Question

The text in the passage can be best termed as ________.

• A. narrative
• B. descriptive
• C. persuasive
• D. expository
• A. highlight the difficulties faced by innovators.
• B. focus on the hardships of patent-seekers.
• C. compare innovators to inventors.
• D. reveal the importance of inventors.
• A. innovators enhance the utility of inventions.
• B. innovators face fewer challenges than inventors do.
• C. every inventor has a patent for the invention.
• D. invention is the same as innovation.
• A. there is no place for mistakes in the process of making an innovation.
• B. making a mistake before finding success is not unusual.
• C. failure is a permanent stumbling block.
• D. all innovators have to go through failure.
• A. a highly-planned and deeply researched invention
• B. the fruit of failure
• C. the need of the hour
• D. an accidental invention
• A. his ingenuity and good fortune
• B. the carelessness of Elisha’s lawyer
• C. the clever trick played by his lawyer
• D. the biased officials in the patent office
• A. Inventors may not be innovators.
• B. Innovators are not expected to be enterprising.
• C. To get a patent, the applicant has to follow a legal process.
• D. Intellectual property rights are not always easy to get.
• A. The world of inventions and innovations is a competitive one.
• B. Not every innovation sees the light of the day.
• C. Thus, inventors and innovators have to be intrepid enough to take risks;
• D. None of the above
• A. hasty
• B. intellectual
• C. daring
• D. rich
• A. praiseworthy
• B. challenging
• C. tiring
• D. disgraceful

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question checks whether you can identify the purpose behind a piece of writing. The four options, narrative, descriptive, persuasive, and expository, each describe a different core purpose, so the task is to match the passage's actual purpose to one of these labels.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Ask what the passage is trying to do: tell a story (narrative), create a sensory picture (descriptive), win the reader over to an opinion (persuasive), or explain a concept with facts and examples (expository). Whichever purpose matches the passage's actual content gives the answer.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The passage defines invention and innovation, brings in examples like the iPhone, Velcro, and Thomas Edison's patents, and clarifies how the two ideas relate to each other. There is no storyline being told, so it is not narrative. There is no focus on sensory description of a place or object, so it is not descriptive. The passage never pushes the reader to adopt an opinion or take a side, so it is not persuasive either. What remains is writing whose entire job is to inform and explain, which is the definition of expository writing.

Step 4: Final Answer:
The passage is best termed expository, so option D is correct.

Answer 2

It often helps to check for the telltale features each writing style would show if it applied here, then rule out any style whose features are simply missing from the passage.

1. Narrative features would include characters, a timeline, and a plot building to some outcome. None of these appear; the passage instead moves between definitions and examples, so narrative is ruled out.
2. Descriptive features would include sensory detail, sight, sound, texture, describing a person, place, or object. The passage never lingers on sensory description, so descriptive is ruled out.
3. Persuasive features would include an opinion being pushed, an appeal to the reader's emotions or judgement, or a call to action. The passage simply presents facts and examples without arguing for any position, so persuasive is ruled out.
4. Expository features would include definitions, examples used to clarify a concept, and a clear informative purpose. The passage shows exactly these features throughout, defining invention and innovation and using the iPhone, Velcro, and Thomas Edison as illustrations.

Once the narrative, descriptive, and persuasive features are confirmed absent, the passage's own definitions and clarifying examples leave expository as the only style whose features are actually present.

Therefore, the correct answer is expository.

Answer 3

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question checks whether you can identify the single idea that ties the whole passage together, rather than a detail mentioned in just one part of it.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Look at what runs consistently through every paragraph of the passage, not just one section, since the main idea has to explain the passage as a whole, not a single example.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The passage opens by defining invention and innovation as related but different, then keeps returning to that distinction through examples: the iPhone shows an innovator blending inventions, Velcro shows an accidental invention, and Thomas Edison shows the rare case of someone who was both an inventor and an innovator. Difficulties and patent disputes are mentioned, but only as supporting details inside this larger comparison, not as the passage's overall point. The consistent thread across the whole passage is the contrast between what inventors do and what innovators do.

Step 4: Final Answer:
The main idea is to compare innovators to inventors, so option C is correct.

Answer 4

A passage's main idea is often signalled by what its opening and closing lines both emphasise, since a writer tends to frame the whole piece around that same point at both ends.

1. Highlight the difficulties faced by innovators: The opening paragraph does not mention difficulty at all, and the closing paragraph focuses on innovations and inventions together, not specifically on hardship, so this option is not framed by either end.
2. Focus on the hardships of patent-seekers: Patents are mentioned nowhere near the opening paragraph and only briefly near the passage's middle, not at its close, so this is not the framing idea either.
3. Compare innovators to inventors: The opening paragraph immediately distinguishes inventors from innovators, and the closing paragraph returns to praising both innovations and the inventions that laid the foundation for them, bookending the passage with the same comparison.
4. Reveal the importance of inventors: The closing paragraph gives equal weight to innovations, not inventors alone, so this option does not match how the passage actually closes.

Since both the opening and closing paragraphs frame the passage around the relationship between inventors and innovators, that comparison is the main idea the passage builds throughout.

Therefore, the correct answer is compare innovators to inventors.

Answer 5

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question checks whether you can pick out a belief the author actually states in the passage, rather than one that sounds plausible but is not supported by the text.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Go back to the specific lines in the passage that describe what innovators do, and check each option against those lines directly, ruling out any option the passage contradicts.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The passage says an invention "may or may not be of utility to the masses" and that the innovator "uses various resources, skills and time to make the invention available for use," sometimes blending inventions together, as with the iPhone. This matches innovators enhancing the utility of inventions. The passage never says innovators face fewer challenges, and in fact treats failure as common to both groups. It also gives the counterexample of Antonio Meucci, who could not get a patent, directly contradicting the idea that every inventor holds one. Finally, the opening line states invention and innovation are "not interchangeable," ruling out the idea that they are the same.

Step 4: Final Answer:
The author believes innovators enhance the utility of inventions, so option A is correct.

Answer 6

A belief the author actually holds should have no exception mentioned anywhere in the passage, while a belief the author does not hold should have at least one clear counter-example to point to. Applying that test to each option settles this question.

1. Innovators face fewer challenges than inventors: This has no basis anywhere in the text, since both groups are described facing failure equally, with no comparison of who struggles more.
2. Every inventor has a patent for the invention: This is directly contradicted by Antonio Meucci's story, who could not secure a patent due to lack of resources.
3. Invention is the same as innovation: This is directly contradicted by the passage's opening line calling the two not interchangeable.
4. Innovators enhance the utility of inventions: This is the one claim with no contradicting example anywhere in the passage, and it is directly backed by the line describing innovators using resources, skills and time to make the invention available for use.

The only option with no counter-example anywhere in the passage, and direct textual support instead, is that innovators enhance the utility of inventions.

Therefore, the correct answer is innovators enhance the utility of inventions.

Answer 7

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question checks whether you can find the shared belief expressed through two quoted figures, Benjamin Franklin and Steve Jobs, rather than a belief attributed to only one of them or overstated beyond what they actually said.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Read both quotes side by side and pick the option that captures what both statements agree on, without adding a stronger claim than the text supports.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
Franklin's belief is that "success doesn't come without challenge, mistake, and in a few cases failure." Steve Jobs says that innovating sometimes leads to mistakes, and the right response is to admit them quickly and move on. Both statements agree that making mistakes on the way to success is common and expected, not something rare. This rules out the option claiming mistakes have no place in innovation, and rules out treating failure as a permanent block, since the passage separately states failures should be seen as stepping stones. The option claiming every innovator must go through failure goes further than what either quote actually says.

Step 4: Final Answer:
Franklin and Jobs believe making a mistake before finding success is not unusual, so option B is correct.

Answer 8

Lining up the exact words Franklin and Jobs use, challenge, mistake, admit, improve, against the wording of each option shows which one uses matching, moderate language rather than an extreme claim.

1. There is no place for mistakes: This uses language opposite to Franklin's own word mistake, which he explicitly includes as part of reaching success.
2. Failure is a permanent stumbling block: This contradicts the passage's own phrase calling failures stepping stones and not stumbling blocks.
3. All innovators have to go through failure: This turns Jobs's conditional statement, sometimes when you innovate, you make mistakes, into an absolute rule for every innovator, which is not what he actually said.
4. Making a mistake before finding success is not unusual: This matches both quotes' shared tone, mistakes happen along the way, and the right response is simply to keep going, not treat them as rare, forbidden, or fatal.

Matching the actual wording and tone of both quotes points to mistakes being a normal, expected part of the process.

Therefore, the correct answer is making a mistake before finding success is not unusual.

Answer 9

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question checks whether you can match a description to the specific story the passage tells about how Velcro was invented, rather than a generic description of how inventions usually happen.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Trace the exact sequence of events the passage gives for Velcro's origin, then match that sequence to the option that best fits a chance discovery rather than planned research, failure, or urgent need.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The passage says George de Mestral was hiking when he found burrs clinging to his clothes and his dog's fur, studied them at home, discovered they were made of tiny hooks, and later patented the resulting fabric strips. There is no mention of a planned research programme, ruling out the option about deep planning. There is no mention of an earlier failed attempt, ruling out the fruit-of-failure option. There is no mention of an urgent demand driving the discovery, ruling out the need-of-the-hour option. The sequence of a chance observation followed by study matches only the description of an accidental invention.

Step 4: Final Answer:
Velcro is best described as an accidental invention, so option D is correct.

Answer 10

The same passage also describes the iPhone, a product built deliberately by combining existing inventions on purpose. Comparing Velcro's origin story against that clearly deliberate example highlights what kind of invention Velcro actually is.

1. A highly-planned and deeply researched invention: This description fits the iPhone's story, a deliberate blend of various inventions made on purpose. Velcro's story, by contrast, begins with George de Mestral simply hiking in the woods and noticing burrs stuck to his clothes and dog, with no mention of setting out to invent a fastener at all.
2. The fruit of failure: There is no failed attempt mentioned before the discovery of the burrs, so this description has nothing in Velcro's story to attach to.
3. The need of the hour: There is no urgent demand mentioned anywhere in Velcro's story, only a chance walk in the woods, so this description does not fit either.
4. An accidental invention: Set against the passage's own example of a deliberately planned innovation, the iPhone, Velcro's chance-observation origin stands out clearly as the opposite, an invention that was not planned at all.

Contrasting Velcro's story with the passage's own deliberately-planned example, the iPhone, shows Velcro's chance-observation origin is best described as accidental.

Therefore, the correct answer is an accidental invention.

Answer 11

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We need to find why Bell is seen as the first person to hold a patent for the telephone. The four options offer different explanations for this outcome.

Step 2: Key Approach:
Check each explanation against what actually happened: Bell worked hard on the device, and his filing reached the patent office only a short time before a rival's. Both effort and timing played a part.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
Bell's technical skill in building a working voice transmitting device shows genuine ingenuity, so this is not a story of pure chance. At the same time, the fact that his papers arrived first by a narrow margin was partly a matter of timing rather than something he controlled, so calling it good fortune is fair. There is no basis to say the rival's lawyer was careless, that Bell's lawyer used a trick, or that officials were biased since the process followed the normal order of filing.

Step 4: Final Answer:
Bell became the first patent holder through a combination of his ingenuity and good fortune.

Answer 12

Another way to approach this is to trace the actual sequence of events step by step and see which option matches that sequence, rather than judging each option in isolation.

1. his ingenuity and good fortune: First, Bell worked out a design that could transmit speech electrically, an achievement that took genuine invention. Then, his application happened to reach the patent office only a short time ahead of a competing claim. Put the two events in sequence and you get invention followed by a lucky margin in timing, exactly what this option describes.
2. the carelessness of Elisha's lawyer: If this were the cause, the sequence would have to include some identifiable error on the rival's side, a late submission, missing paperwork, and so on. That step is missing from the sequence of events, so this cause cannot be inserted into the chain.
3. the clever trick played by his lawyer: This option would require an extra deliberate step, some maneuver beyond ordinary filing, that changed the outcome. No such extra step appears anywhere in the sequence; filing an application first is the normal next step after finishing an invention, not a trick.
4. the biased officials in the patent office: This would insert a decision-making step where the office chose Bell over Gray for reasons other than the order of filing. The sequence instead shows the office simply processing whichever application arrived first, so there is no bias step to add.

Walking through the events in order leaves only invention followed by a fortunate timing gap, with no room for the negligence, trickery, or bias the other three options would require.

Therefore, the correct answer is his ingenuity and good fortune.

Answer 13

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We must find the one statement among the four that is false, not true.

Step 2: Key Approach:
Test each statement against what is generally known about inventors, innovators, and intellectual property, since the false statement will go against one of these established ideas.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
An inventor creates something new but does not always carry it through to real world use, so it is fair to say inventors may not always be innovators. Patents do require a legal application process, and intellectual property protection is often hard to secure, so both of those statements check out. Innovation, though, depends on someone actively pushing an idea forward, taking risks, and organising resources, which is exactly what "enterprising" means. Claiming innovators are not expected to be enterprising works against that basic idea, so this statement fails the test.

Step 4: Final Answer:
The untrue statement is that innovators are not expected to be enterprising.

Answer 14

Another way to test each statement is to picture a real example that fits it and see whether the statement still makes sense.

1. Inventors may not be innovators: Picture someone who patents a new gadget but never brings it to market or gets it adopted anywhere. That person is clearly an inventor without being an innovator, so the statement holds.
2. Innovators are not expected to be enterprising: Try to picture a successful innovator who took no initiative, avoided all risk, and waited for others to act. That picture does not work, because turning an idea into a working, adopted solution requires exactly the initiative and risk tolerance that "enterprising" describes. The statement fails this test.
3. To get a patent, the applicant has to follow a legal process: Picture anyone obtaining a patent without filing an application or going through an examination. That is not possible under any patent system, so the statement holds.
4. Intellectual property rights are not always easy to get: Picture an inventor facing delays, paperwork, or a dispute over who filed first. Such situations are common enough that the statement holds as a fair description.

Only the second statement fails to produce a workable real-world example, which is what marks it as the untrue one.

Therefore, the correct answer is Innovators are not expected to be enterprising.

Answer 15

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We need to pick the line from the passage that most directly points to failure, not just risk or competition.

Step 2: Key Approach:
Read each line for what it actually claims: does it describe rivalry, a warning about taking risks, or an outcome where something did not succeed.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
Talking about competition only tells us the field is crowded, and talking about being intrepid only tells us risk is involved before any result is known. Neither one states that something has actually failed. The line about innovations not seeing the light of day says plainly that some innovations never become successful, which is a direct statement of failure. Since this line clearly fits, the "none of the above" option cannot be correct either.

Step 4: Final Answer:
The line "not every innovation sees the light of the day" is the clearest indicator of failure.

Answer 16

Looking at the grammatical shape of each line, whether it describes an ongoing condition, a piece of advice, or a completed outcome, also helps separate the options.

1. The world of inventions and innovations is a competitive one: This is a general, ongoing description of the field itself. It stays true whether any given innovation later succeeds or fails, so it carries no outcome of its own.
2. Not every innovation sees the light of the day: This line states, as a completed pattern, that some innovations never make it through, phrased as a settled fact about outcomes rather than a description of conditions or advice. That settled, negative outcome is what failure means.
3. Thus, inventors and innovators have to be intrepid enough to take risks: The word "have to" signals advice or a requirement going forward, aimed at handling an outcome that has not happened yet, not a statement that something already failed.
4. None of the above: Ruled out once any one of the three lines is shown to describe failure, and the second line does exactly that.

Only the second line is phrased as a completed, negative outcome rather than a general condition or forward-looking advice, making it the clearest statement of failure.

Therefore, the correct answer is Not every innovation sees the light of the day.

Answer 17

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We need a word that means the same as "intrepid," which describes someone fearless and ready to face risk.

Step 2: Key Approach:
Match the core meaning, fearlessness and boldness, against each option rather than picking a word that merely sounds similar.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
"Hasty" carries a sense of rushing without care, which is a different and often negative idea. "Intellectual" is about mental ability, not courage. "Rich" refers to wealth, again unrelated to bravery. "Daring" is the only word that describes a bold, fearless attitude toward risk, matching "intrepid" closely.

Step 4: Final Answer:
"Daring" is the correct replacement for "intrepid."

Answer 18

A quick way to check a synonym is to substitute each candidate word into a sentence using "intrepid" and see whether the meaning still holds.

1. hasty: Substituting gives something like "a hasty explorer," which suggests someone acting rashly rather than someone brave, changing the meaning of the sentence rather than preserving it.
2. intellectual: Substituting produces "an intellectual explorer," which describes a thinker, not someone facing physical risk, again shifting the sense of the original sentence.
3. daring: Substituting gives "a daring explorer," which keeps the same sense of boldness and willingness to face danger that "an intrepid explorer" originally conveyed. The sentence reads naturally with the same meaning intact.
4. rich: Substituting gives "a rich explorer," which introduces an idea of wealth that was never part of the original meaning.

Only substituting "daring" keeps the sentence's original sense of fearlessness unchanged, confirming it as the correct match.

Therefore, the correct answer is daring.

Answer 19

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We need the antonym, the opposite in meaning, of "laudable," which means worthy of praise.

Step 2: Key Approach:
An antonym must sit at the opposite end of the same scale, praiseworthy versus blameworthy, rather than just being an unrelated quality like difficulty or tiredness.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
"Praiseworthy" actually means the same thing as "laudable," so it cannot be the antonym. "Challenging" and "tiring" describe difficulty and exhaustion, neither of which relates to praise or blame. "Disgraceful" means deserving shame, which sits at the exact opposite end of the scale from "laudable."

Step 4: Final Answer:
"Disgraceful" is the antonym of "laudable."

Answer 20

Testing each word in a sentence describing someone's conduct shows which one flips the meaning of "laudable" rather than merely changing the subject.

1. praiseworthy: "Her laudable conduct" and "her praiseworthy conduct" mean essentially the same thing, so swapping in this word would not create an opposite meaning at all.
2. challenging: "Her challenging conduct" describes conduct that is difficult to deal with, which is a different idea from conduct deserving blame, so this does not produce a true opposite either.
3. tiring: "Her tiring conduct" again shifts the sentence toward exhaustion rather than toward blame, so it fails to reverse the original meaning in the right way.
4. disgraceful: "Her disgraceful conduct" completely reverses the sense of "her laudable conduct," turning praiseworthy behaviour into shameful behaviour, exactly what an antonym should do.

Only swapping in "disgraceful" actually reverses the sentence's meaning the way an antonym is supposed to.

Therefore, the correct answer is disgraceful.