Question 1 · Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension
MCQ
Common Description:
Instructions [1 - 4]
The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
Starting in 1957, [Noam Chomsky] proclaimed a new doctrine: Language, that most human of all attributes, was innate. The grammatical faculty was built into the infant brain, and your average 3-year-old was not a mere apprentice in the great enterprise of absorbing English from his or her parents, but a “linguistic genius.” Since this message was couched in terms of Chomskyan theoretical linguistics, in discourse so opaque that it was nearly incomprehensible even to some scholars, many people did not hear it. Now, in a brilliant, witty and altogether satisfying book, Mr. Chomsky's colleague Steven Pinker . . . has brought Mr. Chomsky's findings to everyman. In “The Language Instinct” he has gathered persuasive data from such diverse fields as cognitive neuroscience, developmental psychology and speech therapy to make his points, and when he disagrees with Mr. Chomsky he tells you so. . . .
For Mr. Chomsky and Mr. Pinker, somewhere in the human brain there is a complex set of neural circuits that have been programmed with “super-rules” (making up what Mr. Chomsky calls “universal grammar”), and that these rules are unconscious and instinctive. A half-century ago, this would have been pooh-poohed as a “black box” theory, since one could not actually pinpoint this grammatical faculty in a specific part of the brain, or describe its functioning. But now things are different. Neurosurgeons [have now found that this] “black box” is situated in and around Broca’s area, on the left side of the forebrain. . . .
Unlike Mr. Chomsky, Mr. Pinker firmly places the wiring of the brain for language within the framework of Darwinian natural selection and evolution. He effectively disposes of all claims that intelligent nonhuman primates like chimps have any abilities to learn and use language. It is not that chimps lack the vocal apparatus to speak; it is just that their brains are unable to produce or use grammar. On the other hand, the “language instinct,” when it first appeared among our most distant hominid ancestors, must have given them a selective reproductive advantage over their competitors (including the ancestral chimps). . . .
So according to Mr. Pinker, the roots of language must be in the genes, but there cannot be a “grammar gene” any more than there can be a gene for the heart or any other complex body structure. This proposition will undoubtedly raise the hackles of some behavioral psychologists and anthropologists, for it apparently contradicts the liberal idea that human behavior may be changed for the better by improvements in culture and environment, and it might seem to invite the twin bugaboos of biological determinism and racism. Yet Mr. Pinker stresses one point that should allay such fears. Even though there are 4,000 to 6,000 languages today, they are all sufficiently alike to be considered one language by an extraterrestrial observer. In other words, most of the diversity of the world’s cultures, so beloved to anthropologists, is superficial and minor compared to the similarities. Racial differences are literally only “skin deep.” The fundamental unity of humanity is the theme of Mr. Chomsky's universal grammar, and of this exciting book.
From the passage, it can be inferred that all of the following are true about Pinker’s book, “The Language Instinct”, EXCEPT that Pinker:
- A.
draws extensively from Chomsky’s propositions.
- B.
disagrees with Chomsky on certain grounds.
- C.
draws from behavioural psychology theories.
- D.
writes in a different style from Chomsky.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is an Inference EXCEPT question requiring Detail Verification, recognisable by the phrase "it can be inferred... EXCEPT".
Why it applies: We are looking for the statement about Pinker's book that is NOT true or cannot be inferred from the passage.
Step 1: Understand the Task. We must verify each option against the text and find the one that contradicts it or is unsupported.
Step 2: Verify Option A. Paragraph 1 states Pinker "has brought Mr. Chomsky's findings to everyman." This confirms he draws from Chomsky. This is true.
Step 3: Verify Option B. Paragraph 1 explicitly says "when he disagrees with Mr. Chomsky he tells you so." This is true.
Step 4: Verify Option D. Paragraph 1 contrasts Chomsky's "opaque" discourse with Pinker's "brilliant, witty" book. This implies a different style. This is true.
Step 5: Evaluate Option C. Paragraph 4 states Pinker's proposition "will undoubtedly raise the hackles of some behavioral psychologists" because it contradicts their ideas. Drawing from a theory implies using it as a foundation; raising hackles implies opposition. Thus, C is false.
Answer: C
Question 2 · Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension
MCQ
Common Description:
Instructions [5 - 8]
The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
Sociologists working in the Chicago School tradition have focused on how rapid or dramatic social change causes increases in crime. Just as Durkheim, Marx, Toennies, and other European sociologists thought that the rapid changes produced by industrialization and urbanization produced crime and disorder, so too did the Chicago School theorists. The location of the University of Chicago provided an excellent opportunity for Park, Burgess, and McKenzie to study the social ecology of the city. Shaw and McKay found . . . that areas of the city characterized by high levels of social disorganization had higher rates of crime and delinquency.
In the 1920s and 1930s Chicago, like many American cities, experienced considerable immigration. Rapid population growth is a disorganizing influence, but growth resulting from in-migration of very different people is particularly disruptive. Chicago’s in-migrants were both native-born whites and blacks from rural areas and small towns, and foreign immigrants. The heavy industry of cities like Chicago, Detroit, and Pittsburgh drew those seeking opportunities and new lives. Farmers and villagers from America’s hinterland, like their European cousins of whom Durkheim wrote, moved in large numbers into cities. At the start of the twentieth century, Americans were predominately a rural population, but by the century’s mid-point, most lived in urban areas. The social lives of these migrants, as well as those already living in the cities they moved to, were disrupted by the differences between urban and rural life. According to social disorganization theory, until the social ecology of the ‘‘new place’’ can adapt, this rapid change is a criminogenic influence. But most rural migrants, and even many of the foreign immigrants to the city, looked like and eventually spoke the same language as the natives of the cities into which they moved. These similarities allowed for more rapid social integration for these migrants than was the case for African Americans and most foreign immigrants.
In these same decades, America experienced what has been called ‘‘the great migration’’: the massive movement of African Americans out of the rural South and into northern (and some southern) cities. The scale of this migration is one of the most dramatic in human history. These migrants, unlike their white counterparts, were not integrated into the cities they now called home. In fact, most American cities at the end of the twentieth century were characterized by high levels of racial residential segregation . . . Failure to integrate these immigrants, coupled with other forces of social disorganization such as crowding, poverty, and illness, caused crime rates to climb in the cities, particularly in the segregated wards and neighbourhoods where the migrants were forced to live.
Foreign immigrants during this period did not look as dramatically different from the rest of the population as blacks did, but the migrants from eastern and southern Europe who came to American cities did not speak English, and were frequently Catholic, while the native born were mostly Protestant. The combination of rapid population growth with the diversity of those moving into the cities created what the Chicago School sociologists called social disorganization.
Which one of the following is not a valid inference from the passage?
- A.
The failure to integrate in-migrants, along with social problems like poverty, was a significant reason for the rise in crime in American cities.
- B.
According to social disorganisation theory, the social integration of African American migrants into Chicago was slower because they were less organised.
- C.
The differences between urban and rural lifestyles were crucial factors in the disruption experienced by migrants to American cities.
- D.
According to social disorganisation theory, fast-paced social change provides fertile ground for the rapid growth of crime.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is an 'Inference EXCEPT' question. Three options are valid deductions supported by the text; one is either contradicted or unsupported.
Step 1: Verify Option A. Paragraph 3 states "Failure to integrate these immigrants, coupled with other forces... caused crime rates to climb." This is a valid inference.
Step 2: Verify Option C. Paragraph 2 mentions migrants were disrupted by "differences between urban and rural life." This is a valid inference.
Step 3: Verify Option D. Paragraph 1 states Chicago School theorists believed "rapid or dramatic social change causes increases in crime." This is a valid inference.
Step 4: Evaluate Option B. It claims African American integration was slower because they were "less organised." Check Paragraph 3. The text attributes slower integration to "racial residential segregation" and being "forced to live" in segregated wards. It explicitly contrasts this with white migrants who integrated faster due to similarities. The text never attributes the difference to the migrants' own organizational capacity; rather, it cites external structural barriers.
Step 5: Conclusion. Option B imputes an internal cause ("less organised") where the text specifies an external constraint ("segregation"). This is a distortion, making it the correct answer for an EXCEPT question.
Answer: B
Question 3 · Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension
MCQ
Common Description:
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
Understanding romantic aesthetics is not a simple undertaking for reasons that are internal to the nature of the subject. Distinguished scholars, such as Arthur Lovejoy, Northrop Frye and Isaiah Berlin, have remarked on the notorious challenges facing any attempt to define romanticism. Lovejoy, for example, claimed that romanticism is “the scandal of literary history and criticism” . . . The main difficulty in studying the romantics, according to him, is the lack of any “single real entity, or type of entity” that the concept “romanticism” designates. Lovejoy concluded, “the word ‘romantic’ has come to mean so many things that, by itself, it means nothing” . . .
The more specific task of characterizing romantic aesthetics adds to these difficulties an air of paradox. Conventionally, “aesthetics” refers to a theory concerning beauty and art or the branch of philosophy that studies these topics. However, many of the romantics rejected the identification of aesthetics with a circumscribed domain of human life that is separated from the practical and theoretical domains of life. The most characteristic romantic commitment is to the idea that the character of art and beauty and of our engagement with them should shape all aspects of human life. Being fundamental to human existence, beauty and art should be a central ingredient not only in a philosophical or artistic life, but also in the lives of ordinary men and women. Another challenge for any attempt to characterize romantic aesthetics lies in the fact that most of the romantics were poets and artists whose views of art and beauty are, for the most part, to be found not in developed theoretical accounts, but in fragments, aphorisms and poems, which are often more elusive and suggestive than conclusive.
Nevertheless, in spite of these challenges the task of characterizing romantic aesthetics is neither impossible nor undesirable, as numerous thinkers responding to Lovejoy’s radical skepticism have noted. While warning against a reductive definition of romanticism, Berlin, for example, still heralded the need for a general characterization: “[Although] one does have a certain sympathy with Lovejoy’s despair…[he is] in this instance mistaken. There was a romantic movement…and it is important to discover what it is” . . .
Recent attempts to characterize romanticism and to stress its contemporary relevance follow this path. Instead of overlooking the undeniable differences between the variety of romanticisms of different nations that Lovejoy had stressed, such studies attempt to characterize romanticism, not in terms of a single definition, a specific time, or a specific place, but in terms of “particular philosophical questions and concerns” . . .
While the German, British and French romantics are all considered, the central protagonists in the following are the German romantics. Two reasons explain this focus: first, because it has paved the way for the other romanticisms, German romanticism has a pride of place among the different national romanticisms . . . Second, the aesthetic outlook that was developed in Germany roughly between 1796 and 1801-02 — the period that corresponds to the heyday of what is known as “Early Romanticism” . . .— offers the most philosophical expression of romanticism since it is grounded primarily in the epistemological, metaphysical, ethical, and political concerns that the German romantics discerned in the aftermath of Kant’s philosophy.
According to the romantics, aesthetics:
- A.
should be confined to a specific domain separate from the practical and theoretical aspects of life.
- B.
is primarily the concern of philosophers and artists, rather than of ordinary people.
- C.
is widely considered to be irrelevant to human existence.
- D.
permeates all aspects of human life, philosophical and mundane.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is a "Subject's View vs. Conventional View" detail retrieval question. You must identify the specific belief held by the group in question, ignoring the standard definition they rejected.
Step 1: Locate the keywords in the question: "romantics" and "aesthetics".
Step 2: Read Paragraph 2 carefully. The text sets up a contrast: "Conventionally, 'aesthetics' refers to a theory... separated from the practical and theoretical domains... However, many of the romantics rejected [this]... The most characteristic romantic commitment is to the idea that the character of art and beauty... should shape all aspects of human life."
Step 3: Evaluate Option A. This describes the "conventional" view that the romantics explicitly rejected. Eliminate.
Step 4: Evaluate Option B. The passage states aesthetics should be central to the lives of "ordinary men and women", not just philosophers and artists. This contradicts the romantic view. Eliminate.
Step 5: Evaluate Option C. The passage asserts that beauty is "fundamental to human existence", making it highly relevant, not irrelevant. Eliminate.
Step 6: Evaluate Option D. This perfectly aligns with the romantic commitment that aesthetics should shape all aspects of human life, both philosophical and mundane ("ordinary men and women").
Answer: D
Question 4 · Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension
NAT
Five jumbled up sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), related to a topic, are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a coherent paragraph. Identify the odd sentence and key in the number of that sentence as your answer.
1. Animals have an interest in fulfilling their basic needs, but also in avoiding suffering, and thus we ought to extend moral consideration.
2. Singer viewed himself as a utilitarian, and presents a direct moral theory concerning animal rights, in contrast to indirect positions, such as welfarist views.
3. He argued for extending moral consideration to animals because, similar to humans, animals have certain significant interests.
4. The event that publicly announced animal rights as a legitimate issue within contemporary philosophy was Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation text in 1975.
5. As such, we ought to view their interests alongside and equal to human interests, which results in humans having direct moral duties towards animals.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is an Odd Sentence Out question based on specific exposition versus general premise. Four sentences outline Peter Singer's specific philosophical arguments from his 1975 text, while one sentence states a general moral premise without attribution.
Step 1: Tag each sentence. Sentence 4 introduces Peter Singer's 1975 text. Sentence 2 describes his utilitarian framework. Sentence 3 explains his specific argument about animal interests. Sentence 5 concludes his argument about equal consideration.
Step 2: Check the common pattern. Sentences 2, 3, 4, and 5 form a cohesive summary of Singer's specific philosophical exposition.
Step 3: Examine Sentence 1. It states a general moral premise about animals avoiding suffering and extending moral consideration, but lacks the specific attribution to Singer's argument found in the other sentences.
Step 4: Decide the odd one. Sentence 1 breaks the specific exposition of Singer's text by introducing a standalone general premise.
Answer: 1
Question 5 · Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension
NAT
The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3 and 4) below, when properly sequenced, would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequencing of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer:
1. Some company leaders are basing their decisions on locating offices to foster innovation and growth, as their best-performing inventors suffered the greatest productivity losses when their commutes grew longer.
2. Shorter commutes support innovation by giving employees more time in the office and greater opportunities for in-person collaboration, while removing the physical strain of a long commute.
3. This is not always the case: remote work does not automatically lead to greater creativity and productivity as office water-cooler conversations are also very important for innovation.
4. Some see the link between long commutes and productivity as support for work-from-home scenarios, as many workers have grown accustomed to their commute-free arrangements during the pandemic.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is a workplace-policy debate sequencing question. It is recognizable because one sentence makes a claim, another rebuts it, and the rest give an alternative strategy and its justification.
Why this method applies: Sentence 3 begins with "This is not always the case", which is a clear rebuttal marker. It must immediately follow the specific claim it is rebutting.
Step 1: Identify the initial claim. Sentence 4 presents the prevailing view: some see the link between long commutes and productivity as support for work-from-home (WFH) scenarios.
Step 2: Link the rebuttal. Sentence 3 rebuts that claim with "This is not always the case", arguing that remote work doesn't automatically lead to creativity because water-cooler conversations are important. This forms a tight 4-3 pair.
Step 3: Introduce the alternative. Sentence 1 presents the alternative strategy: company leaders are basing decisions on locating offices to foster innovation, as inventors suffered when commutes grew longer.
Step 4: Provide the reason. Sentence 2 explains why this alternative works: shorter commutes support innovation by giving employees more time in the office and removing physical strain.
Common trap: Starting with 1 or 2 fails because they introduce the alternative strategy before the initial claim and rebuttal are established.
Answer: 4312
Question 6 · Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning
MCQ
Common Description:
Instructions [25 - 29]
The numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are placed in ten slots of the following grid based on the conditions below.
| Column 1 | Column 2 | Column 3 | Column 4 |
| Row 1 | | | | |
| Row 2 | | | | |
| Row 3 | | | | |
| Row 4 | | | | |
1. Numbers in any row appear in an increasing order from left to right.
2. Numbers in any column appear in a decreasing order from top to bottom.
3. 1 is placed either in the same row or in the same column as 10.
4. Neither 2 nor 3 is placed in the same row or in the same column as 10.
5. Neither 7 nor 8 is placed in the same row or in the same column as 9.
6. 4 and 6 are placed in the same row.
Which of the following statements MUST be true?
I. 2 is placed in a slot in Column 2.
II. 3 is placed in a slot in Column 3.
- A.
Only I
- B.
Both I and II
- C.
Neither I nor II
- D.
Only II
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is a Grid and Slot Placement problem with monotonicity constraints (Young Tableau structure), recognisable by the row-increasing and column-decreasing conditions.
Why: The conditions explicitly state rows increase left-to-right and columns decrease top-to-bottom. This forces extreme values into specific corners and creates a partial order.
Step 1: Fix extremes. 10 is the largest, so it must be at the top-right corner: R1C4 = 10. 1 is the smallest. Condition 3 says 1 shares a row or column with 10. Since columns decrease downward, 1 must be at the bottom of Column 4: R4C4 = 1.
Step 2: Place 9, 8, and 7. Condition 5 says neither 7 nor 8 shares a row or column with 9. 9 goes to R1C3. Then 8 and 7 must avoid Row 1 and Column 3. The only Column 4 slots left are R2C4 and R3C4. So R2C4 = 8 and R3C4 = 7.
Step 3: Place 4, 6, then 2, 3, 5. Condition 6 says 4 and 6 share a row. They MUST be in Row 1: R1C1 = 4, R1C2 = 6.
Step 4: Enumerate valid configs for remaining slots R2C2, R2C3, R3C3 with numbers 2, 3, 5. Constraints: R2C2 < R2C3 and R2C3 > R3C3.
Config A: R2C2=2, R2C3=5, R3C3=3. Here 2 is in Col 2, 3 is in Col 3.
Config B: R2C2=3, R2C3=5, R3C3=2. Here 3 is in Col 2, 2 is in Col 3.
Step 5: Evaluate statements. Since both configs are valid, neither Statement I nor Statement II MUST be true.
Answer: C
Question 7 · Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning
NAT
Common Description:
Instructions [25 - 29]
In the following, a year corresponds to 1st of January of that year.
A study to determine the mortality rate for a disease began in 1980. The study chose 1000 males and 1000 females and followed them for forty years or until they died, whichever came first. The 1000 males chosen in 1980 consisted of 250 each of ages 10 to less than 20, 20 to less than 30, 30 to less than 40, and 40 to less than 50. The 1000 females chosen in 1980 also consisted of 250 each of ages 10 to less than 20, 20 to less than 30, 30 to less than 40,and 40 to less than 50.
The four figures below depict the age profile of those among the 2000 individuals who were still alive in 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020. The blue bars in each figure represent the number of males in each age group at that point in time, while the pink bars represent the number of females in each age group at that point in time. The numbers next to the bars give the exact numbers being represented by the bars. For example, we know that 230 males among those tracked and who were alive in 1990 were aged between 20 and 30.
Age profile of survivors
| Year | Age group | Males | Females |
| 1990 | 20-30 | 230 | 240 |
| 1990 | 30-40 | 235 | 225 |
| 1990 | 40-50 | 210 | 190 |
| 1990 | 50-60 | 190 | 220 |
| 2000 | 30-40 | 180 | 210 |
| 2000 | 40-50 | 205 | 175 |
| 2000 | 50-60 | 160 | 150 |
| 2000 | 60-70 | 100 | 120 |
| 2010 | 40-50 | 150 | 160 |
| 2010 | 50-60 | 165 | 145 |
| 2010 | 60-70 | 90 | 100 |
| 2010 | 70-80 | 25 | 30 |
| 2020 | 50-60 | 140 | 100 |
| 2020 | 60-70 | 125 | 105 |
| 2020 | 70-80 | 50 | 60 |
| 2020 | 80-90 | 5 | 15 |
How many of the females who were being tracked and who were between 20 and 30 years of age in 1980 died between the ages of 50 and 60?
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is a cohort mortality tracking question, recognisable because the same group of people is followed over time, and their age groups shift diagonally through the table as decades pass.
Step 1: Identify the target cohort. We need females who were between 20 and 30 years of age in 1980. The study began with 250 females in this age group.
Step 2: Track the cohort through the survey years. Each year in the table is 1st January of that year, and each decade increases the cohort's age by 10 years.
- In 1980: target cohort is aged 20-30.
- In 1990: target cohort is aged 30-40.
- In 2000: target cohort is aged 40-50.
- In 2010: target cohort is aged 50-60.
- In 2020: target cohort is aged 60-70.
Step 3: Read the survivor counts for this cohort from the table.
- Females aged 50-60 in 2010 = 145.
- Females aged 60-70 in 2020 = 105.
Step 4: Interpret "died between the ages of 50 and 60". These are people who were alive when they reached the 50-60 age band but were not alive when they reached the next age band, 60-70.
- Alive at the start of the 50-60 band: females counted in the 50-60 group in 2010 = 145.
- Alive at the start of the next band, 60-70, in 2020 = 105.
Step 5: Compute deaths during the 50-60 interval.
Deaths between ages 50 and 60 = 145−105=40.
Answer: 40