Question:

IMPERVIOUS: PENETRATE::

Show Hint

Pay close attention to prefixes like "in-", "im-", "ir-", and "un-", which all mean "not." They are often a key part of the logic in analogy questions, frequently setting up a "cannot be X" relationship.
Updated On: Oct 1, 2025
  • ineluctable: avoid
  • ineradicable: damage
  • boorish: flatter
  • irrepressible: censure
  • disruptive: restrain
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This analogy relates a quality (adjective) to an action (verb) that cannot be performed on something with that quality.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The relationship is: Something that is IMPERVIOUS cannot be PENETRATED. The prefix "im-" means "not." The relationship is "cannot be X-ed."
- (A) ineluctable: avoid: Something that is INELUCTABLE is inescapable or inevitable. Therefore, it cannot be AVOIDED. This is a perfect match. The prefix "in-" means "not."
- (B) ineradicable: damage: Something that is ineradicable cannot be erased or removed. It can still be damaged.
- (C) boorish: flatter: A boorish person is rough and bad-mannered. It is possible to flatter them, though they may not respond well. The relationship is not "cannot be."
- (D) irrepressible: censure: Something irrepressible cannot be repressed or held back. It can be censured (criticized).
- (E) disruptive: restrain: Something that is disruptive can be restrained (though it might be difficult). The relationship is not "cannot be."
Step 3: Final Answer:
Something that is IMPERVIOUS cannot be PENETRATED, just as something that is INELUCTABLE cannot be AVOIDED.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Questions Asked in GRE exam

View More Questions