This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 1 April 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.
Logjam
Explanation: Logjam means a situation where progress is blocked or delayed, often because of a deadlock, obstruction, or congestion. Among the given options, stalemate is the closest in meaning because it refers to a condition in which no side can move forward. The other options like breakthrough, progress, and advance show movement or success, which are opposite in sense.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Fallout
Explanation: Fallout means the negative consequences or after-effects of an event, action, or decision. The word repercussion matches this meaning best because it refers to an unintended result, often harmful. The other options like benefit, advantage, and gain suggest positive outcomes, so they do not fit the meaning of fallout.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Spearhead
Explanation: Spearhead as a verb means to lead, begin, or take the main role in starting an action or movement. Therefore, initiate is the best answer because it means to start something. The other options such as follow, obey, and neglect do not convey the idea of leadership or beginning an action.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Clout
Explanation: Clout means power, influence, or strong importance in social, political, or professional matters. The word influence is the closest match because both words suggest the ability to affect decisions or people. The remaining options like weakness, inferiority, and impotence express lack of power, which is opposite to clout.
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Bailout
Explanation: Bailout means financial help, rescue, or support given to save a person, company, or institution from difficulty. Its opposite among the given options is neglect, because neglect means failure to care for or help someone or something. Rescue, assistance, and relief are all related to support, so they cannot be opposites.
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Gridlock
Explanation: Gridlock means a complete deadlock or blockage where movement or advancement becomes impossible, especially in traffic or decision-making. Therefore, progress is the correct opposite because it means forward movement or development. The options deadlock, impasse, and stalemate are all similar in meaning to gridlock, not opposite.
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Multilateral
Explanation: Multilateral means involving many parties, sides, or countries in an agreement or activity. Its opposite here is individual, which refers to a single person or unit rather than many. The other options such as collective, cooperative, and international all suggest broader participation, so they are not opposites of multilateral.
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Bankruptcy
Explanation: Bankruptcy means a state of financial failure or inability to pay debts. The opposite is prosperity, which means financial success, growth, and well-being. The options insolvency, collapse, and ruin are all close in meaning to bankruptcy, so they cannot be the opposite.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which can substitute the given sentence. (One word)
The negative results or bad effects that follow an event or situation.
Explanation: The phrase the negative results or bad effects that follow an event or situation is best expressed by fallout. This word is commonly used for harmful consequences that appear after an event. The other options do not match this meaning: logjam means blockage, spearhead means lead, and clout means influence.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which can substitute the given sentence. (One word)
Influence or power, especially in politics, business, or social situations.
Explanation: The phrase influence or power, especially in politics, business, or social situations is best replaced by clout. This word directly means influence or pull. The other options do not fit because logjam means blockage, spearhead means initiate or lead, and bailout means rescue or aid.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which can substitute the given sentence. (One word)
A situation in which no progress can be made because of disagreement or obstruction, or when roads are so blocked that traffic cannot move.
Explanation: A situation in which no progress can be made because of disagreement or obstruction, or when roads are so blocked that traffic cannot move, is called gridlock. This word is used both for traffic blockage and decision-making deadlock. The other options—multilateral, bankruptcy, and oligopoly—have completely different meanings.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which can substitute the given sentence. (One word)
To separate, disconnect, or make two things no longer linked or dependent on each other.
Explanation: To separate, disconnect, or make two things no longer dependent on each other is to decouple. This word is often used in economics, technology, and policy contexts to show separation of connected systems. The other options do not fit the definition, so Decouple is the 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.
It’ll rain soon ________ ?
Explanation: The sentence It’ll rain soon is a positive statement using will, so its proper question tag must be negative: won’t it? Therefore, option (a) is correct. The other options are grammatically incorrect or do not match the auxiliary verb and subject required by the 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.
A thorough search of the aircraft was carried ________ in the airport
Explanation: The correct phrasal verb is carried out, which means conducted or performed. Therefore, A thorough search of the aircraft was carried out in the airport is the correct expression. The other options—off, on, and along—do not form the correct phrasal verb in this context.
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 traffic also becomes an unfortunate catalyst in ______ the dust particles in the area and around.
Explanation: The sentence talks about traffic acting as a catalyst in spreading dust particles in the area. The word dispersing fits perfectly because it means scattering or spreading in different directions. The other options do not match the context: collecting means gathering, accomplished is an adjective, combine means join, and delineating means describe clearly.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
face the music
Explanation: The idiom face the music means to accept criticism or punishment for something one has done. Therefore, be punished is the best option among those given. While criticism may also be part of the expression, the closest available answer in the list is clearly option (b).
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Strain every nerve
Explanation: The idiom strain every nerve means to make every possible effort to achieve something. So work very hard is the best match among the given options. It conveys intense effort and determination, whereas the other options such as begging, spending, or trying tricks do not reflect the true meaning.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
cat nap
Explanation: A cat nap means a short sleep taken for a brief period, usually during the day. Therefore, option (c) is correct. The other choices are incorrect because the idiom does not refer to sleeping like a cat, snoring, or taking a long sleep.
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.
I forbid you not to go there again.
Explanation: The answer marked as (b) is correct because the phrase not to go is wrong after forbid in this sentence. The intended meaning is I forbid you to go there again or more naturally I forbid you from going there again. So the error lies in the bold phrase, and option (b) correctly identifies the part that must be changed.
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.
Will you please (1)/ give me little milk (2)/ for my cat ? (3)/ No error (4)
Explanation: The answer (a) is correct because little milk is grammatically weak in this context. The sentence needs a little milk, which means some amount of milk. Without the article a, little usually carries a negative sense of hardly any. Therefore, the incorrect phrase is give me little milk, and option (a) is right.
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.
Whatever may be the origin of speech, (1)/ we can be certain that man did not bagan (2) / to feel the need to speak (3)/ until he began to live in communities (4)/ No error (5)
Explanation: The marked answer (b) is correct because the word bagan in the phrase we can be certain that man did not bagan is misspelt. It should be began. The sentence is otherwise structurally correct, so the error lies in that part only. Hence, option (b) correctly identifies the incorrect phrase.
Read the following passages carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words are given in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. <br><br><br> Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 per cent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don't have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problems here as one of managing change. <br><br> For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn't have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes, and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was emphasized because it's easier to teach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that's what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever growing enterprises. <br><br> Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome. The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: success creates some degree of market dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organization under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not on leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. <br><br> Arrogant managers can over-evaluate their current performance and competitive position, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities. Bureaucratic cultures can smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organisations to break out of the morass.
Why, according to the author, is a distinction between management and leadership crucial?
Explanation: The answer (b) is correct because the passage clearly says that successful transformation is mostly about leadership and only partly about management. The author stresses that this distinction is crucial because organisations in changing situations need leaders much more than managers. So option (b) directly reflects the central idea given in the passage.
Read the following passages carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words are given in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. <br><br><br> Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 per cent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don't have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problems here as one of managing change. <br><br> For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn't have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes, and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was emphasized because it's easier to teach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that's what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever growing enterprises. <br><br> Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome. The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: success creates some degree of market dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organization under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not on leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. <br><br> Arrogant managers can over-evaluate their current performance and competitive position, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities. Bureaucratic cultures can smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organisations to break out of the morass.
Why did companies and universities develop programmes to prepare managers in such a large number?
Explanation: The answer (c) is correct because the passage explains that during the growth of large organisations, there was a great need for managers to keep those bureaucracies functioning smoothly. That is why companies and universities developed management programmes in large numbers. The other options are not supported by the passage.
Read the following passages carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words are given in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. <br><br><br> Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 per cent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don't have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problems here as one of managing change. <br><br> For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn't have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes, and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was emphasized because it's easier to teach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that's what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever growing enterprises. <br><br> Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome. The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: success creates some degree of market dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organization under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not on leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. <br><br> Arrogant managers can over-evaluate their current performance and competitive position, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities. Bureaucratic cultures can smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organisations to break out of the morass.
Which of the following statements is NOT TRUE in the context of the passage?
Explanation: The answer (b) is correct because the passage clearly assigns planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving to management, not leadership. Leadership is described as defining the future, aligning people, and inspiring them. Therefore, saying leadership centres on planning and problem-solving is not true in the context of the passage.
Read the following passages carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words are given in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. <br><br><br> Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 per cent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don't have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problems here as one of managing change. <br><br> For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn't have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes, and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was emphasized because it's easier to teach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that's what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever growing enterprises. <br><br> Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome. The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: success creates some degree of market dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organization under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not on leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. <br><br> Arrogant managers can over-evaluate their current performance and competitive position, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities. Bureaucratic cultures can smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organisations to break out of the morass.
Which of the following is not the characteristic of bureaucratic culture?
Explanation: The answer (a) is correct because the passage states that inwardly focused employees have difficulty seeing the forces that present threats and opportunities. So saying that employees clearly see such forces is not a characteristic of bureaucratic culture. The other options are all supported by the passage as features linked to bureaucratic and management-heavy systems.
Read the following passages carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words are given in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. <br><br><br> Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 per cent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don't have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problems here as one of managing change. <br><br> For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn't have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes, and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was emphasized because it's easier to teach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that's what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever growing enterprises. <br><br> Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome. The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: success creates some degree of market dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organization under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not on leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. <br><br> Arrogant managers can over-evaluate their current performance and competitive position, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities. Bureaucratic cultures can smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organisations to break out of the morass.
Which of the following is SIMILAR in meaning to the word SMOTHER as used in the passage?
Explanation: The answer (d) is correct because smother in the passage means to hold back, suffocate, or prevent something from developing freely. The word suppress matches this meaning best. The surrounding sentence shows that bureaucratic cultures stop or crush the efforts of those who want to respond to changing conditions, which supports this choice.
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.
