Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

The only country in South East Asia that was never colonized by a European power is :

The only country in South East Asia that was never colonized by a European power is : Correct Answer Thailand

দক্ষিণ - পূর্ব এশিয়ার দেশ থাইল্যান্ড, যা কখনো কোন দেশের উপনিবেশ ছিলনা। থাইল্যান্ড শব্দের অর্থস্বাধীন ভূমি বা মুক্তভূমি। থাইল্যান্ডের পূর্বনাম ছিল শ্যাম দেশ।

Related Questions

In the context of bilateral trade negotiations between India and the European Union, what is the difference between European Commission and European Council? 1. European Commission represents the EU in trade negotiations whereas the European Council partici­pates in the legislation of matters pertaining to economic policies of the European Union. 2. European Commission comprises of the Heads of State or government of member countries whereas the European Council comprises of the persons nominated by European Parliament. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
A road network has parallel roads, which are equidistant from each other and running North-South or East-West only. The road junctions A, B, C, H and X are such that A is East of B and West of C. H is South-West of C and South-East of B. B is South-East of X. Which of the junctions are the farthest South and the farthest East?
The only country in Asia that was never colonized by a European power is -
On December 22, the sun:
1. is not visible at north pole
2. is only visible for a few minutes at the Antarctic Circle
3. rises south of east and sets south of west at the Tropic of Cancer
4. rises south of east and set south of west at the equator
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? The writer was working at a university in which country?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? Why do some French people think that Hindi is the only Indian language?
If ‘South – west’ becomes ‘East’, ‘West’ becomes ‘South – east’, ‘North’ becomes ‘South – west’, then what will ‘South’ become?
If North is called North west , West is called South west , South is called South east and so on . A person walks straight from South west to North east and then turns left . Walks straight and again turns left . Now at what direction he is facing ?
India is a member of which among the following? 1. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation 2. Association of South-East Asian Nations 3. East Asia Summit Select the correct answer using the code given below.
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? What wrong with respect to India are the Europeans responsible for?