What are Para Jumbles?
or Paragraph Jumbles, as the name refers to a paragraph wherein the sentences of the paragraph are jumbled and are assigned with some number or letter. We are required to arrange the sentences in a proper manner such that they link and form a coherent paragraph, and we must do this rearrangement by choosing the appropriate option from the given option.
This section of english is definitely not an easy section and is also a very common section in the most prestigious exams like CAT, IBPS, SSB, SSC, RRB and many others. Hence, a good understanding and practice are very much required for para jumbles.
SSC Exam Test and Preparation 2023
Prepare for SSC CGL, CHSL, SSC MTS, Junior Engineer 2023
More than 1200+ detailed question and answers
SSC Exam Test and Preparation 2023 – Download Now!
Practice Questions : For Para Jumbles
Directions: The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) given below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequence of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer.
1. People with dyslexia have difficulty with print-reading, and people with autism spectrum disorder have difficulty with mind-reading.
2. An example of a lost cognitive instinct is mind-reading: our capacity to think of ourselves and others as having beliefs, desires, thoughts and feelings.
3. Mind-reading looks increasingly like literacy, a skill we know for sure is not in our genes, since scripts have been around for only 5,000-6,000 years.
4. Print-reading, like mind-reading varies across cultures, depends heavily on certain parts of the brain, and is subject to developmental disorders.
1 must come at the end because it is contrasting a specific feature of print-reading and mind-reading. Before 1, we must have the ideas of print reading and mind-reading introduced to us.
41 is definitely a pair because, and we must introduce mind-reading before statement 4. The point is should we have 2 or 3 as the opening sentence? 2 has a better introductory tone, and statement 3 goes into the detail of mind-reading. Thus we must 23 as one pair and 41 as the other, with 23 coming first. 2341 is thus the right sequence.
1. If you’ve seen a little line of text on websites that says something like "customers who bought this also enjoyed that” you have experienced this collaborative filtering firsthand.
2. The problem with these algorithms is that they don’t take into account a host of nuances and circumstances that might interfere with their accuracy.
3. If you just bought a gardening book for your cousin, you might get a flurry of links to books about gardening, recommended just for you! – the algorithm has no way of knowing you hate gardening and only bought the book as a gift.
4. Collaborative filtering is a mathematical algorithm by which correlations and cooccurrences of behaviors are tracked and then used to make recommendations.
Statement 4 opens the para by introducing the idea of collaborative filtering. 1 takes the idea further by giving a first-and example of collaborative filtering. 2 talks about a problem with the algorithms of collaborative filtering, and 3 gives an example of that problem. Thus 4123 form a coherent paragraph.
1. We’ll all live under mob rule until then, which doesn’t help anyone.
2. Perhaps we need to learn to condense the feedback we receive online so that 100 replies carry the same weight as just one.
3. As we grow more comfortable with social media conversations being part of the way we interact every day, we are going to have to learn how to deal with legitimate criticism.
4. A new norm will arise where it is considered unacceptable to reply with the same point that dozens of others have already.
Statement 3 opens the idea by saying that we need to learn how to deal with legitimate criticism.
By fixing the position of 1, we can arrange the sentences in the right order. 1 says ‘we will all live under mob rule until then…’ To what does this then refer? It must refer to some specific time or event. It refers to the time till we have new norm (read statement 4). A new norm will arise… we will have to live under a mob rule until then… Thus 4 and 1 form a pair. 2 cannot come after 1, nor does it open the para. The best place for 2 is after 3.
1. To the uninitiated listener, atonal music can sound like chaotic, random noise.
2. Atonality is a condition of music in which the constructs of the music do not ‘live’ within the confines of a particular key signature, scale, or mode.
3. After you realize the amount of knowledge, skill, and technical expertise required to compose or perform it, your tune may change, so to speak.
4. However, atonality is one of the most important movements in 20th century music.
The presence of ‘however’ in statement 4 suggests that 4 must be preceded by a contrary idea. Statement 1 has that. Thus 1 and 4 form a mandatory pair. 3 says ‘your tune may change’. In other words, ‘your attitude may change’. That attitude is there in statement 1. Thus 143 form pair because 3 cannot come before 1. You must state the negative attitude, and then say that your attitude may change after you realize the amount of skill required to come or perform such music. Statement 2 can come only at the start and not at the end. Thus 2143 is the right sequence.
1. Such a belief in the harmony of nature requires a purpose presumably imposed by the goodness and wisdom of a deity.
2. These parts, all fit together into an integrated, well-ordered system that was created by design.
3. Historically, the notion of a balance of nature is part observational, part metaphysical, and not scientific in any way.
4. It is an example of an ancient belief system called teleology, the notion that what we call nature has a predetermined destiny associated with its component parts.
Statement 4 says ‘it is an example of an ancient belief system...’. You must ask what noun the pronoun ‘it’ is referring to. It can only refer to the noun phrase ‘the notion of balance’. Thus 3 and 4 form a pair. Now we can have 3412 or 3421
2 has the phrase ‘these parts’, what noun is ‘these parts’ referring to. It is referring to the noun ‘component parts’ in statement 4. Thus, 342 form a pair. In fact, 4 and 2 form one unit. ‘Such a belief’ in 4 refers to the belief in 4.
1. Conceptualisations of ‘women’s time’ as contrary to clock-time and clock-time as synonymous with economic rationalism are two of the deleterious results of this representation.
2. While dichotomies of ‘men’s time’, ‘women’s time’, clock-time, and caring time can be analytically useful, this article argues that everyday caring practices incorporate a multiplicity of times; and both men and women can engage in these multiple-times
3. When the everyday practices of working sole fathers and working sole mothers are carefully examined to explore conceptualisations of gendered time, it is found that caring time is often more focused on the clock than generally theorised.
4. Clock-time has been consistently represented in feminist literature as a masculine artefact representative of a ‘time is money’ perspective.
Statement 1 has the demonstrative pronoun ‘this representation’. It must refer to something. Statement 4 says clock-time has been consistently represented. Statement 1 talks about this representation. 41 is a pair. The point is whether 4132 is correct or 4123. To sort out this confusion, we must read the 2nd sentence given in the question. Statement 1 speaks of a negative outcome by mentioning the deleterious results. This negative outcome is further extended in statement 3 in which the author says ‘it is found that caring time is often more focused on the clock than generally theorised’. In para jumbles, we must keep similar ideas together, thus the deleterious results in 1 and the biased focus in 3 must be kept together. 413 forms pair, with 2 coming in the end because it is a sort of conclusion in which the author mentions all the different ‘times’.
1. Impartiality and objectivity are fiendishly difficult concepts that can cause all sorts of injustices even if transparently implemented.
2. It encourages us into bubbles of people we know and like, while blinding us to different perspectives, but the deeper problem of ‘transparency’ lies in the words “…and much more”.
3. Twitter’s website says that “tweets you are likely to care about most will show up first in your timeline…based on accounts you interact with most, tweets you engage with, and much more.”
4. We are only told some of the basic principles, and we can’t see the algorithm itself, making it hard for citizens to analyse the system sensibly or fairly or be convinced of its impartiality and objectivity.
Right from the start we can sense that sentence 1 is likely to start the paragraph. It introduces the idea of ‘impartiality and objectivity’. Sentences 2,3 and 4 form one unit because they all revolve around Twitter. The algorithm that statement 4 talks about must be about algorithm that twitter would be using. The pronoun ‘it’ in statement 2 refers to Twitter. Thus 2 must come after 3. 32 is a pair. The problem of transparency in statement 2 is further elaborated in statement 4. Statement 2 says that the problem of transparency lies in something…statement 4 takes over by saying ..we are only told some of the basic principles..(the problem of transparency is continued).
1. The woodland’s canopy receives most of the sunlight that falls on the trees.
2. Swifts do not confine themselves to woodlands, but hunt wherever there are insects in the air.
3. With their streamlined bodies, swifts are agile flyers, ideally adapted to twisting and turning through the air as they chase flying insects – the creatures that form their staple diet.
4. Hundreds of thousands of insects fly in the sunshine up above the canopy, some falling prey to swifts and swallows
This is a difficult question as there very little to choose from two sequences 1423 and 1432. Both the sequences are plausible, though 1 and 4 will come before 2 and 3. ‘the canopy’ in statement 4 refers to the woodland’s canopy in statement 1. Thus 1 and 4 form a pair. The hunting process of the swifts is described in statement 3, and this hunting is not just confined to woodlands is what statement 2 says. Thus 3 and 2 form a pair. The right sequence is 1432.
1. But now we have another group: the unwitting enablers.
2. Democracy and high levels of inequality of the kind that have come to characterize the United States are simply incompatible.
3. Believing these people are working for a better world, they are, actually, at most, chipping away at the margins, making slight course corrections, ensuring the system goes on as it is, uninterrupted.
4. Very rich people will always use money to maintain their political and economic power.
There is little doubt that statement 2 will open the paragraph. The sentence says that democracy and high levels of inequality are simple incompatible. Why? Because very rich people will always use money to maintain their political and economic power. Thus 2 and 4 form a pair. Statement 1 says that now apart from the rich people we have another group: the unwitting enablers. What they do is described in sentence 3.
1. The eventual diagnosis was skin cancer and after treatment all seemed well.
2. The viola player didn’t know what it was; nor did her GP.
3. Then a routine scan showed it had come back and spread to her lungs.
4. It started with a lump on Cathy Perkins’ index finger.
The clue to the sequence lies in the pronoun ‘it’, and in the phrase ‘had come back’, which suggests that it must have gone first, and then it must have come back. The pronoun ‘it’ refers to a disease, and is most likely to refer to the noun ‘skin cancer’. Also, we must look for that sentence in which ‘the skin cancer’ must have gone back. Sentence 1 has the noun ‘skin cancer’ and says that the treatment had gone well. This connects sentence 1 with 3. 13 is a pair. Statement 4 is likely to start the paragraph because it opens the idea by suggesting that something had started. So the idea goes like this: it started with a lump and no one knew what it was. Thus, 4 and 2 form a pair. After this must have come the diagnosis. Thus 4213 is the right sequence.
1. It was his taxpayers who had to shell out as much as $1.6bn over 10 years to employees of failed companies.
2. Companies in many countries routinely engage in such activities which means that the employees are left with unpaid entitlements
3. Deliberate and systematic liquidation of a company to avoid liabilities and then restarting the business is called phoenixing.
4. The Australian Minister for Revenue and Services discovered in an audit that phoenixing had cost the Australian economy between 2.9bn and 5.1bn last year.
The pronoun ‘such activities’ in statement 2 must refer to some activities. The only noun it could refer to is phoenixing, which has been introduced in sentence 3. Since statement 3 opens the idea of phoenixing, it should start the paragraph. After statement 3 we can have either 4 or 2. 2 makes more sense because it further adds more information about the idea of phoenixing. Thus 3 and 2 form a pair, and 4 and 1 form another pair because ‘his taxpayers’ in statement 1 should refer to a noun, which can be found in statement 4 in the Australian minister for Revenue and Services.
1. They would rather do virtuous side projects assiduously as long as these would not compel them into doing their day jobs more honourably or reduce the profit margins.
2. They would fund a million of the buzzwordy programs rather than fundamentally question the rules of their game or alter their own behavior to reduce the harm of the existing distorted, inefficient and unfair rules.
3. Like the dieter who would rather do anything to lose weight than actually eat less, the business elite would save the world through social-impact-investing and philanthro-capitalism.
4. Doing the right thing — and moving away from their win-win mentality — would involve real sacrifice; instead, it’s easier to focus on their pet projects and initiatives.
Statements 1 and 2 have the pronoun ‘they’, which is likely to refer to a noun. That noun is ‘business elite’ in statement 3. Thus statement 3 would come before statement 1 and 2.
Statement 3 opens the paragraph by comparing a dieter with the business elite. The idea of social-impact-investing and philanthro-capitalism in statement 3 connects with ‘they would fund a million of the buzzwordy programs…’ in statement 2. Thus 32 form a pair.
4 and 1 form a pair because in statement 4 ‘doing the right thing would demand real sacrifice’ and ‘they would rather do virtuous side project assiduously’.
1. Self-management is thus defined as the ‘individual’s ability to manage the symptoms, treatment, physical and psychosocial consequences and lifestyle changes inherent in living with a chronic condition’.
2. Most people with progressive diseases like dementia prefer to have control over their own lives and health-care for as long as possible.
3. Having control means, among other things, that patients themselves perform self-management activities.
4. Supporting people in decisions and actions that promote self-management is called self-management support requiring a cooperative relationship between the patient, the family, and the professionals.
There is no doubt that statements 2 and 3 form a pair because they both speak of ‘having control’. Statement 2 says ‘most people … prefer to have control…’, while statement 3 says ‘having control means…’. Thus 2 and 3 form a pair. The idea of self-management is further elaborated on by ‘self-management support’, which has been introduced in statement 4. Now we come to the placement of statement 1. As we see, statement 1 is not about self-management support, but about self-management. Thus 1 must come before 4 because in 4 we have shifted our discussion from self-management to self-management support. Statement 1 is the intermediate conclusion for statements 2 and 3.
1. In the era of smart world, however, ‘Universal Basic Income’ is an ineffective instrument which cannot address the potential breakdown of the social contract when large swathes of the population would effectively be unemployed.
2. In the era of industrial revolution, the abolition of child labour, poor laws and the growth of trade unions helped families cope with the pressures of mechanised work.
3. Growing inequality could be matched by a creeping authoritarianism that is bolstered by technology that is increasingly able to peer into the deepest vestiges of our lives.
4. New institutions emerge which recognise ways in which workers could contribute to and benefit by economic growth when, rather than if, their jobs are automated.
By reading the statements, we get to know that 213 form a pair. Statement 2 and statement 3 are the two contrasting ideas. 2 and 1 will form a pair. The idea of growing inequality in statement 3 is a consequence of ‘large swathes of population getting unemployed’, as indicated in statement 1. Thus we see that 2, 1 and 3 form a coherent paragraph. The difficult thing is the placement of statement 4. It could come at the start or at the end.
For this we have to understand the contents of statement 4. It says that ‘new institutions emerge…’. Both statements 2 and 1 have those new institutions. In statement 2 it is trade unions, while in statement 1 it is universal basic income. Thus the idea stated in 4 finds further substantiation in statements 2 and 1. 4 will come at the start. 4213 form a coherent paragraph.