Comprehension Test Questions and Answers प्रश्न और उत्तर का अभ्यास करें
8 प्र:Read the passage carefully and give answer the following question.
We should preserve Nature to preserve life and beauty. A beautiful landscape, full of green vegetation, will not just attract our attention but will fill us with infinite satisfaction. Unfortunately, because of modernization, much of nature is now yielding to towns, roads and industrial areas. In a few places some natural reserves are now being carved out to avert the danger of destroying nature completely. Man will perish without nature, so modern man should continue this struggle to save plants, which give us oxygen. Moreover, Nature is essential to man’s health.
What does ‘struggle’ in the passage mean?
1268 05fa3c6689e3c9b0bcb6af444
5fa3c6689e3c9b0bcb6af444- 1Man’s struggle to exist in the worldfalse
- 2Man’s struggle to save Naturetrue
- 3Man’s struggle to catch up with modern trendsfalse
- 4Man’s struggle to conserve oxygenfalse
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 2. "Man’s struggle to save Nature"
प्र:Direction : Read the following passage carefully and answer the question given below it. Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the question.
Governments have traditionally equated economic progress with steel mills and cement factories. While urban centers thrive and city dwellers get rich, hundreds of millions of farmers remain mired in poverty. However fears of food shortages, a rethinking of anti-poverty priorities and the crushing recession in 2008 are causing a dramatic shift in world economic policy in favour of greater support for agriculture.
The last time when the world’s farmer felt such love was in the 1970s. At that time, as food prices spiked, there was real concern that the world was facing a crisis in which the planet was simply unable to produce enough grain and meat for an expanding population. Government across the developing world and international aid organisations plowed investment into agriculture in the early 1970s, while technological breakthroughs, like high-yield strains of important food crops, boosted production. The result was the Green Revolution and food production exploded. But the Green Revolution became a victim of its own success. Food prices plunged by some 60% by the late 1980s from their peak in the mid-1970s. Policy makers and aid workers turned their attention to the poor’s other pressing needs such as health care and education. Farming got starved of resources and investment. By 2004 aid directed at agriculture sank to 3.5 % and Agriculture lost its glitter. Also as consumer in high-growth giants such as China and India became wealthier they began eating more meat so grain once used for human consumption got diverted to beef up livestock. By early 2008 panicked buying by importing countries and restrictions slapped on grain exports by some big producers helped drive prices upto heights not seen for three decades. Making matters worse land and resources got reallocated to produce cash crops such as biofuels and the result was that voluminous reserves of grain evaporated. Protests broke out across the emerging world and fierce food riots toppled governments. This spurred global leaders into action. This made them aware that food security is one of the fundamental issues in the world that has to be dealt with in order to maintain administrative and political stability. This also spurred the US which traditionally provisioned food aid from American grain surpluses to help needy nations to move towards investing in farm sectors around the globe to boost productive for themselves and be in a better position to feed their own people.
Africa, which missed out on the first Green Revolution due to poor policy and limited resources, also witnessed a 'change'. Swayed by the success of East Asia the primary poverty-fighting method favoured by many policy-makers in Africa was to get farmers off their farms and into modern jobs in factories and urban centers. But that strategy proved to be highly insufficient. Income levels in the countryside badly trailed those in cities while the FAO estimated that the number of poor going hungry in 2009 reached an all time high at more than one billion. In India on the other hand with only 40% of its farmland irrigated, entire economic boom currently underway is held hostage by the unpredictable monsoon. With much of India’s farming areas suffering from drought this year, the government will have a tough time meeting its economic growth targets. In a report Goldman Sachs, predicted that if this year, too receives weak rains it could cause agriculture to contract by 2 % this fiscal year making the government 7%GDP growth target look "a bit rich". Another green revolution is the need of the hour and to make it a reality, the global community still has much backbreaking farm work to do.
What is the author trying to convey through the phrase making the government 7 % GDP growth target look a bit rich ?
1267 05ea6a040fb6adc33ce5beda2
5ea6a040fb6adc33ce5beda2Governments have traditionally equated economic progress with steel mills and cement factories. While urban centers thrive and city dwellers get rich, hundreds of millions of farmers remain mired in poverty. However fears of food shortages, a rethinking of anti-poverty priorities and the crushing recession in 2008 are causing a dramatic shift in world economic policy in favour of greater support for agriculture.
The last time when the world’s farmer felt such love was in the 1970s. At that time, as food prices spiked, there was real concern that the world was facing a crisis in which the planet was simply unable to produce enough grain and meat for an expanding population. Government across the developing world and international aid organisations plowed investment into agriculture in the early 1970s, while technological breakthroughs, like high-yield strains of important food crops, boosted production. The result was the Green Revolution and food production exploded. But the Green Revolution became a victim of its own success. Food prices plunged by some 60% by the late 1980s from their peak in the mid-1970s. Policy makers and aid workers turned their attention to the poor’s other pressing needs such as health care and education. Farming got starved of resources and investment. By 2004 aid directed at agriculture sank to 3.5 % and Agriculture lost its glitter. Also as consumer in high-growth giants such as China and India became wealthier they began eating more meat so grain once used for human consumption got diverted to beef up livestock. By early 2008 panicked buying by importing countries and restrictions slapped on grain exports by some big producers helped drive prices upto heights not seen for three decades. Making matters worse land and resources got reallocated to produce cash crops such as biofuels and the result was that voluminous reserves of grain evaporated. Protests broke out across the emerging world and fierce food riots toppled governments. This spurred global leaders into action. This made them aware that food security is one of the fundamental issues in the world that has to be dealt with in order to maintain administrative and political stability. This also spurred the US which traditionally provisioned food aid from American grain surpluses to help needy nations to move towards investing in farm sectors around the globe to boost productive for themselves and be in a better position to feed their own people.
Africa, which missed out on the first Green Revolution due to poor policy and limited resources, also witnessed a 'change'. Swayed by the success of East Asia the primary poverty-fighting method favoured by many policy-makers in Africa was to get farmers off their farms and into modern jobs in factories and urban centers. But that strategy proved to be highly insufficient. Income levels in the countryside badly trailed those in cities while the FAO estimated that the number of poor going hungry in 2009 reached an all time high at more than one billion. In India on the other hand with only 40% of its farmland irrigated, entire economic boom currently underway is held hostage by the unpredictable monsoon. With much of India’s farming areas suffering from drought this year, the government will have a tough time meeting its economic growth targets. In a report Goldman Sachs, predicted that if this year, too receives weak rains it could cause agriculture to contract by 2 % this fiscal year making the government 7%GDP growth target look "a bit rich". Another green revolution is the need of the hour and to make it a reality, the global community still has much backbreaking farm work to do.
- 1India is unlikely to achieve the targeted growth ratetrue
- 2Allocation of funds to agriculture has raised India’s chances of having a high GDPfalse
- 3Agriculture growth has artificially inflated India’s GDP and such growth is not realfalse
- 4India is likely to have one of the highest GDP growth ratesfalse
- 5A large portion of India’s GDP is contributed by agriculturefalse
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 1. "India is unlikely to achieve the targeted growth rate"
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 1. "Peaceful and calming activities."
प्र:Read the passage carefully and give the answer of following questions.
Poverty can be defined as a social phenomenon in which a section of the society is unable to fulfil even its basic necessities of life. When a substantial segment of the society is deprived of the minimum level of living and continues at a bare subsistence level, that society is said to be plagued with mass poverty. The countries of the third world exhibit invariably the existence of mass poverty, although pockets of poverty exist even in the developed countries of Europe and America.
Attempts have been made in all societies to define poverty, but all of them are conditioned by the vision of minimum or good life obtaining in society. For instance, the concept of the poverty in the U.S.A. would be significantly different from that in India because the average man is able to afford a much higher level of living in the United States. There is an effort in all definitions of poverty to approach the average level of living in a society and as such these definitions reflect the coexistence of inequalities in a society and the extent to which different societies are prepared to tolerate them. For instance, inn India, the generally accepted definition of poverty emphasizes minimum level of living rather than a reasonable level of living. This attitude is borne out of a realization that it would not be possible to provide even a minimum quantum of basic needs for some decades and therefore, to talk about a reasonable level of living or good life may appear to be wishful thinking at the present stage. Thus, political considerations enter the definitions of poverty because programmes of alleviating poverty may become prohibitive as the vision of a good life widens.
What conditions the various attempts to define poverty?
1265 05fbddbbd2e911753dd52dc3a
5fbddbbd2e911753dd52dc3a- 1The definition of poverty in India.false
- 2The definition of poverty in the U.S.A.false
- 3The vision of minimum or good life.true
- 4Political considerations.false
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 3. "The vision of minimum or good life."
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 4. "Zenith"
प्र:Read the passage carefully and give the answer of following questions.
A glass bottle that is sent to a landfill can take up to a million years to break down. By contrast, it takes as little as 30 days for a recycled glass bottle to leave your kitchen recycling bin and appear on a store shelf as a new glass container. Glass container are 100 percent recyclable, which means they can be recyclable repeatedly, again and again, with no loss of purify or quality in the glass. Recovered glass from glass recycling is the primary ingredient in all new glass containers. A typical glass container is made of as much as 70 percent recycled glass. According to industry estimates, 80 percent of all recycled glass eventually ends up as new glass containers. Every ton of glass that is recycled save more than a ton of the raw materials needed to create new glass, including 13,00 pounds of sand, 410 pounds of soda ash, and 380 pounds of limestone.
Because glass is made from natural materials such as sand and limestones, glass containers have a low rate of chemical interaction with their contents. As a result, glass can be safety reused.
Besides serving as the primary ingredient in new glass containers, recycled glass also has many other commercial uses-from creating decorative tiles and landscaping materials to rebuilding eroded beaches.
The materials used for making glass is_
1260 05f3a143279d2942e2b79def9
5f3a143279d2942e2b79def9A glass bottle that is sent to a landfill can take up to a million years to break down. By contrast, it takes as little as 30 days for a recycled glass bottle to leave your kitchen recycling bin and appear on a store shelf as a new glass container. Glass container are 100 percent recyclable, which means they can be recyclable repeatedly, again and again, with no loss of purify or quality in the glass. Recovered glass from glass recycling is the primary ingredient in all new glass containers. A typical glass container is made of as much as 70 percent recycled glass. According to industry estimates, 80 percent of all recycled glass eventually ends up as new glass containers. Every ton of glass that is recycled save more than a ton of the raw materials needed to create new glass, including 13,00 pounds of sand, 410 pounds of soda ash, and 380 pounds of limestone.
Because glass is made from natural materials such as sand and limestones, glass containers have a low rate of chemical interaction with their contents. As a result, glass can be safety reused.
Besides serving as the primary ingredient in new glass containers, recycled glass also has many other commercial uses-from creating decorative tiles and landscaping materials to rebuilding eroded beaches.
- 1soda ash and limestonefalse
- 2sand and limestonetrue
- 3soda and limefalse
- 4sandstone and tilesfalse
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 2. "sand and limestone"
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 1. "ironic"
- उत्तर देखेंउत्तर छिपाएं
- Workspace
- SingleChoice

