Comprehension
Read an extract from A Scandal in Bohemia by Arthur Conan Doyle:
“I rang the door-bell and was shown up to the chamber which had formerly been in part my own. With hardly a word spoken, Sherlock Holmes waved me to an armchair. Then he stood before the fire and looked me over in his singular introspective fashion. “Watson, you did not tell me that you intended to go into harness.” “Then, how do you know?” “I see it, I deduce it. How do I know that you have been getting yourself very wet lately, and that you have a most clumsy and careless servant girl?” “My dear Holmes,” said I, “this is too much. It is true that I had a country walk on Thursday and came home in a dreadful mess, but as I have changed my clothes, I can’t imagine how you deduce it. As to Mary Jane, she is incorrigible, but there, again, I fail to see how you work it out.” “It is simplicity itself,” said he; “my eyes tell me that on the inside of your left shoe, just where the firelight strikes it, the leather is scored by six almost parallel cuts. Obviously, they have been caused by someone who has very carelessly scared round the edges of the sole in order to remove crusted mud from it. Hence, you see, my double deduction that you had been out in vile weather, and that you had a particularly malignant boot-slitting specimen of the London slavey.”
In fiction, detectives like Holmes are usually portrayed as people with exceptionally brilliant minds. They possess the rare skill to see and analyze what ordinary people can’t. They have incredible abilities to infer, deduce, induce and conclude.
Then, there is G.K. Chesterton’s fictional catholic priest, Father Brown who relies on his extraordinary power of sympathy and empathy that enable him to imagine and feel as criminals do. He explains, “I had thought out exactly how a thing like that could be done, and in what style or state of mind a man could really do it. And when I was quite sure that I felt exactly like the murderer myself, of course I knew who he was.”
Sherlock finds the criminal by starting from the outside. He relies on science, experimental methods and deduction. On the contrary, Father Brown uses varied psychological experiences learned from those who make confessions of crime to him. He relies on introspection, intuition and empathy.
There is yet another set of detectives like those created by writers like Agatha Christie. Her Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot is a story-teller who draws information from the stories that others tell. He patiently listens to numerous accounts of what happened, where it happened and how it happened. He listens for credibility and ambiguity; he identifies why and how the pieces of the jig-saws don’t fit together. Ultimately, he uncovers the truth.
“I rang the door-bell and was shown up to the chamber which had formerly been in part my own. With hardly a word spoken, Sherlock Holmes waved me to an armchair. Then he stood before the fire and looked me over in his singular introspective fashion. “Watson, you did not tell me that you intended to go into harness.” “Then, how do you know?” “I see it, I deduce it. How do I know that you have been getting yourself very wet lately, and that you have a most clumsy and careless servant girl?” “My dear Holmes,” said I, “this is too much. It is true that I had a country walk on Thursday and came home in a dreadful mess, but as I have changed my clothes, I can’t imagine how you deduce it. As to Mary Jane, she is incorrigible, but there, again, I fail to see how you work it out.” “It is simplicity itself,” said he; “my eyes tell me that on the inside of your left shoe, just where the firelight strikes it, the leather is scored by six almost parallel cuts. Obviously, they have been caused by someone who has very carelessly scared round the edges of the sole in order to remove crusted mud from it. Hence, you see, my double deduction that you had been out in vile weather, and that you had a particularly malignant boot-slitting specimen of the London slavey.”
In fiction, detectives like Holmes are usually portrayed as people with exceptionally brilliant minds. They possess the rare skill to see and analyze what ordinary people can’t. They have incredible abilities to infer, deduce, induce and conclude.
Then, there is G.K. Chesterton’s fictional catholic priest, Father Brown who relies on his extraordinary power of sympathy and empathy that enable him to imagine and feel as criminals do. He explains, “I had thought out exactly how a thing like that could be done, and in what style or state of mind a man could really do it. And when I was quite sure that I felt exactly like the murderer myself, of course I knew who he was.”
Sherlock finds the criminal by starting from the outside. He relies on science, experimental methods and deduction. On the contrary, Father Brown uses varied psychological experiences learned from those who make confessions of crime to him. He relies on introspection, intuition and empathy.
There is yet another set of detectives like those created by writers like Agatha Christie. Her Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot is a story-teller who draws information from the stories that others tell. He patiently listens to numerous accounts of what happened, where it happened and how it happened. He listens for credibility and ambiguity; he identifies why and how the pieces of the jig-saws don’t fit together. Ultimately, he uncovers the truth.
Question: 1
From the passage, it can be inferred that
From the passage, it can be inferred that
Updated On: Jul 15, 2026
- Watson is Holmes’ mentor
- Earlier, Watson used to live with Holmes
- Watson is a detective..
- Watson shares all his personal matters with Holmes
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
The correct Answer is (B):Earlier, Watson used to live with Holmes.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks what can be reasonably inferred from the extract about Watson's history with Holmes.
- A) Watson is Holmes' mentor: Nothing in the extract shows Watson teaching or guiding Holmes. Holmes is the one doing the deducing and explaining his method to Watson, which is the opposite of a mentor relationship with Watson in charge. This option has no support in the text.
- B) Earlier, Watson used to live with Holmes: Watson's own words are, "I rang the door-bell and was shown up to the chamber which had formerly been in part my own." A chamber that was formerly in part his own means Watson once shared that room, and by extension that residence, with Holmes. This is a direct textual clue, so the inference is sound.
- C) Watson is a detective: Watson is shown failing to work out simple deductions that Holmes finds obvious, and he openly admits he cannot see how Holmes reaches his conclusions. He is the one being surprised by Holmes' skill, not someone applying detective skill of his own.
- D) Watson shares all his personal matters with Holmes: The extract shows the reverse. Watson is startled that Holmes already knows about his country walk and his careless servant girl without being told, which means Watson had not volunteered these personal details to Holmes. Holmes worked them out on his own from physical clues.
Only option B is backed by a specific line in the passage, since the phrase about the chamber being formerly in part his own directly places Watson as a former resident of that room.
The correct answer is B) Earlier, Watson used to live with Holmes.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
It is evident that for solving cases, Father Brown relies largely on
It is evident that for solving cases, Father Brown relies largely on
Updated On: Jul 15, 2026
- His own sympathetic and empathic thought process about criminals
- A sympathetic approach towards various people’s opinion on the case to be solved.
- A deductive analysis of the crime and his ability to sympathize.
- All the above.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Approach Solution - 1
The correct Answer is (A): His own sympathetic and empathic thought process about criminals
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks what Father Brown's method for solving cases actually depends on, based on how the passage describes him.
- A) His own sympathetic and empathic thought process about criminals: The passage states Father Brown relies on his extraordinary power of sympathy and empathy that let him imagine and feel as criminals do, and quotes him saying he identifies the criminal once he feels exactly like the murderer himself. This is his own internal process, matching the option precisely.
- B) A sympathetic approach towards various people's opinion on the case to be solved: Listening to many people's opinions and accounts of a case describes Poirot's method in the passage, not Father Brown's. Father Brown does not gather outside opinions here; he works through his own imagination.
- C) A deductive analysis of the crime and his ability to sympathize: The passage explicitly contrasts Father Brown with Holmes on this point, saying Sherlock finds the criminal by starting from the outside and relies on science and deduction, while Father Brown relies on introspection, intuition and empathy instead. So deduction is not part of his method as the passage frames it.
- D) All the above: Since B actually describes Poirot's method and C wrongly attributes deduction to Father Brown, this option cannot be correct, as it would require every other option to be accurate.
The passage isolates Father Brown's method as his own act of imagining and feeling like the criminal, which is exactly option A.
The correct answer is A) His own sympathetic and empathic thought process about criminals.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
For the three detectives mentioned in the passage, which one of these would be nonessential for solving criminal cases?
For the three detectives mentioned in the passage, which one of these would be nonessential for solving criminal cases?
Updated On: Jul 15, 2026
- Forgiving nature
- Sensitivity
- Critical thinking
- Patience
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Approach Solution - 1
The correct Answer is (A): Forgiving nature
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question asks which quality, among the four listed, is not actually required by any of the three detectives described in the passage.
- A) Forgiving nature: None of the three methods described, Holmes' physical deduction, Father Brown's empathetic imagination, or Poirot's comparison of witness accounts, require the detective to forgive the criminal. Solving a case and forgiving the person who committed it are two separate things, and the passage never links forgiveness to how any of these three detectives reach their conclusions.
- B) Sensitivity: Father Brown's method depends on sensitivity to other people's inner states, since he has to imagine and feel as the criminal does. This quality is essential to at least one of the three detectives.
- C) Critical thinking: Holmes' entire method, reasoning from small physical clues like the cuts on a shoe to a firm conclusion, is an exercise in critical thinking. This quality is essential to his approach.
- D) Patience: Poirot's method is described as listening to numerous accounts of what happened, where it happened and how it happened, before uncovering the truth. Sitting through many retellings before reaching a conclusion needs patience, so this quality is essential to his approach.
Sensitivity, critical thinking, and patience are each tied to one of the three detectives in the passage, but a forgiving nature is never mentioned or implied for any of them.
The correct answer is A) Forgiving nature.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
In order to solve cases, Poirot uses the art of ______ the narratives that he has been told
In order to solve cases, Poirot uses the art of ______ the narratives that he has been told
Updated On: Jul 15, 2026
- Building a fantasy based on
- Empathizing with all the characters in
- Creating new plots for
- Detecting and analyzing the missing links in
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Approach Solution - 1
The correct Answer is (D):Detecting and analyzing the missing links in
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question asks how Poirot works with the different narratives people tell him, completing the sentence about the art he uses on the narratives he has been told.
- A) Building a fantasy based on: Poirot is not described as inventing an imaginative story from what he hears. He checks the accounts he receives for consistency, not building a fantasy out of them.
- B) Empathizing with all the characters in: Empathizing with people involved in a case is closer to Father Brown's method than Poirot's. Poirot's method in the passage is about listening for consistency across accounts, not feeling what the people in them felt.
- C) Creating new plots for: Poirot does not invent new plots; he works with the plot that already happened and tries to reconstruct it accurately from what witnesses tell him.
- D) Detecting and analyzing the missing links in: The passage states that Poirot identifies why and how the pieces of the jig-saws don't fit together, which is exactly detecting and analyzing missing or mismatched links between different accounts, before he uncovers the truth.
The passage's own description of Poirot spotting where the pieces of the jig-saws don't fit together matches only the phrase about detecting and analyzing missing links.
The correct answer is D) Detecting and analyzing the missing links in.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
The word incorrigible is the antonym of
The word incorrigible is the antonym of
Updated On: Jul 15, 2026
- Habitual
- Unperformable
- Repentant
- Incurable
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Approach Solution - 1
The correct Answer is (C): Repentant
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
Incorrigible describes a person or habit that cannot be reformed, corrected, or made to change for the better, even after repeated attempts. The question asks for the word that means the opposite of this.
- A) Habitual: A habitual fault is one that keeps recurring, which is close in meaning to incorrigible rather than opposite to it. Someone incorrigible is often described as a habitual offender, so this is a near synonym, not an antonym.
- B) Unperformable: This word describes a task that cannot be carried out. It has no real connection to whether a person or habit can be corrected or reformed, so it does not work as either a synonym or an antonym of incorrigible.
- C) Repentant: A repentant person recognizes their fault, feels genuine regret, and is willing to change. This is precisely the opposite of being incorrigible, since an incorrigible person shows no such willingness to reform despite correction.
- D) Incurable: An incurable problem is one that cannot be fixed or cured, which lines up closely with incorrigible rather than opposing it. This is another near synonym, not the antonym the question is looking for.
Since incorrigible means resistant to being corrected, its true opposite is a word describing someone open to change and remorse, which is repentant.
The correct answer is C) Repentant.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top CLAT Questions
- In the realm of contemporary literature, the interplay between character and setting is a nuanced dance that shapes the narrative’s essence. The setting, often described with painstaking detail, becomes more than a backdrop; it becomes a character, influencing the plot and character development.
Consider, for instance, the barren expanse of the desert in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake. The arid landscape mirrors the sense of isolation felt by the protagonist, Gogol, as he navigates his identity crisis in a foreign land. The relentless sun and vast sands are not mere descriptions; they are the silent witnesses to his inner turmoil.
On the other end of the literary spectrum, there is Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things. The lush, vibrant Kerala backwaters are not just the setting; they are a character woven into the fabric of the story. The teeming, humid landscape reflects the complex web of human relationships and secrets that unravel in the narrative. This interplay is not confined to contemporary literature alone. In Shakespeare’s timeless tragedy Macbeth, the eerie and foreboding setting of the Scottish moors casts a dark shadow over the characters’ actions. The moors, shrouded in mist and mystery, serve as an ever-present omen of the impending tragedy. - The crisis of justice that is the subject matter of discussion in the media today is in fact the crisis of “justice for the middle class”. The main difference between India and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries is that whereas the middle class in these countries has reasonable access to justice, in India it does not. A vocal and powerful middle class has emerged in India since 1991. It is demanding reasonable access to justice. Much of the judicial reform effort will help meet this demand…
The question of justice for the poor is, however, an altogether different challenge. No country in the world has been able to secure justice for the poor. Most of the jails of the richest countries are filled with the poorest. The “masses” are more often victims of the criminal justice system than of crime. In India as well, jails are almost exclusively filled with the poor. The civil justice system is hardly accessible to them. They are often victimised by lawyers, touts and court staff. They are docket-excluded, a new type of untouchability. The language and the logic—and the colonial and feudal culture—of the judicial system are alien to them. It rarely takes cognisance of their needs and interests.
Their main concern, therefore, is to escape the attention of the justice system, criminal and civil. A landless Dalit person in the interior of Madhya Pradesh once gave me an insightful definition of a court from the perspective of the masses: “A court is a place where you are forcibly taken by the police to be punished; no one goes to a court.” In contrast, many lawyers and judges colloquially define a court as “a temple of justice where rights are protected”.
These sharply divergent visions mean that justice for one section is often injustice for another. Protecting the livelihood of traditional taxi and auto drivers from predatory pricing by corporate app-based taxi providers by imaginatively using the available tools of law to delay their incursion would be seen by the rich and by sections of the middle class as a failure of the judicial system, and possibly as also resulting in a downgrading of the “ease of doing business” measure. However, the masses would see such a judicial intervention as strong evidence of a good justice system. Although the conflict over competing visions of the nation and conflicting demands from social and economic segments have confined judicial reform of judicial administration mainly to “neutral” areas such as process reform, procedural law, technology, planning and court and case management, judge strength, and the workload of judges, there has been considerable improvement in these areas, and the judicial system has improved its performance.
[Extracted, with edits, from “Justice and the Two Ideas of India”, by G. Mohan Gopal, Frontline] - Everything she wanted was here, at Carignano, in Kasauli. Here, on the ridge of the mountain, in this quiet house. It was the place, and the time of life, that she had wanted and prepared for all her life-as she realized on the first day at Carignano, with a great, cool flowering of relief - and at last she had it. She wanted no one and nothing else. Whatever else came, or happened here, would be an unwelcome intrusion and distraction. This she tried to convey to the plodding postman with a cold and piercing stare from the height of the ridge onto his honest bull back. Unfortunately, he did not look up at her on the hilltop but stared stolidly down at the dust piling onto his shoes as he plodded on. A bullock-man, an oafish ox, she thought bitterly. She stepped backwards into the garden and the wind suddenly billowed up and threw the pine branches about as though to curtain her. She was grey, tall and thin and her silk sari made a sweeping, shivering sound and she fancied she could merge with the pine trees and be mistaken for one. To be a tree, no more and no less, was all she was prepared to undertake.
What pleased and satisfied her so, here at Carignano, was its barrenness. This was the chief virtue of all Kasauli of course-its starkness. It had rocks, it had pines, it had light and air. In every direction there was a sweeping view - to the north, of the mountains, to the south, of the plains. Occasionally an eagle swam through this clear unobstructed mass of light and air, that was all. And Carignano, her home on the ridge, had no more than that. Why should it? The sun shone on its white walls. Its windows were open the ones facing north opened on to the blue waves of the Himalayas flowing out and up to the line of ice and snow sketched upon the sky, while those that faced south looked down the plunging cliff to the plain stretching out, flat and sere to the blurred horizon.
Yes, there were some apricot trees close to the house. There were clumps of iris that had finished blooming. There was the kitchen with a wing of smoke lifting out of its chimney and a stack of wood outside its door. But these were incidental, almost unimportant.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Fire on the Mountain” by Anita Desai] - English literature is a vast and diverse field that has left an indelible mark on the world of letters. From the eloquent plays of William Shakespeare to the complex novels of Jane Austen and the profound poetry of William Wordsworth, English literature offers a window into the human experience. One of the luminaries of English literature is William Shakespeare, often hailed as the greatest playwright in the history of English language. His works, including Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet, are celebrated for their exploration of human nature, love, ambition, and tragedy. His characters, such as the tormented Hamlet and the star-crossed lovers Romeo and Juliet, continue to captivate readers and audiences worldwide.
The 19th century ushered in a new era of literary giants. Jane Austen’s novels, such as Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, provide incisive social commentary through the lens of wit and romance. Austen’s heroines, like Elizabeth Bennet and Elinor Dashwood, remain beloved literary figures known for their intelligence and resilience. The Romantic era brought forth poets like William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who celebrated * 8 UG the beauty of nature and the emotional intensity of the individual. Wordsworth’s ‘‘I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud’’ and Coleridge’s ‘‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’’ are testament to the power of the written words to evoke profound emotions and imagery. Moving towards 20th century, English literature continued to evolve. Virginia Woolf’s ground-breaking novel Mrs. Dalloway explored the inner thoughts and lives of its characters with a modernist narrative style. Dystopian visions, as seen in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four provided stark warnings about the dangers of totalitarianism and the erosion of individual freedom.
Today, English literature is a global phenomenon, transcending borders and languages. Indian authors like Arundhati Roy, with her novel The God of Small Things, have won prestigious international literary awards. The book not only explores intricate family dynamics but also delves into the broader socio-political landscape of India. In summary, English literature is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the written word. It encompasses an array of authors, themes, and styles that continue to captivate and inspire readers across the world. - On the evening of the 10th, General Dyer arrived at Amritsar, and the Deputy-Commissioner handed over the civil power to him. He issued a proclamation by word of mouth that no meetings should be held. Two days later, after there had been no sort of riot, nor murder, General Dyer heard that a meeting was to be held at the Jallianwala Bagh. He proceeded there with about fifty troops, half British, half Indian, and a certain number of Ghurkas, armed with their kukris. The Jallianwala Bagh is an open space, half a mile square, which has one entry wide enough for three persons. The troops got in and lined up on a mound of debris. The walls, seven feet high, and the surrounding houses enclosed the people. There were, too, three alleys through which the people might have been able to pass. Within thirty seconds of the troops getting in, General Dyer gave orders to fire, and the crowd of people, estimated at anything from 5,000 to 20,000, who were sitting on the ground peacefully listening to the mob oratory, were fired on. The result of the troops’ fire into the mass of people we do not know. But we do know that Dyer’s own estimate of the casualties resulting from ten minutes continual individual firing, was 400 to 500 killed and 1,500 wounded. The people were not able to escape. They were people who had not offered any violence and who had not been warned. These people were shot down. After ten minutes, the ammunition was exhausted and the troops marched off, and they left 1,500 wounded there. There were men lying there for two days, dying of thirst, eating the ground, bleeding to death and nobody to look after them. Those who lived nearby came and carried away some of the wounded from the heap of dead and dying, but the unfortunate country people died there miserably of their wounds. This is what is done in 1919 in British India…
Centuries hence you will find Indian children brought up to this spot, just as they visit now the Cawnpore Well, and you can imagine the feelings of these Indians for generations over this terrible business.
[Col. Wedgwood, MP, speaking in the British Parliament, 22 December 1919]
View More Questions