This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 12 February 2026, the same 26 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.
Momentous
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Suppress
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Tarnish
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Counterpart
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Regime
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Unruly
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Drudgery
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Agitation
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Put an end to, prevent from being seen/heard/known, or hold back.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
A person or thing that corresponds to or has the same function as another in a different place or situation.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Not willing to obey rules or control; difficult to manage.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
A feeling of sudden shock, worry, or confusion.
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.
Please, don't laugh...... those beggars.
Explanation: The correct answer is C: at<br> First, let's define the preposition at in this context. At is used to indicate the direction of an action or feeling towards a specific person or thing. <br> The sentence Please, don't laugh . . . . . . those beggars implies a request to refrain from a disrespectful action directed towards the beggars. Laughing at someone implies mockery or ridicule, which is the negative action the sentence seeks to prevent. <br> Let's look at why the other options are incorrect: <br> A: for - Laugh for implies laughing because of something, not at someone. This doesn't fit the context of the sentence. <br> B: against - Laugh against isn't a standard English expression. It doesn't make logical sense in this context. <br> D: from - Laugh from suggests the source of laughter, not the target. This also doesn't fit the meaning of the sentence. <br> Therefore, only at accurately conveys the intended meaning of directing the action of laughter towards the beggars, highlighting the negative connotation of mocking them.
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.
Please, stop..... so many mistakes.
Explanation: In English grammar, the verb stop is typically followed by a gerund (the -ing form of a verb) when the meaning is to cease or discontinue an action. Here's a detailed explanation: <br> 1. Gerund Usage: <br> A gerund is a verb form that ends in -ing and functions as a noun. When stop is followed by a gerund, it indicates that the action described by the gerund should be discontinued. <br> For example: stop smoking, stop talking, and in this case, stop making. <br> 2. Correct Sentence Construction: <br> The correct way to express the idea of ceasing to make mistakes is: Please, stop making so many mistakes. <br> Here, making is the gerund form of the verb make, and it fits correctly after stop. <br> 3. Why Not Other Options?: <br> - Option A: to make – Using to make (the infinitive form) would imply a purpose rather than the cessation of an action, which is not the intended meaning here. <br> - Option B: make – Using make without any form (gerund or infinitive) is grammatically incorrect in this context. <br> - Option D: makes – Makes is the third person singular form of the verb and does not fit the grammatical structure required after stop. <br> 4. Conclusion: <br> The gerund making correctly follows stop to convey the meaning of discontinuing the action of making mistakes. Hence, Please, stop making so many mistakes is the correct sentence.
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..... her husband for 15 minutes.
Explanation: The question tests your understanding of perfect continuous tenses in English grammar. <br> Perfect continuous tenses show an action that started in the past and continues up to the present moment, emphasizing the duration of the action. <br> The correct answer is B: has been beating. <br> This option uses the present perfect continuous tense ( has been + present participle ). This tense perfectly describes an action (beating her husband) that began 15 minutes ago and is still ongoing at the time of speaking. The duration of 15 minutes is a key indicator of the need for a continuous tense. <br> Let's look at why the other options are incorrect: <br> A: is beating – This uses the present continuous tense, which implies an action happening now, but doesn't necessarily specify how long it's been happening. It lacks the sense of duration implied by for 15 minutes . <br> C: has been beaten – This uses the present perfect passive continuous tense. This would imply that *she* is the recipient of the beating, not the one doing the beating. The sentence structure requires the active voice. <br> D: beats – This is the simple present tense, indicating a habitual action, not an ongoing one. It doesn't convey the duration of 15 minutes.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To live fast
Explanation: To live fast: To live a life of dissipation.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To beat the air
Explanation: To beat the air: To keep doing something despite its apparent pointlessness or futility.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
To wrangle over an ass's shadow
Explanation: To wrangle over an ass's shadow: To argue over trivial matters.
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.
(a) Let's spend a few minutes/ (b) in the park/ (c) can we?/ (d) No error.
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.
(a) He'd better/ (b) gone now/ (c) or he'll be late. (d) No error.
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.
(a) The families/ (b) are living in Avenue Park/ (c) for last ten years./ (d) No error.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the following questions. <br><br><br> The Amazon rainforest, the largest of its kind in the world, is ablaze, with over 9,500 distinct fires burning through its main basin since August 15. Overall, Brazil has seen more than 76,000 fires ravage the Amazon in 2019, of which around 10,000 have been started in the past few weeks, mainly by loggers and farmers seeking, as they do during the summer months, to clear vast tracts for agricultural or industrial use. However, this annual exercise of planned deforestation appears to have crossed a tipping point this year. There has been an increase of at least 80% in the number of recorded fires compared to the same period in 2018, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE). This week, images of darkening skies above Sao Paulo, more than 2,700 km away from the fires, went viral. The number and intensity of the fires are closely linked to the rate of deforestation. Some reports estimate that in July 2019, the Amazon shrunk by 1,345 sq km, up 39% from the same month last year, and a historical record. The flames are not confined just to Brazil either. In neighbouring Bolivia, deadly blazes are devastating forests and farmlands, so much so, that its President, Evo Morales, has put his re-election campaign on hold over the weekend, and, unlike his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro, was quick to welcome foreign aid to help fight the fires. <br><br> The distinctly political undertones of the crisis in Brazil sets it apart. Mr Bolsonaro’s critics say that his economic and environmental policies have virtually set the stage for intensifying degradation of the Amazon’s rich biodiversity. They argue that since he came to power this year, he has chipped away at the protections that the rainforest enjoyed, including by weakening the environment ministry when he made Ricardo Salles, found guilty of administrative improprieties for altering a map to benefit mining companies, the Environment Minister; by driving away Norway and Germany, principal donors who have backed protections for the Amazon; by sacking the head INPE over absurd allegations that he was disclosing how rapidly Amazon deforestation was happening; and by attacking both environmental charities, alleging without proof that they started fires to serve certain foreign interests, and indigenous Amazon dwellers. Under intense global pressure, including from the ongoing G-7 meetings of world leaders, Mr. Bolsonaro, a right-wing climate-change sceptic, appears to have relented to an extent, and has authorised 44,000 military troops to help with the firefighting efforts. Even if they succeed, and the Bolsonaro administration ultimately bends to global outrage over the destruction of a critical global ecosystem, the discernible shift in Brazilian public institutions responsible for guarding the future of the Amazon rainforest is a worrying sign of worse things to come.
According to the passage, what is the main cause of Amazon forest fire?
Explanation: Refer to: ‘…as they do during the summer months, to clear vast tracts for agricultural or industrial use. However, this annual exercise of planned deforestation appears to have crossed a tipping point this year. There has been an increase of at least 80% in the number of recorded fires compared to the same period in 2018…’ Deforestation is the main reason for the fires. But other options are not the immediate cause of the fire. Hence option C is the right answer.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the following questions. <br><br><br> The Amazon rainforest, the largest of its kind in the world, is ablaze, with over 9,500 distinct fires burning through its main basin since August 15. Overall, Brazil has seen more than 76,000 fires ravage the Amazon in 2019, of which around 10,000 have been started in the past few weeks, mainly by loggers and farmers seeking, as they do during the summer months, to clear vast tracts for agricultural or industrial use. However, this annual exercise of planned deforestation appears to have crossed a tipping point this year. There has been an increase of at least 80% in the number of recorded fires compared to the same period in 2018, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE). This week, images of darkening skies above Sao Paulo, more than 2,700 km away from the fires, went viral. The number and intensity of the fires are closely linked to the rate of deforestation. Some reports estimate that in July 2019, the Amazon shrunk by 1,345 sq km, up 39% from the same month last year, and a historical record. The flames are not confined just to Brazil either. In neighbouring Bolivia, deadly blazes are devastating forests and farmlands, so much so, that its President, Evo Morales, has put his re-election campaign on hold over the weekend, and, unlike his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro, was quick to welcome foreign aid to help fight the fires. <br><br> The distinctly political undertones of the crisis in Brazil sets it apart. Mr Bolsonaro’s critics say that his economic and environmental policies have virtually set the stage for intensifying degradation of the Amazon’s rich biodiversity. They argue that since he came to power this year, he has chipped away at the protections that the rainforest enjoyed, including by weakening the environment ministry when he made Ricardo Salles, found guilty of administrative improprieties for altering a map to benefit mining companies, the Environment Minister; by driving away Norway and Germany, principal donors who have backed protections for the Amazon; by sacking the head INPE over absurd allegations that he was disclosing how rapidly Amazon deforestation was happening; and by attacking both environmental charities, alleging without proof that they started fires to serve certain foreign interests, and indigenous Amazon dwellers. Under intense global pressure, including from the ongoing G-7 meetings of world leaders, Mr. Bolsonaro, a right-wing climate-change sceptic, appears to have relented to an extent, and has authorised 44,000 military troops to help with the firefighting efforts. Even if they succeed, and the Bolsonaro administration ultimately bends to global outrage over the destruction of a critical global ecosystem, the discernible shift in Brazilian public institutions responsible for guarding the future of the Amazon rainforest is a worrying sign of worse things to come.
As per the passage, what led the Brazilian president to change his tactics in dealing with the fire?
Explanation: Refer to: ‘Under intense global pressure, including from the ongoing G-7 meetings of world leaders, Mr. Bolsonaro, a right-wing climate-change sceptic, appears to have relented to an extent.’ Hence option A is the correct choice.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the following questions. <br><br><br> The Amazon rainforest, the largest of its kind in the world, is ablaze, with over 9,500 distinct fires burning through its main basin since August 15. Overall, Brazil has seen more than 76,000 fires ravage the Amazon in 2019, of which around 10,000 have been started in the past few weeks, mainly by loggers and farmers seeking, as they do during the summer months, to clear vast tracts for agricultural or industrial use. However, this annual exercise of planned deforestation appears to have crossed a tipping point this year. There has been an increase of at least 80% in the number of recorded fires compared to the same period in 2018, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE). This week, images of darkening skies above Sao Paulo, more than 2,700 km away from the fires, went viral. The number and intensity of the fires are closely linked to the rate of deforestation. Some reports estimate that in July 2019, the Amazon shrunk by 1,345 sq km, up 39% from the same month last year, and a historical record. The flames are not confined just to Brazil either. In neighbouring Bolivia, deadly blazes are devastating forests and farmlands, so much so, that its President, Evo Morales, has put his re-election campaign on hold over the weekend, and, unlike his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro, was quick to welcome foreign aid to help fight the fires. <br><br> The distinctly political undertones of the crisis in Brazil sets it apart. Mr Bolsonaro’s critics say that his economic and environmental policies have virtually set the stage for intensifying degradation of the Amazon’s rich biodiversity. They argue that since he came to power this year, he has chipped away at the protections that the rainforest enjoyed, including by weakening the environment ministry when he made Ricardo Salles, found guilty of administrative improprieties for altering a map to benefit mining companies, the Environment Minister; by driving away Norway and Germany, principal donors who have backed protections for the Amazon; by sacking the head INPE over absurd allegations that he was disclosing how rapidly Amazon deforestation was happening; and by attacking both environmental charities, alleging without proof that they started fires to serve certain foreign interests, and indigenous Amazon dwellers. Under intense global pressure, including from the ongoing G-7 meetings of world leaders, Mr. Bolsonaro, a right-wing climate-change sceptic, appears to have relented to an extent, and has authorised 44,000 military troops to help with the firefighting efforts. Even if they succeed, and the Bolsonaro administration ultimately bends to global outrage over the destruction of a critical global ecosystem, the discernible shift in Brazilian public institutions responsible for guarding the future of the Amazon rainforest is a worrying sign of worse things to come.
As per critics, what has led to worsen the state of Amazon rainforest?
Explanation: Refer to: ‘Mr. Bolsonaro’s critics say that his economic and environmental policies have virtually set the stage for intensifying degradation of the Amazon’s rich biodiversity.’ Deforestation is the main cause of the fires while it is a mix of economic and environmental policies that have led to worsening the rainforest. Hence option B is the right answer.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the following questions. <br><br><br> The Amazon rainforest, the largest of its kind in the world, is ablaze, with over 9,500 distinct fires burning through its main basin since August 15. Overall, Brazil has seen more than 76,000 fires ravage the Amazon in 2019, of which around 10,000 have been started in the past few weeks, mainly by loggers and farmers seeking, as they do during the summer months, to clear vast tracts for agricultural or industrial use. However, this annual exercise of planned deforestation appears to have crossed a tipping point this year. There has been an increase of at least 80% in the number of recorded fires compared to the same period in 2018, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE). This week, images of darkening skies above Sao Paulo, more than 2,700 km away from the fires, went viral. The number and intensity of the fires are closely linked to the rate of deforestation. Some reports estimate that in July 2019, the Amazon shrunk by 1,345 sq km, up 39% from the same month last year, and a historical record. The flames are not confined just to Brazil either. In neighbouring Bolivia, deadly blazes are devastating forests and farmlands, so much so, that its President, Evo Morales, has put his re-election campaign on hold over the weekend, and, unlike his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro, was quick to welcome foreign aid to help fight the fires. <br><br> The distinctly political undertones of the crisis in Brazil sets it apart. Mr Bolsonaro’s critics say that his economic and environmental policies have virtually set the stage for intensifying degradation of the Amazon’s rich biodiversity. They argue that since he came to power this year, he has chipped away at the protections that the rainforest enjoyed, including by weakening the environment ministry when he made Ricardo Salles, found guilty of administrative improprieties for altering a map to benefit mining companies, the Environment Minister; by driving away Norway and Germany, principal donors who have backed protections for the Amazon; by sacking the head INPE over absurd allegations that he was disclosing how rapidly Amazon deforestation was happening; and by attacking both environmental charities, alleging without proof that they started fires to serve certain foreign interests, and indigenous Amazon dwellers. Under intense global pressure, including from the ongoing G-7 meetings of world leaders, Mr. Bolsonaro, a right-wing climate-change sceptic, appears to have relented to an extent, and has authorised 44,000 military troops to help with the firefighting efforts. Even if they succeed, and the Bolsonaro administration ultimately bends to global outrage over the destruction of a critical global ecosystem, the discernible shift in Brazilian public institutions responsible for guarding the future of the Amazon rainforest is a worrying sign of worse things to come.
Which of the following is farthest in meaning from the word discernible?
Explanation: Discernible means visible or noticeable. <br> Immobile means stationary. <br> Vagabond refers to a wanderer. <br> Imperceptible means something so slight, gradual, or subtle which can not to be perceived easily. <br> Thus, the two words are exact opposites of each other. <br> Hence, option A is the right answer.
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the following questions. <br><br><br> The Amazon rainforest, the largest of its kind in the world, is ablaze, with over 9,500 distinct fires burning through its main basin since August 15. Overall, Brazil has seen more than 76,000 fires ravage the Amazon in 2019, of which around 10,000 have been started in the past few weeks, mainly by loggers and farmers seeking, as they do during the summer months, to clear vast tracts for agricultural or industrial use. However, this annual exercise of planned deforestation appears to have crossed a tipping point this year. There has been an increase of at least 80% in the number of recorded fires compared to the same period in 2018, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE). This week, images of darkening skies above Sao Paulo, more than 2,700 km away from the fires, went viral. The number and intensity of the fires are closely linked to the rate of deforestation. Some reports estimate that in July 2019, the Amazon shrunk by 1,345 sq km, up 39% from the same month last year, and a historical record. The flames are not confined just to Brazil either. In neighbouring Bolivia, deadly blazes are devastating forests and farmlands, so much so, that its President, Evo Morales, has put his re-election campaign on hold over the weekend, and, unlike his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro, was quick to welcome foreign aid to help fight the fires. <br><br> The distinctly political undertones of the crisis in Brazil sets it apart. Mr Bolsonaro’s critics say that his economic and environmental policies have virtually set the stage for intensifying degradation of the Amazon’s rich biodiversity. They argue that since he came to power this year, he has chipped away at the protections that the rainforest enjoyed, including by weakening the environment ministry when he made Ricardo Salles, found guilty of administrative improprieties for altering a map to benefit mining companies, the Environment Minister; by driving away Norway and Germany, principal donors who have backed protections for the Amazon; by sacking the head INPE over absurd allegations that he was disclosing how rapidly Amazon deforestation was happening; and by attacking both environmental charities, alleging without proof that they started fires to serve certain foreign interests, and indigenous Amazon dwellers. Under intense global pressure, including from the ongoing G-7 meetings of world leaders, Mr. Bolsonaro, a right-wing climate-change sceptic, appears to have relented to an extent, and has authorised 44,000 military troops to help with the firefighting efforts. Even if they succeed, and the Bolsonaro administration ultimately bends to global outrage over the destruction of a critical global ecosystem, the discernible shift in Brazilian public institutions responsible for guarding the future of the Amazon rainforest is a worrying sign of worse things to come.
What do you mean by the phrase ‘virtually set the stage’?
Explanation: To set the stage means to make it possible for something else to happen. Option B best describes the given phrase. It does not refer to quantity and hence option A is incorrect. The rest of the options also do not make sense. Hence Option B is 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.
