (b)/ the apathy of his pupils (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.
She did the work very well (a)/ however, she showed no interest (b)/ in anything beyond her assignment. (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: 'but' instead of 'however'
Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside. <br> <br> Air India’s disinvestment, first attempted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, is being revived. The sale bid the last time was a flop, shelved prematurely after all the bidders were either disqualified or dropped out. The many factors that were and may still be at work against the sale are not widely understood. Unless overcome, they may again endanger the sale. <br><br> In May 2000, bids were invited for a 40% stake in Air India, with a cap of 26% on foreign investment. The airline had reported losses for six straight years, had $70 million debt on its books and was fast losing traffic. More than 18,000 workers were on its rolls for a fleet of just about two dozen planes. Its employee-aircraft ratio, 750, was among the worst. Singapore Airlines, in contrast, had 91 employees per aircraft. Inefficiency, typical in a government controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. Plus, in a sale carried out through competitive bidding, reduced interest can impact the valuation. <br><br> The sale’s stated purpose was to bring on board a strategic partner who would turn around Air India. But the sale’s rules were loaded against candidates with a proven track record — foreign airlines. Lufthansa, Swissair, Emirates, British Airways and Air France-Delta in combination were among those to have expressed interest formally in buying the stake. However, a bidding rule that required foreign airlines to team up with a local partner forced them to opt out. Singapore Airlines, which had also expressed interest formally, roped in the Tatas to proceed with its bid. <br><br> Those who remained in the fray had their expressions of interest evaluated; those ineligible were disqualified. In the end, the contest was down to two bidders — the Hinduja group and the Singapore Airlines-Tata joint venture. Both were invited to inspect Air India’s books. The Hindujas’ bid was already under fire from the Opposition over allegations related to the Bofors arms scandal. After studying Air India’s financial records, the group presented to the government a whole set of conditions on management control, threatening to withdraw if these were not met. The government barred the Hindujas from pursuing its bid, leaving a sole bidder: the Singapore Airlines-Tatas combine. <br><br> Private airline owners who had so far orchestrated resistance to the sale from the background, now openly pointed out that the majority stakeholder in Singapore Airlines was a foreign government. The unmasked attack made Singapore Airlines pull out. The airline said in a statement that the intensity of opposition to the privatisation from political groups and the trade unions had surprised it and that in such an adverse climate, it was not confident it could play a useful role. <br><br> The then Disinvestment Minister, Arun Shourie, clarified that the Tata group, Air India’s erstwhile owner before its nationalisation in 1953, could proceed with its bid without a partner. But the Tatas too withdrew, forcing the government to abort the disinvestment.
Which of the following facts discouraged the deserving bidders to go for the sale? <br> I. Sizeable control by the government. <br> II. Their several demands about maintenance issues went unheeded. <br> III. The government’s will to have its own directors.
Explanation: Reference: <br> 2nd paragraph<br> Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. <br> The second statement is a specific point and we can’t say anything about it as it is not mentioned in the passage. <br> Option B is hence the correct answer..
Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside. <br> <br> Air India’s disinvestment, first attempted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, is being revived. The sale bid the last time was a flop, shelved prematurely after all the bidders were either disqualified or dropped out. The many factors that were and may still be at work against the sale are not widely understood. Unless overcome, they may again endanger the sale. <br><br> In May 2000, bids were invited for a 40% stake in Air India, with a cap of 26% on foreign investment. The airline had reported losses for six straight years, had $70 million debt on its books and was fast losing traffic. More than 18,000 workers were on its rolls for a fleet of just about two dozen planes. Its employee-aircraft ratio, 750, was among the worst. Singapore Airlines, in contrast, had 91 employees per aircraft. Inefficiency, typical in a government controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. Plus, in a sale carried out through competitive bidding, reduced interest can impact the valuation. <br><br> The sale’s stated purpose was to bring on board a strategic partner who would turn around Air India. But the sale’s rules were loaded against candidates with a proven track record — foreign airlines. Lufthansa, Swissair, Emirates, British Airways and Air France-Delta in combination were among those to have expressed interest formally in buying the stake. However, a bidding rule that required foreign airlines to team up with a local partner forced them to opt out. Singapore Airlines, which had also expressed interest formally, roped in the Tatas to proceed with its bid. <br><br> Those who remained in the fray had their expressions of interest evaluated; those ineligible were disqualified. In the end, the contest was down to two bidders — the Hinduja group and the Singapore Airlines-Tata joint venture. Both were invited to inspect Air India’s books. The Hindujas’ bid was already under fire from the Opposition over allegations related to the Bofors arms scandal. After studying Air India’s financial records, the group presented to the government a whole set of conditions on management control, threatening to withdraw if these were not met. The government barred the Hindujas from pursuing its bid, leaving a sole bidder: the Singapore Airlines-Tatas combine. <br><br> Private airline owners who had so far orchestrated resistance to the sale from the background, now openly pointed out that the majority stakeholder in Singapore Airlines was a foreign government. The unmasked attack made Singapore Airlines pull out. The airline said in a statement that the intensity of opposition to the privatisation from political groups and the trade unions had surprised it and that in such an adverse climate, it was not confident it could play a useful role. <br><br> The then Disinvestment Minister, Arun Shourie, clarified that the Tata group, Air India’s erstwhile owner before its nationalisation in 1953, could proceed with its bid without a partner. But the Tatas too withdrew, forcing the government to abort the disinvestment.
Which of the following is/are true in the context of the passage? <br> I. The government still wanted to be a majority shareholder and decision maker in Air India. <br> II. Earlier attempts for disinvestment were stopped by the government itself. <br> III. Inefficiency is a common scene in major government departments.
Explanation: Reference: <br> 2nd paragraph<br> Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. <br> Hence, the first statement is correct. <br> The second statement is nowhere suggested in the passage that government itself tried to cancel the idea of disinvestment. <br> 2nd paragraph<br> Inefficiency, typical in a government-controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. <br> Hence, the third statement suggests that it is usual to have inefficient officers in the government and there was nothing new in it. <br> It clearly validates that only statements I and III are correct. <br> Option E is hence the correct answer.
Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside. <br> <br> Air India’s disinvestment, first attempted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, is being revived. The sale bid the last time was a flop, shelved prematurely after all the bidders were either disqualified or dropped out. The many factors that were and may still be at work against the sale are not widely understood. Unless overcome, they may again endanger the sale. <br><br> In May 2000, bids were invited for a 40% stake in Air India, with a cap of 26% on foreign investment. The airline had reported losses for six straight years, had $70 million debt on its books and was fast losing traffic. More than 18,000 workers were on its rolls for a fleet of just about two dozen planes. Its employee-aircraft ratio, 750, was among the worst. Singapore Airlines, in contrast, had 91 employees per aircraft. Inefficiency, typical in a government controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. Plus, in a sale carried out through competitive bidding, reduced interest can impact the valuation. <br><br> The sale’s stated purpose was to bring on board a strategic partner who would turn around Air India. But the sale’s rules were loaded against candidates with a proven track record — foreign airlines. Lufthansa, Swissair, Emirates, British Airways and Air France-Delta in combination were among those to have expressed interest formally in buying the stake. However, a bidding rule that required foreign airlines to team up with a local partner forced them to opt out. Singapore Airlines, which had also expressed interest formally, roped in the Tatas to proceed with its bid. <br><br> Those who remained in the fray had their expressions of interest evaluated; those ineligible were disqualified. In the end, the contest was down to two bidders — the Hinduja group and the Singapore Airlines-Tata joint venture. Both were invited to inspect Air India’s books. The Hindujas’ bid was already under fire from the Opposition over allegations related to the Bofors arms scandal. After studying Air India’s financial records, the group presented to the government a whole set of conditions on management control, threatening to withdraw if these were not met. The government barred the Hindujas from pursuing its bid, leaving a sole bidder: the Singapore Airlines-Tatas combine. <br><br> Private airline owners who had so far orchestrated resistance to the sale from the background, now openly pointed out that the majority stakeholder in Singapore Airlines was a foreign government. The unmasked attack made Singapore Airlines pull out. The airline said in a statement that the intensity of opposition to the privatisation from political groups and the trade unions had surprised it and that in such an adverse climate, it was not confident it could play a useful role. <br><br> The then Disinvestment Minister, Arun Shourie, clarified that the Tata group, Air India’s erstwhile owner before its nationalisation in 1953, could proceed with its bid without a partner. But the Tatas too withdrew, forcing the government to abort the disinvestment.
What made Singapore Airlines withdraw from the sale?
Explanation: Reference: <br> 5th paragraph<br> The airline said in a statement that the intensity of opposition to the privatisation from political groups and the trade unions had surprised it and that in such an adverse climate, it was not confident it could play a useful role. <br> Allegation of corruption were related to Hinduja group. <br> Further, the passage has not mentioned any specific demands made by the Singapore Airlines. <br> Thus, all other statements are absurd and illogical. <br> Option B is hence the correct answer.
Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside. <br> <br> Air India’s disinvestment, first attempted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, is being revived. The sale bid the last time was a flop, shelved prematurely after all the bidders were either disqualified or dropped out. The many factors that were and may still be at work against the sale are not widely understood. Unless overcome, they may again endanger the sale. <br><br> In May 2000, bids were invited for a 40% stake in Air India, with a cap of 26% on foreign investment. The airline had reported losses for six straight years, had $70 million debt on its books and was fast losing traffic. More than 18,000 workers were on its rolls for a fleet of just about two dozen planes. Its employee-aircraft ratio, 750, was among the worst. Singapore Airlines, in contrast, had 91 employees per aircraft. Inefficiency, typical in a government controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. Plus, in a sale carried out through competitive bidding, reduced interest can impact the valuation. <br><br> The sale’s stated purpose was to bring on board a strategic partner who would turn around Air India. But the sale’s rules were loaded against candidates with a proven track record — foreign airlines. Lufthansa, Swissair, Emirates, British Airways and Air France-Delta in combination were among those to have expressed interest formally in buying the stake. However, a bidding rule that required foreign airlines to team up with a local partner forced them to opt out. Singapore Airlines, which had also expressed interest formally, roped in the Tatas to proceed with its bid. <br><br> Those who remained in the fray had their expressions of interest evaluated; those ineligible were disqualified. In the end, the contest was down to two bidders — the Hinduja group and the Singapore Airlines-Tata joint venture. Both were invited to inspect Air India’s books. The Hindujas’ bid was already under fire from the Opposition over allegations related to the Bofors arms scandal. After studying Air India’s financial records, the group presented to the government a whole set of conditions on management control, threatening to withdraw if these were not met. The government barred the Hindujas from pursuing its bid, leaving a sole bidder: the Singapore Airlines-Tatas combine. <br><br> Private airline owners who had so far orchestrated resistance to the sale from the background, now openly pointed out that the majority stakeholder in Singapore Airlines was a foreign government. The unmasked attack made Singapore Airlines pull out. The airline said in a statement that the intensity of opposition to the privatisation from political groups and the trade unions had surprised it and that in such an adverse climate, it was not confident it could play a useful role. <br><br> The then Disinvestment Minister, Arun Shourie, clarified that the Tata group, Air India’s erstwhile owner before its nationalisation in 1953, could proceed with its bid without a partner. But the Tatas too withdrew, forcing the government to abort the disinvestment.
Why does the author seem to be apprehensive about the success of Air India's current disinvestment plan? <br> I. Author is aware of the corruption that exists in government machinery. <br> II. Excessive participation of foreign investors. <br> III. Author believes that Disinvestment is not an appropriate plan.
Explanation: Reference: <br> 1st paragraph<br> Air India’s disinvestment, first attempted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, is being revived. <br> The sale bid the last time was a flop, shelved prematurely after all the bidders were either disqualified or dropped out. The many factors that were and may still be at work against the sale are not widely understood. Unless overcome, they may again endanger the sale. <br> The underlined parts above implies that none of the given statements I, II and III is appropriate. <br> Option E is hence the correct answer.
Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside. <br> <br> Air India’s disinvestment, first attempted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, is being revived. The sale bid the last time was a flop, shelved prematurely after all the bidders were either disqualified or dropped out. The many factors that were and may still be at work against the sale are not widely understood. Unless overcome, they may again endanger the sale. <br><br> In May 2000, bids were invited for a 40% stake in Air India, with a cap of 26% on foreign investment. The airline had reported losses for six straight years, had $70 million debt on its books and was fast losing traffic. More than 18,000 workers were on its rolls for a fleet of just about two dozen planes. Its employee-aircraft ratio, 750, was among the worst. Singapore Airlines, in contrast, had 91 employees per aircraft. Inefficiency, typical in a government controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. Plus, in a sale carried out through competitive bidding, reduced interest can impact the valuation. <br><br> The sale’s stated purpose was to bring on board a strategic partner who would turn around Air India. But the sale’s rules were loaded against candidates with a proven track record — foreign airlines. Lufthansa, Swissair, Emirates, British Airways and Air France-Delta in combination were among those to have expressed interest formally in buying the stake. However, a bidding rule that required foreign airlines to team up with a local partner forced them to opt out. Singapore Airlines, which had also expressed interest formally, roped in the Tatas to proceed with its bid. <br><br> Those who remained in the fray had their expressions of interest evaluated; those ineligible were disqualified. In the end, the contest was down to two bidders — the Hinduja group and the Singapore Airlines-Tata joint venture. Both were invited to inspect Air India’s books. The Hindujas’ bid was already under fire from the Opposition over allegations related to the Bofors arms scandal. After studying Air India’s financial records, the group presented to the government a whole set of conditions on management control, threatening to withdraw if these were not met. The government barred the Hindujas from pursuing its bid, leaving a sole bidder: the Singapore Airlines-Tatas combine. <br><br> Private airline owners who had so far orchestrated resistance to the sale from the background, now openly pointed out that the majority stakeholder in Singapore Airlines was a foreign government. The unmasked attack made Singapore Airlines pull out. The airline said in a statement that the intensity of opposition to the privatisation from political groups and the trade unions had surprised it and that in such an adverse climate, it was not confident it could play a useful role. <br><br> The then Disinvestment Minister, Arun Shourie, clarified that the Tata group, Air India’s erstwhile owner before its nationalisation in 1953, could proceed with its bid without a partner. But the Tatas too withdrew, forcing the government to abort the disinvestment.
In what aspect Singapore Airlines is better than Air India?
Explanation: Reference: <br> 2nd paragraph <br> In May 2000, bids were invited for a 40% stake in Air India, with a cap of 26% on foreign investment. The airline had reported losses for six straight years, had $70 million debt on its books and was fast losingtraffic. More than 18,000 workers were on its rolls for a fleet of just about two dozen planes. Its employee-aircraft ratio, 750, was among the worst. Singapore Airlines, in contrast, had 91 employees per aircraft. Inefficiency, typical in a government-controlled set up, was bleeding Air India. Yet, the quantum of stake on offer made it clear that the government intended to retain a crucial stake, appoint its own directors and continue to have a say in running the business. Put off by the substantial degree of control the government wanted to retain in the airline after the disinvestment, several potential bidders stayed away from the sale, including, possibly the worthiest contender. Plus, in a sale carried out through competitive bidding, reduced interest can impact the valuation. Other issues are not mentioned here. <br> The highlighted sentence in the paragraph above clearly validates the fact what has been mentioned in option C. <br> Option C is hence the right answer.
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.
