Self Studies

Communication Ability Test-4

Result Self Studies

Communication Ability Test-4
  • Score

    -

    out of -
  • Rank

    -

    out of -
TIME Taken - -
Self Studies

SHARING IS CARING

If our Website helped you a little, then kindly spread our voice using Social Networks. Spread our word to your readers, friends, teachers, students & all those close ones who deserve to know what you know now.

Self Studies Self Studies
Weekly Quiz Competition
  • Question 1
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Direction: After reading the passage choose the best answer to the given question based on what is stated or implied in the passage and in any accompanying graphics (such as a table or graph).

    Questions are based on the following passage and supplementary material.

    The news is a form of public knowledge.
    Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the
    health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a
    private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge
    5 increases in value as it is shared by more people. The
    date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;
    the causes and consequences of an environmental
    disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular
    law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all
    10 examples of public knowledge that people are
    generally expected to know in order to be considered
    informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or
    private knowledge, which is generally left to
    individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is
    15 promoted even to those who might not think it
    matters to them. In short, the circulation of public
    knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded
    as a public good which cannot be solely
    demand-driven.
    20 The production, circulation, and reception
    of public knowledge is a complex process. It is
    generally accepted that public knowledge should
    be authoritative, but there is not always
    common agreement about what the public needs to
    25 know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and
    how authoritative reputations should be determined
    and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The
    Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely
    regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative
    30 agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied
    the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of
    authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the
    opinions of others.” As part of the general process of
    the transformation of authority whereby there has
    35 been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional
    sources of public knowledge, the demand has been
    for all authority to make explicit the frames of value
    which determine their decisions. Centers of news
    production, as our focus groups show, have not been
    40 exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps
    some news journalists feel uneasy about this
    renegotiation of their authority:
    Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the
    “most read” lists on their own and other websites
    45 to work out which stories matter to readers and
    viewers. And now the audience—which used to
    know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of
    journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our
    credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008).
    50 The result of democratizing access to TV news
    could be political disengagement by the majority
    and a dumbing down through a popularity
    contest of stories (online news editor, 2007).
    Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,
    55 they amount to more than straightforward
    professional defensiveness. In their reference to an
    audience “which used to know its place” and
    conflation between democratization and “dumbing
    down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular
    60 mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by
    experts, immune from populist pressures; and
    disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive
    recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down
    opportunities for popular involvement in the making
    65 of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional
    claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are
    right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every
    institutional level in contemporary society,
    skepticism towards the epistemological authority of
    70 expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed
    by several of our focus group participants, that the
    news media should be “informative rather than
    authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to
    “give the news as raw as it is, without putting their
    75 slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient
    information” from which “we would be able to form
    opinions of our own.”
    At stake here are two distinct conceptions of
    authority. The journalists we have quoted are
    80 resistant to the democratization of news:
    the supremacy of the clickstream (according to
    which editors raise or lower the profile of stories
    according to the number of readers clicking on them
    online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”
    85 news; the demands of some audience members for
    raw news rather than constructed narratives.

    ...view full instructions

    Based on the table, in which year were people the most trusting of the news media?

    Solution

    The table shows that in 1985, 55% of respondents believed news organizations “get the facts straight,” which was the highest percentage for that choice for any of the years provided.

     

  • Question 2
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Direction: After reading the passage choose the best answer to the given question based on what is stated or implied in the passage and in any accompanying graphics (such as a table or graph).

    Questions are based on the following passage and supplementary material.

    The news is a form of public knowledge.
    Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the
    health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a
    private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge
    5 increases in value as it is shared by more people. The
    date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;
    the causes and consequences of an environmental
    disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular
    law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all
    10 examples of public knowledge that people are
    generally expected to know in order to be considered
    informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or
    private knowledge, which is generally left to
    individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is
    15 promoted even to those who might not think it
    matters to them. In short, the circulation of public
    knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded
    as a public good which cannot be solely
    demand-driven.
    20 The production, circulation, and reception
    of public knowledge is a complex process. It is
    generally accepted that public knowledge should
    be authoritative, but there is not always
    common agreement about what the public needs to
    25 know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and
    how authoritative reputations should be determined
    and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The
    Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely
    regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative
    30 agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied
    the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of
    authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the
    opinions of others.” As part of the general process of
    the transformation of authority whereby there has
    35 been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional
    sources of public knowledge, the demand has been
    for all authority to make explicit the frames of value
    which determine their decisions. Centers of news
    production, as our focus groups show, have not been
    40 exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps
    some news journalists feel uneasy about this
    renegotiation of their authority:
    Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the
    “most read” lists on their own and other websites
    45 to work out which stories matter to readers and
    viewers. And now the audience—which used to
    know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of
    journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our
    credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008).
    50 The result of democratizing access to TV news
    could be political disengagement by the majority
    and a dumbing down through a popularity
    contest of stories (online news editor, 2007).
    Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,
    55 they amount to more than straightforward
    professional defensiveness. In their reference to an
    audience “which used to know its place” and
    conflation between democratization and “dumbing
    down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular
    60 mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by
    experts, immune from populist pressures; and
    disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive
    recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down
    opportunities for popular involvement in the making
    65 of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional
    claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are
    right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every
    institutional level in contemporary society,
    skepticism towards the epistemological authority of
    70 expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed
    by several of our focus group participants, that the
    news media should be “informative rather than
    authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to
    “give the news as raw as it is, without putting their
    75 slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient
    information” from which “we would be able to form
    opinions of our own.”
    At stake here are two distinct conceptions of
    authority. The journalists we have quoted are
    80 resistant to the democratization of news:
    the supremacy of the clickstream (according to
    which editors raise or lower the profile of stories
    according to the number of readers clicking on them
    online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”
    85 news; the demands of some audience members for
    raw news rather than constructed narratives.

    ...view full instructions

    The authors indicate that the public is coming to believe that journalists’ reports should avoid:

    Solution

    The passage explains that although the major news organizations were once considered “trusted shapers” of public knowledge, that perception is changing due to the “growing feeling that the news media should be ‘informative rather than authoritative’; the job of journalists should be to ‘give the news as raw as it is, without putting their slant on it’; and people should be given ‘sufficient information’ from which ‘we would be able to form opinions of our own'”. In other words, the audience now wants raw facts about the world, not facts constructed in support of a certain opinion.

     

  • Question 3
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Direction: After reading the passage choose the best answer to the given question based on what is stated or implied in the passage and in any accompanying graphics (such as a table or graph).

    Questions are based on the following passage and supplementary material.

    The news is a form of public knowledge.
    Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the
    health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a
    private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge
    5 increases in value as it is shared by more people. The
    date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;
    the causes and consequences of an environmental
    disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular
    law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all
    10 examples of public knowledge that people are
    generally expected to know in order to be considered
    informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or
    private knowledge, which is generally left to
    individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is
    15 promoted even to those who might not think it
    matters to them. In short, the circulation of public
    knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded
    as a public good which cannot be solely
    demand-driven.
    20 The production, circulation, and reception
    of public knowledge is a complex process. It is
    generally accepted that public knowledge should
    be authoritative, but there is not always
    common agreement about what the public needs to
    25 know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and
    how authoritative reputations should be determined
    and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The
    Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely
    regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative
    30 agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied
    the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of
    authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the
    opinions of others.” As part of the general process of
    the transformation of authority whereby there has
    35 been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional
    sources of public knowledge, the demand has been
    for all authority to make explicit the frames of value
    which determine their decisions. Centers of news
    production, as our focus groups show, have not been
    40 exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps
    some news journalists feel uneasy about this
    renegotiation of their authority:
    Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the
    “most read” lists on their own and other websites
    45 to work out which stories matter to readers and
    viewers. And now the audience—which used to
    know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of
    journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our
    credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008).
    50 The result of democratizing access to TV news
    could be political disengagement by the majority
    and a dumbing down through a popularity
    contest of stories (online news editor, 2007).
    Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,
    55 they amount to more than straightforward
    professional defensiveness. In their reference to an
    audience “which used to know its place” and
    conflation between democratization and “dumbing
    down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular
    60 mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by
    experts, immune from populist pressures; and
    disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive
    recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down
    opportunities for popular involvement in the making
    65 of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional
    claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are
    right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every
    institutional level in contemporary society,
    skepticism towards the epistemological authority of
    70 expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed
    by several of our focus group participants, that the
    news media should be “informative rather than
    authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to
    “give the news as raw as it is, without putting their
    75 slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient
    information” from which “we would be able to form
    opinions of our own.”
    At stake here are two distinct conceptions of
    authority. The journalists we have quoted are
    80 resistant to the democratization of news:
    the supremacy of the clickstream (according to
    which editors raise or lower the profile of stories
    according to the number of readers clicking on them
    online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”
    85 news; the demands of some audience members for
    raw news rather than constructed narratives.

    ...view full instructions

    According to the passage, which expectation do traditional authorities now face?

    Solution

    Although the passage initially states that traditional news authorities were once implicitly “trusted” regarding the content they produced, it goes on to note that “as part of the general process of the transformation of authority the demand has been for all authority to make explicit the frames of value which determine their decisions”. The modern audience, in other words, wants to hear not only the stories a news organization produces but also the values that form the foundation of that organization’s beliefs.

     

  • Question 4
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Direction: After reading the passage choose the best answer to the given question based on what is stated or implied in the passage and in any accompanying graphics (such as a table or graph).

    Questions are based on the following passage and supplementary material.

    The news is a form of public knowledge.
    Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the
    health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a
    private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge
    5 increases in value as it is shared by more people. The
    date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;
    the causes and consequences of an environmental
    disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular
    law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all
    10 examples of public knowledge that people are
    generally expected to know in order to be considered
    informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or
    private knowledge, which is generally left to
    individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is
    15 promoted even to those who might not think it
    matters to them. In short, the circulation of public
    knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded
    as a public good which cannot be solely
    demand-driven.
    20 The production, circulation, and reception
    of public knowledge is a complex process. It is
    generally accepted that public knowledge should
    be authoritative, but there is not always
    common agreement about what the public needs to
    25 know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and
    how authoritative reputations should be determined
    and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The
    Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely
    regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative
    30 agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied
    the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of
    authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the
    opinions of others.” As part of the general process of
    the transformation of authority whereby there has
    35 been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional
    sources of public knowledge, the demand has been
    for all authority to make explicit the frames of value
    which determine their decisions. Centers of news
    production, as our focus groups show, have not been
    40 exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps
    some news journalists feel uneasy about this
    renegotiation of their authority:
    Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the
    “most read” lists on their own and other websites
    45 to work out which stories matter to readers and
    viewers. And now the audience—which used to
    know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of
    journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our
    credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008).
    50 The result of democratizing access to TV news
    could be political disengagement by the majority
    and a dumbing down through a popularity
    contest of stories (online news editor, 2007).
    Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,
    55 they amount to more than straightforward
    professional defensiveness. In their reference to an
    audience “which used to know its place” and
    conflation between democratization and “dumbing
    down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular
    60 mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by
    experts, immune from populist pressures; and
    disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive
    recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down
    opportunities for popular involvement in the making
    65 of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional
    claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are
    right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every
    institutional level in contemporary society,
    skepticism towards the epistemological authority of
    70 expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed
    by several of our focus group participants, that the
    news media should be “informative rather than
    authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to
    “give the news as raw as it is, without putting their
    75 slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient
    information” from which “we would be able to form
    opinions of our own.”
    At stake here are two distinct conceptions of
    authority. The journalists we have quoted are
    80 resistant to the democratization of news:
    the supremacy of the clickstream (according to
    which editors raise or lower the profile of stories
    according to the number of readers clicking on them
    online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”
    85 news; the demands of some audience members for
    raw news rather than constructed narratives.

    ...view full instructions

    The 2011 data in the table best serve as evidence of:

    Solution

    The 2011 data in the table indicate that only 25% of respondents believed news organizations were accurate, 15% believed they were independent, and 16% believed they were fair. Combined, these data support the idea put forth that modern audiences are becoming skeptical of the authority of experts.

     

  • Question 5
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Direction: After reading the passage choose the best answer to the given question based on what is stated or implied in the passage and in any accompanying graphics (such as a table or graph).

    Questions are based on the following passage and supplementary material.

    The news is a form of public knowledge.
    Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the
    health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a
    private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge
    5 increases in value as it is shared by more people. The
    date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;
    the causes and consequences of an environmental
    disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular
    law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all
    10 examples of public knowledge that people are
    generally expected to know in order to be considered
    informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or
    private knowledge, which is generally left to
    individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is
    15 promoted even to those who might not think it
    matters to them. In short, the circulation of public
    knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded
    as a public good which cannot be solely
    demand-driven.
    20 The production, circulation, and reception
    of public knowledge is a complex process. It is
    generally accepted that public knowledge should
    be authoritative, but there is not always
    common agreement about what the public needs to
    25 know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and
    how authoritative reputations should be determined
    and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The
    Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely
    regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative
    30 agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied
    the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of
    authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the
    opinions of others.” As part of the general process of
    the transformation of authority whereby there has
    35 been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional
    sources of public knowledge, the demand has been
    for all authority to make explicit the frames of value
    which determine their decisions. Centers of news
    production, as our focus groups show, have not been
    40 exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps
    some news journalists feel uneasy about this
    renegotiation of their authority:
    Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the
    “most read” lists on their own and other websites
    45 to work out which stories matter to readers and
    viewers. And now the audience—which used to
    know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of
    journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our
    credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008).
    50 The result of democratizing access to TV news
    could be political disengagement by the majority
    and a dumbing down through a popularity
    contest of stories (online news editor, 2007).
    Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,
    55 they amount to more than straightforward
    professional defensiveness. In their reference to an
    audience “which used to know its place” and
    conflation between democratization and “dumbing
    down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular
    60 mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by
    experts, immune from populist pressures; and
    disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive
    recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down
    opportunities for popular involvement in the making
    65 of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional
    claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are
    right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every
    institutional level in contemporary society,
    skepticism towards the epistemological authority of
    70 expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed
    by several of our focus group participants, that the
    news media should be “informative rather than
    authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to
    “give the news as raw as it is, without putting their
    75 slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient
    information” from which “we would be able to form
    opinions of our own.”
    At stake here are two distinct conceptions of
    authority. The journalists we have quoted are
    80 resistant to the democratization of news:
    the supremacy of the clickstream (according to
    which editors raise or lower the profile of stories
    according to the number of readers clicking on them
    online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”
    85 news; the demands of some audience members for
    raw news rather than constructed narratives.

    ...view full instructions

    Which choice provides the best evidence for the answer to the given question?

    Solution

    The question asks what the public is beginning to believe should be avoided in news stories, with the answer being the personal opinions or feelings of journalists. This is supported: “There is a growing feeling that the news media should be ‘informative rather than authoritative’; the job of journalists should be to ‘give the news as raw as it is, without  putting their slant on it’; and people should be given ‘sufficient information’ from which ‘we would be able to form opinions of our own.’”

     

  • Question 6
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Direction: After reading the passage choose the best answer to the given question based on what is stated or implied in the passage and in any accompanying graphics (such as a table or graph).

    Questions are based on the following passage and supplementary material.

    The news is a form of public knowledge.
    Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the
    health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a
    private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge
    5 increases in value as it is shared by more people. The
    date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;
    the causes and consequences of an environmental
    disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular
    law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all
    10 examples of public knowledge that people are
    generally expected to know in order to be considered
    informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or
    private knowledge, which is generally left to
    individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is
    15 promoted even to those who might not think it
    matters to them. In short, the circulation of public
    knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded
    as a public good which cannot be solely
    demand-driven.
    20 The production, circulation, and reception
    of public knowledge is a complex process. It is
    generally accepted that public knowledge should
    be authoritative, but there is not always
    common agreement about what the public needs to
    25 know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and
    how authoritative reputations should be determined
    and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The
    Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely
    regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative
    30 agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied
    the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of
    authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the
    opinions of others.” As part of the general process of
    the transformation of authority whereby there has
    35 been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional
    sources of public knowledge, the demand has been
    for all authority to make explicit the frames of value
    which determine their decisions. Centers of news
    production, as our focus groups show, have not been
    40 exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps
    some news journalists feel uneasy about this
    renegotiation of their authority:
    Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the
    “most read” lists on their own and other websites
    45 to work out which stories matter to readers and
    viewers. And now the audience—which used to
    know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of
    journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our
    credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008).
    50 The result of democratizing access to TV news
    could be political disengagement by the majority
    and a dumbing down through a popularity
    contest of stories (online news editor, 2007).
    Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,
    55 they amount to more than straightforward
    professional defensiveness. In their reference to an
    audience “which used to know its place” and
    conflation between democratization and “dumbing
    down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular
    60 mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by
    experts, immune from populist pressures; and
    disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive
    recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down
    opportunities for popular involvement in the making
    65 of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional
    claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are
    right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every
    institutional level in contemporary society,
    skepticism towards the epistemological authority of
    70 expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed
    by several of our focus group participants, that the
    news media should be “informative rather than
    authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to
    “give the news as raw as it is, without putting their
    75 slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient
    information” from which “we would be able to form
    opinions of our own.”
    At stake here are two distinct conceptions of
    authority. The journalists we have quoted are
    80 resistant to the democratization of news:
    the supremacy of the clickstream (according to
    which editors raise or lower the profile of stories
    according to the number of readers clicking on them
    online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”
    85 news; the demands of some audience members for
    raw news rather than constructed narratives.

    ...view full instructions

    “Common” most nearly means:

    Solution

    The passage states that “there is not always common agreement about what the public needs to know.” In this context, a “common” agreement is a widespread one shared by many people.

     

  • Question 7
    1 / -0

    Select the most appropriate for the phrase.

    Hard-nosed attitude

    Solution

    Hard nose attitude: being tough, stubborn, or uncompromising

    For example, That guy seems so hard-nosed that I'm afraid to say hi to him.

    Thus, 'aggressive' is the most suitable meaning.

     

  • Question 8
    1 / -0

    Choose the correct meaning of the phrase:

    On the rocks:

    Solution

    On the rocks means If something, like a relationship, is on the rocks, it is in trouble and may come to an end.

    Ex. Their marriage is on the rocks.

     

  • Question 9
    1 / -0

    Fill in the blank by selecting the appropriate phrasal verb from the given options.

    He is _________ the trees with an electric saw.

    Solution

    He is cutting down the trees with an electric saw.

    'Cutting down' means 'to reduce the amount/level of something'. In the given sentence, the context is that the trees are being cut with an electric saw. Therefore, the suitable phrasal verb is - 'cutting down'.

    'Carrying on' means 'to continue doing something'.

    'Bringing up' means 'to take care of the growth of something'.

    'Putting down' means 'to criticize something'.

    None of these are suitable as per the meaning of the given sentence.

     

  • Question 10
    1 / -0

    Functional Dependencies are the types of constraints that are based on______.

    Solution

    Key is the basic element needed for the constraints. A key in DBMS is an attribute or a set of attributes that help to uniquely identify a tuple (or row) in a relation (or table). Keys are also used to establish relationships between the different tables and columns of a relational database. Individual values in a key are called key values

     

Self Studies
User
Question Analysis
  • Correct -

  • Wrong -

  • Skipped -

My Perfomance
  • Score

    -

    out of -
  • Rank

    -

    out of -
Re-Attempt Weekly Quiz Competition
Self Studies Get latest Exam Updates
& Study Material Alerts!
No, Thanks
Self Studies
Click on Allow to receive notifications
Allow Notification
Self Studies
Self Studies Self Studies
To enable notifications follow this 2 steps:
  • First Click on Secure Icon Self Studies
  • Second click on the toggle icon
Allow Notification
Get latest Exam Updates & FREE Study Material Alerts!
Self Studies ×
Open Now