Fill in the Blanks Questions and Answers

Answer: C

The correct option is One another: He and his four brothers love one another very much.

Traditional grammar uses each other for two persons and one another for more than two. Here there are five brothers, so one another is the expected form.

Each other is the two-person form in that rule, which is why it is the near miss. Some other and all another are not reciprocal pronouns and do not make grammatical sentences here.

Answer: A

The correct word is Lightning: plenty of thunder and lightning.

Lightning is the flash of electricity in the sky during a storm, the natural partner of thunder in the fixed phrase thunder and lightning.

Lightening is the present participle of lighten, meaning making lighter in weight or colour, so it is a common misspelling here. Roaring and thundering describe sound, and thunder has already supplied the sound in the sentence.

Answer: B

The correct option is Can: He can scarcely see in this light.

Scarcely is a negative adverb meaning 'almost not', so the sentence needs a positive verb with it: can scarcely see means he is almost unable to see.

Can't and could not would put a second negative beside scarcely, a double negative that is wrong in standard English. Only leaves the sentence without a verb to govern see.

Answer: D

The correct option is Much: Neelima is much cleverer than Savita.

A comparative adjective such as cleverer is intensified with much, far or a lot: much taller, far better.

More cannot be added because cleverer is already comparative, and more cleverer is a double comparative. Very modifies the positive degree (very clever), not the comparative. Positively does not combine with a comparative in this way.

Answer: A

The correct pair is Lose, get: It is better to keep one's head in the face of danger than lose one's courage and get panicky.

After It is better to ... than, the second part takes the same bare infinitive form as the first: better to keep ... than (to) lose ... and (to) get. The idioms lose one's courage and get panicky fit the sense.

Losing, getting breaks the parallel structure. Quell (suppress) and bemoan (lament) do not fit the meaning, and look out for, dispel being makes no sense in the sentence.

Answer: C

The sentence reads I would like to have bought a diamond ring.

'Would like to have + past participle' expresses a wish about the past that was not fulfilled: the speaker did not buy the ring and now wishes they had. 'Would like' is the standard polite form for a wish, and the perfect infinitive 'to have bought' carries the past reference.

'Have a liking' is a noun phrase that takes 'for', not an infinitive ('a liking for rings'). 'Should have liked' already puts the wish in the past, so following it with another perfect infinitive doubles the past marking. 'May like' expresses possibility, not a wish.

Answer: C

The sentence reads Food prices have been rising again this month.

'Rise' is intransitive: prices rise by themselves, with no object. The present perfect continuous 'have been rising' describes an increase that began in the past and is still going on, which suits 'again this month'.

'Raise' is transitive and needs an object (shops raise prices), so 'have raised' and 'have been raising' leave the verb without one. 'Have arose' uses the past tense where the past participle is needed; the correct form would be 'have arisen'.

Answer: C

The sentence is I would like to have bought a diamond ring.

'Would like to have + past participle' expresses a wish about the past that did not come true: the speaker wanted to buy the ring but did not. It is the standard form for an unfulfilled past desire.

'Have a liking to' is not idiomatic (one has a liking for something). 'Should have liked to have bought' doubles the perfect and is a clumsy double past, and 'may like' expresses a present possibility that does not fit with the perfect infinitive 'to have bought'.

Answer: C

The sentence is Food prices have been rising again this month.

Prices rise by themselves: 'rise' is intransitive and takes no object. The present perfect continuous 'have been rising' describes a process that started earlier and is still going on, which suits 'again this month'.

'Raise' is transitive and needs an object (the shops raised prices), so 'have raised' and 'have been raising' leave the verb without one. 'Have arose' uses the past tense 'arose' where the past participle 'arisen' is needed, so it is ungrammatical.

Answer: D

The word is unpopular.

The administrators' argument is that one more unreasonable measure 'would hardly make a difference' because the existing measures were already disliked. Only 'unpopular' supplies a quality that the new measure would merely add to: people already resented the measures, so another one would not change their attitude.

'Reflective' (thoughtful) and 'utopian' (idealistic, impractically perfect) contradict 'unreasonable', and 'luxuriant' means growing richly, which makes no sense of measures. None of them supports the 'hardly make a difference' reasoning.