English Language Quiz For SBI Clerk | 02-03-2020

Dear Readers,

Mahendras has started special quizzes for SBI Clerk examination so that you can practice more and more to crack the examination. This SBI Clerk special quiz series will mold your preparations in the right direction and the regular practice of these quizzes will be really very helpful in scoring good marks in the Examination. Here we are providing you important question of English Language for SBI Clerk 2020 Exam.


Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words have been given in bold to help you locate them while answering some questions.

The Supreme Court’s judgment in a case, upholding the constitutionality of criminal defamation will be remembered more for its obscurely colourful language than for its progressive values. The court has again bent the arc of jurisprudence towards fear and paternalism, rather than liberty and rights. The arguments striking down Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code are now familiar: These restrictions have a chilling effect on freedom of speech; they create an anomaly whereby the threshold for criminal prosecution for defamation is now possibly lower than the threshold for civil damages; they provide public remedies for essentially private wrongs; they go against the global trend of decriminalising defamation, and so forth. These arguments provide good grounds to think that this judgment is an atrocious blow against freedom of expression. But there is a reason to think that this judgment is not just an idiosyncratic pathology of one bench. If we are interested in a defence of liberalism, we need to go beyond doctrine, and excavate the deep roots of these pathological judgments.

There is one preliminary technical matter. Many lawyers have argued that damage to reputation is a private wrong. This use of the public-private distinction is not actually as self-evident as liberals make it out to be. What is a public or a private wrong is always a function of law; it is not given antecedent to it. The issue at stake is where the line should be drawn. Saying that damage to reputation is by definition a private wrong; or that damage to reputation is not as serious a matter as minor physical assault, is actually begging the question. That defamation is a private crime is not a fact as liberals assume; it is a conclusion that needs to be argued. They would be better off arguing that even if it is not a purely private crime, the costs of dealing with it with criminal remedies far outweigh the benefits. The fact that allegations can be refuted in an open society; the fact that there are civil remedies should be enough to address concerns.

The moral charge of the judgment actually comes from taking damage to reputation as a serious public issue. Liberals do themselves disservice by not taking this concern seriously. And here we are, as always, more in the realm of moral psychology, than law. Law often depends on an underlying picture of what a society should fear more. The judges look at Indian society and regard those who are worried about freedom of expression, as someone crying fire in Noah’s flood. They implicitly weighed the risk to society from an unfettered culture of allegation-mongering more heavily than the risk of misusing criminal law to harass journalists. The judges are probably wrong about this: The dozens of defamation cases filed in Tamil Nadu to silence journalists, the fact that powerful politicians are using this as a weapon against each other, should have been a sign to the judges that criminal defamation can fetter democratic accountability. In fact, the democratic accountability argument is a stronger argument for decriminalising defamation than a pure free speech argument.

But the really troubling issue is this. In the evolution of law, the trend is usually towards decriminalisation of more crimes and the institution of civil remedies. India seems to be moving in an opposite direction. More and more crimes, from trademark violations to drinking and eating, are becoming criminal violations. We prefer penal over civil remedies. Why is this? Underlying these punitive responses is the large fact of institutional decay and incapacity. As it has been pointed out in a brilliant article, India is extraordinary in the degree to which it has an underdeveloped tort system. So everything becomes a matter of public rather than private law. The justice system disincentivises the claims; it is far easier to get the state involved. Second, in the actual functioning of courts, civil remedies take an inordinately long time; civil defamation cases can last decades. So judges implicitly don’t see it as a remedy. Our punitive impulses are an expression of deep institutional failure.

Q1. How are the defamation cases in Tamil Nadu observed by the judges?

(A) It can positively affect the democracy.

(B) It can be harmful to freedom of speech.

(C) It can restrict the democratic responsibility.

01. Only A

02. Only B

03. Only C

04. Both B and C

05. Both A and B

Q2 Which of the following sentence is NOT TRUE in the context of the given passage?

01. Damage to reputation is a private wrong

02. Civil remedies take inordinately long time

03. Indians prefer penal over civil remedies

04. Decriminalizing defamation is not a global trend.

05. All of the above

Q3 Indians prefer penal remedies to civil remedies, why?

01. The cases can take prolonged time to be solved.

02. Every matter in India is a public issue.

03. India has a well-developed jurisdiction.

04. Both A and C

05. All of the above

Q4 In the gradual development of law, what usually prevails?

01. Decriminalisation of more crimes and the institution of civil remedies.

02. Defamation of lesser crimes and the institution of civil remedies.

03. Decriminalisation of civil remedies and the institution of less crimes.

04. Civil remedies’ criminalization and the institution of more crimes.

05. Decriminalisation of more crimes and the institution of foreign remedies.

Q5 With reference to the passage, the arc of legal system is said to have bent on-

A. Liberalism

B. Freedom of speech 

C. Fear and paternalism

D. Liberty and rights

01. Only A

02. Only C

03. Only D

04. Both B and C

05. Both A and D

6. In the following question, four words are given of which two words are most nearly the same or opposite in meaning. Find the two words.

(A) Surmount

(B) Untrue

(C) Rigid

(D) Prevail

01. A-B

02. A-D

03. A-C

04. B-C

05. C-D

7. In the following question, four words are given of which two words are most nearly the same or opposite in meaning. Find the two words.

(A) Vanquish

(B) Culmination

(C) Nadir

(D) Lofty

01. A-B

02. A-D

03. A-C

04. B-C

05. C-D

8 .In the following question, four words are given of which two words are most nearly the same or opposite in meaning. Find the two words.

(A) Staid 

(B) Serious

(C) Dissipate

(D) Reel

01. A-B

02. A-D

03. A-C

04. B-C

05. C-D

9. In the following question, four words are given of which two words are most nearly the same or opposite in meaning. Find the two words.

(A) Stark

(B) Totter

(C) Loyal

(D) Mild

01. A-B

02. A-D

03. A-C

04. B-C

05. C-D

10. In the following question, four words are given of which two words are most nearly the same or opposite in meaning. Find the two words.

(A) Unobtrusive

(B) Roving

(C) Naïve

(D) Disingenuous

01. A-B

02. A-D

03. A-C

04. B-C

05. C-D

Answers:

1. (3) The answer lies at the end of the third paragraph

2. (4) The answer is given in the first paragraph.

3. (1) The answer is given in the last paragraph.

4. (1) The answer is mentioned in the last paragraph.

5. (2) The answer is given in the first paragraph

6. (2) Surmount (v) – get over

Prevail (v) – conquer

Both these words are synonyms.

7. (4) Culmination (n) – top

Nadir (n) – bottom

Lofty (adj.) – of imposing height.

8. (1) Staid (adj.) – sober; serious. Both the words are synonyms.

Reel (v)- feel shocked, bewildered, or giddy

9. (2) Stark (adj.) – stiff

Mild (adj.) – gentle. Both these words are opposite in meaning.

10. (5) Naïve (adj.) – Innocent

Disingenuous (adj.) – Dishonest

Both are antonyms.