CDS English · Reading Comprehension
Sentence pairs: premise, extension, push-back, degree and word use
Some sentence-pair items use a wider set of labels: premise, precursor, extends, analogy, fully or partly consistent. Another kind asks whether an underlined word is used rightly in each of two sentences.
Why this matters
These items sit in the same block as the four core relations, but the options are wider and two of them often look nearly right. Three questions settle most of them: which sentence comes first in logic or time, does S2 build on S1 or push back, and how strongly does it support it. The underlined-word items are a different job altogether: grammar and word choice, judged one sentence at a time.
Concept 1 of 5: Premise, reason, precursor, consequence: which came first
Some labels describe order. A premise or a reason supports a claim. A precursor comes earlier and leads to an event. A consequence follows from it. Ask which sentence is the support or cause, and which is the claim or result.
Definition
The terms:
- Premise / reason: S2 is the support that the claim in S1 rests on.
- Precursor: S2 happened earlier and led to what S1 describes.
- Consequence / follows the first: S2 results from S1.
The method:
- Join them with because: 'S1, because S2.' If it reads well, S2 is the reason or premise.
- Join them with so: 'S1, so S2.' If it reads well, S2 is a consequence of S1.
- Check time: if S2's event came first and drove S1's, S2 is a precursor.
- Cut labels of opposition (rebuts, contradicts, dilutes, disputes) when nothing in S1 is denied or weakened.
Worked example
S1: The regiment won the inter-army shooting trophy. S2: Its soldiers had practised on the range every morning for a year. The second sentence (a) is a precursor to the first (b) follows the first (c) contradicts the first (d) dilutes the first
Practice this conceptself-check · 4 quick reps
The same idea in a real exam question:
CDS · 2024 · CDS (I) 2024 — English · Q90Moderate
Example 1 · Reading Comprehension · Sentence Pairs: Premise, Extension, Degree and Word Use
Directions: co-relationship of second sentence to the first
S1: The best ever cricket captain India has ever had is XYZ.
S2: As captain, XYZ has won considerably more matches for India than any other captain.
Reversing the direction
Premise and consequence name the same link from opposite ends. Test with because and with so. Only one of the two joined sentences reads well.
An opposition label when nothing is denied
Rebuts, dilutes, disputes and contradicts need S2 to deny or weaken S1. If S2 only explains or follows from S1, cut them all.
Concept 2 of 5: Building on S1: expands, extends, analogy, restates
When S2 agrees with S1 and goes on from it, the options ask HOW it goes on. Does it add detail, carry the story to the next stage, apply S1's rule to a field, give a parallel case, add a separate fact, or say the same thing again? Each label names one of these moves.
Definition
The method:
- First check that S2 does not push back: both can be true and nothing in S1 is limited.
- Then ask what S2 adds, and match it to a row below.
- Markers help: 'much in the same way', 'just as', 'likewise' signal a parallel case; 'after', 'then', 'once' signal the next stage.
- If S1 is a saying or an image and S2 says its meaning plainly, that is a reassertion, not an explanation.
The labels used in these items:
| Label | What S2 does | Quick test | Sitting |
|---|---|---|---|
| expands the first | adds detail inside S1's topic, or widens it to a related area | S1, and more about it: S2 | 2024 (I), 2025 (I) |
| extends the first | carries S1's process or story to its next stage | S1; next, S2 | 2025 (I) |
| develops an axiom based on the first | turns S1's general rule into a rule for one field | S1 in general; so in this field, S2 | 2024 (I) |
| provides an analogy for the first | gives a parallel case that works the same way | just as S1, so S2 | 2024 (I) |
| provides additional information | adds a separate fact of the same kind beside S1 | S1. Also, S2. Each stands alone. | 2025 (II) |
| reiterates the axiom stated in the first | says the same idea again, often in more general words | S1; that is, S2 | 2025 (II) |
| provides a metaphorical reassertion of the first | S1 is a saying or an image; S2 says the same thing without the picture | S1 is a picture; S2 is its plain meaning | 2025 (I) |
| explains / explicates the first (often a wrong option) | gives the reason behind S1 or how it works | S1, and here is why: S2 | 2024 (I), 2025 (I) |
| coincides with the first (often a wrong option) | is the very same statement, or happens at the same moment | S1 and S2 are one fact | 2025 (I) |
First rule out push-back, then ask what S2 adds: detail, next stage, rule for a field, parallel case, separate fact, or the same idea again.
Practice this conceptself-check · 4 quick reps
The same idea in a real exam question:
CDS · 2024 · CDS (I) 2024 — English · Q89Moderate
Example 2 · Reading Comprehension · Sentence Pairs: Premise, Extension, Degree and Word Use
Directions: co-relationship of second sentence to the first
S1: The concept of Ahimsa was adopted by Gandhiji after he was introduced to it by Tolstoy. The latter first read about it in German translation of Thirukkural, the great moral treatise in Tamil.
S2: Much in the same way that Gandhi was influenced by Tolstoy, in the United States of America, Martin Luther King Jr. shaped his Civil Rights Movement based on Gandhian principles.
Extends or expands?
Extends moves forward to the next stage (hypothesis, then proven thesis). Expands stays on the same point and adds detail or widens it (an adjective for the rose, then the rose as a poetic symbol).
Additional information is not confirmation
A second fact of the same kind (a state bird beside the national bird) neither proves nor limits S1. It simply adds to it.
Reasserting a saying is not explaining it
When S1 is a proverb and S2 states the same lesson in plain words, the label is a (metaphorical) reassertion. Explains would need S2 to give a reason why the proverb is true.
Concept 3 of 5: Pushing back: contradicts, contrasts, limits, qualifies
These are the core relations in new clothes. Contradicts, disputes, annuls and negates all mean S2 makes S1 false. Establishes limits on means the same as qualifies. Run the same test: can both be true, and is it the same subject?
Definition
The labels:
- contradicts / negates / disputes / annuls / rebuts: if S2 is true, S1 cannot be.
- contrasts / offers a contrast to: a different case or approach set beside S1; both stand.
- establishes limits on / qualifies: S1 stands, but S2 marks where it stops.
- Labels of support, offered as wrong options here: corroborates, confirms, coincides with, correlates to.
The method:
- Can both be true? No: contradicts.
- Both true, same subject, and S2 marks an edge, an exception or a condition: qualifies, or establishes limits.
- Both true, and S2 brings a different subject or a different approach: contrasts.
- An absolute claim (all, every, in every respect) falls to a single counter-case: that is contradiction, not a limit.
Worked example
S1: Maps help travellers find their way. S2: No map can show a road built after it was printed. The second sentence (a) contradicts the assertion of the first (b) explains the basis of the first (c) establishes limits on the assertion of the first (d) corroborates the first
Practice this conceptself-check · 4 quick reps
The same idea in a real exam question:
CDS · 2025 · CDS (II) 2025 — English · Q41Hard
Example 3 · Reading Comprehension · Sentence Pairs: Premise, Extension, Degree and Word Use
Directions: In the following items a pair of sentences (S1, S2) is given. Select the most appropriate and relevant co-relationship of the second sentence to the first sentence from among the options (a), (b), (c) and (d), and mark your response on the Answer Sheet accordingly.
S1: Failure is the stepping stone to success.
S2: Successive failures are not however successive stepping stones to success.
New labels, same test
Annuls, disputes and rebuts look harder than contradicts, but they ask the same question: can both be true? Translate the label into one of the four core relations, then run the test.
Two 'but' sentences are not a contradiction
S1: one country grew fast but gave up democracy. S2: another grew fast and kept it. Both are true of different countries, so S2 offers a contrast. Different subjects cannot contradict each other.
Concept 4 of 5: Degree words: fully, to an extent, reinforces, correlates
Some options grade how much S2 supports S1: fully, to an extent, marginally. Others name a looser tie: S2 correlates to S1 when the two go together without one proving the other. Match strength against strength.
Definition
The terms:
- fully consistent / fully reinforces: S2 backs S1 as far as S1 goes.
- reinforces to an extent / marginally consistent: S2 backs S1 only partly, because S2 is weaker or narrower than S1's claim.
- reinforces: S2 adds a fact that strengthens S1.
- correlates to: S2 is a related fact or trend on the same side as S1, but neither proves S1 nor simply follows from it.
The method:
- Find the strength word in each sentence: never, always, all, every against not always, some, often, may.
- S1 claims more than S2 can back (every case against some cases): support only to an extent.
- S2 backs S1 at full strength: fully consistent.
- S2 goes together with S1 but is a separate fact: correlates.
- Cut 'definitely follows' unless S2 is a result of S1, and 'is the only possible explanation' unless nothing else could explain S1.
Worked example
S1: Learning a language well takes years of regular practice. S2: Army interpreters train for three to four years before they are posted. The second sentence (a) is not consistent with the first (b) is fully consistent with the first (c) is marginally consistent with the first (d) is the only possible explanation for the first
Practice this conceptself-check · 4 quick reps
The same idea in a real exam question:
CDS · 2025 · CDS (I) 2025 — English · Q46Hard
Example 4 · Reading Comprehension · Sentence Pairs: Premise, Extension, Degree and Word Use
Directions: In the following items a pair of statements (S1, S2) is given. Select the most appropriate and relevant co-relationship of the second statement to the first from among the options (a), (b), (c) and (d), and mark your response on the Answer Sheet accordingly.
S1: The final outcome can never be predicted incontrovertibly.
S2: All outcomes are based on variables that cannot always be fully understood.
Ignoring the strength word
A reason that holds 'often' cannot fully back a claim about 'every case'. Before choosing between fully and to an extent, circle the strength word in each sentence.
Correlates is not confirms
Two facts can point the same way (a cleaner engine and the phasing out of an older one) without one proving the other. If S2 is related but is not evidence for S1, choose correlates.
Concept 5 of 5: Is the underlined word right? Judge each sentence alone
A different format. Each of two sentences has one underlined word. Decide whether each is used correctly, then pick one of four boxes: S1 right and S2 wrong, S1 wrong and S2 right, both wrong, or both right. This is grammar and word choice, not logic. The two sentences are not linked.
Definition
The method:
- Cover S2. Judge only S1's underlined word: is it the right word for this sentence? Mark R or W.
- Cover S1. Judge S2's underlined word the same way.
- One sentence being right tells you nothing about the other. The same word may be right in one and wrong in the other.
- Then choose the box. 'Both right' and 'both wrong' are real answers; do not avoid them.
- Judge only the underlined word, not the rest of the sentence.
The word pairs tested:
- since / for: since + a point in time (since Monday, since the war ended); for + a length of time (for two years, for a long time).
- shall / will: both mark the future. Shall goes with I and we in formal English; will goes with every person, including I and we.
- any / some: any in negatives, questions and after whether or if; some in plain positive statements and offers.
- between / among: between two; among three or more, or a group.
- especially / specially: especially = particularly, above all; specially = for one particular purpose.
Worked example
S1: The sweets were shared between the whole class. S2: She asked whether there was any mail for her. (a) S1 is right and S2 is wrong (b) S1 is wrong and S2 is right (c) Both S1 and S2 are wrong (d) Both S1 and S2 are right
Practice this conceptself-check · 4 quick reps
The same idea in a real exam question:
CDS · 2024 · CDS (I) 2024 — English · Q119Moderate
Example 5 · Reading Comprehension · Sentence Pairs: Premise, Extension, Degree and Word Use
Directions: judge whether the underlined word is used correctly in each of sentences S1 and S2
S1: I have not seen her since a long time.
S2: It has been a while since I saw her.
Letting one sentence decide the other
Students judge S1, then assume S2 must be the opposite. The four boxes include 'both right' and 'both wrong' because the sentences are independent. Judge each with the other covered.
Will with I and we is not wrong
Shall with I and we is formal, but will is correct with every person. Do not mark 'We will go' or 'They will need' wrong.
Judging words that are not underlined
Only the underlined word is being tested. A tense or a comma elsewhere in the sentence does not change the box you choose.
Summary — formulas & gotchas at a glance
A revision cheat-sheet for the formulas and gotchas above. Click any concept name to jump back to its full explanation.
Reference tables (1)
Building on S1: expands, extends, analogy, restates9 rows
| Label | What S2 does | Quick test | Sitting |
|---|---|---|---|
| expands the first | adds detail inside S1's topic, or widens it to a related area | S1, and more about it: S2 | 2024 (I), 2025 (I) |
| extends the first | carries S1's process or story to its next stage | S1; next, S2 | 2025 (I) |
| develops an axiom based on the first | turns S1's general rule into a rule for one field | S1 in general; so in this field, S2 | 2024 (I) |
| provides an analogy for the first | gives a parallel case that works the same way | just as S1, so S2 | 2024 (I) |
| provides additional information | adds a separate fact of the same kind beside S1 | S1. Also, S2. Each stands alone. | 2025 (II) |
| reiterates the axiom stated in the first | says the same idea again, often in more general words | S1; that is, S2 | 2025 (II) |
| provides a metaphorical reassertion of the first | S1 is a saying or an image; S2 says the same thing without the picture | S1 is a picture; S2 is its plain meaning | 2025 (I) |
| explains / explicates the first (often a wrong option) | gives the reason behind S1 or how it works | S1, and here is why: S2 | 2024 (I), 2025 (I) |
| coincides with the first (often a wrong option) | is the very same statement, or happens at the same moment | S1 and S2 are one fact | 2025 (I) |
First rule out push-back, then ask what S2 adds: detail, next stage, rule for a field, parallel case, separate fact, or the same idea again.
Watch out for (12)
- Reversing the direction→ Premise, reason, precursor, consequence: which came first
- An opposition label when nothing is denied→ Premise, reason, precursor, consequence: which came first
- Extends or expands?→ Building on S1: expands, extends, analogy, restates
- Additional information is not confirmation→ Building on S1: expands, extends, analogy, restates
- Reasserting a saying is not explaining it→ Building on S1: expands, extends, analogy, restates
- New labels, same test→ Pushing back: contradicts, contrasts, limits, qualifies
- Two 'but' sentences are not a contradiction→ Pushing back: contradicts, contrasts, limits, qualifies
- Ignoring the strength word→ Degree words: fully, to an extent, reinforces, correlates
- Correlates is not confirms→ Degree words: fully, to an extent, reinforces, correlates
- Letting one sentence decide the other→ Is the underlined word right? Judge each sentence alone
- Will with I and we is not wrong→ Is the underlined word right? Judge each sentence alone
- Judging words that are not underlined→ Is the underlined word right? Judge each sentence alone
Test yourself on Reading Comprehension
25 past CDS questions from this chapter, timed at 25 minutes and marked the way the exam marks it. You see your score and every answer the moment you finish. Free to start.