option
list | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"The effects of human activities on prehistoric wildlife",
"The origins of the hunter-gatherer way of life",
"The diets of large animals of the Pleistocene epoch",
"The change in climate at the end of the Pleistocene epoch"
] | What does the passage mainly discuss? | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 0 |
[
"occasionally",
"unexpectedly",
"previously",
"certainly"
] | The word "Undoubtedly" in line 1 is closest in meaning to | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 3 |
[
"parts",
"problems",
"changes",
"varieties"
] | The word "components" in line 2 is closest in meaning to | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 0 |
[
"Many of the animals that became extinct were quite large.",
"Humans migrated into certain regions around the time that major extinctions occurred.",
"There is evidence that new species were arriving in areas inhabited by humans.",
"Humans began to keep and care for certain animals."
] | Which of the following is mentioned as supporting the Pleistocene overkill hypothesis? | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 1 |
[
"caused by",
"whereas",
"in addition to",
"in favor of"
] | The word "Besides" in line 14 is closest in meaning to | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 2 |
[
"became extinct before the Pleistocene epoch",
"was unusually large for its time",
"was not able to compete with humans",
"caused the extinction of several species"
] | The author mentions saber-toothed cats in line 17 as an example of a carnivore that | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 2 |
[
"human hunters",
"game animals",
"other predators",
"large mammals"
] | The word "they" in line 22 refers to | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 2 |
[
"Some humans hunt more frequently than gray wolves.",
"Gray wolves hunt in larger groups than some humans.",
"Some humans can hunt larger animals than gray wolves can hunt.",
"Some humans prey on animals of all ages, but gray wolves concentrate their efforts on young animals."
] | According to the passage , what is one difference between the hunting done by some humans and the hunting done by gray wolves? | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 3 |
[
"large",
"escaping",
"preferred",
"local"
] | The word "favored" in line 26 is closest in meaning to | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 2 |
[
"the effect of climate changes on large game animals",
"large animals moving into a new environment",
"humans hunting some species more than others",
"older animals not being able to compete with younger animals"
] | According to the passage , the imbalances discussed in paragraph 3 may have resulted from | Many prehistoric people subsisted as hunters and gatherers. Undoubtedly, game animals, including some very large species, provided major components of human diets. An important controversy centering on the question of human effects on prehistoric wildlife concerns the sudden disappearance of so many species of large animals at or near the end of the Pleistocene epoch. Most paleontologists suspect that abrupt changes in climate led to the mass extinctions. Others, however, have concluded that prehistoric people drove many of those species to extinction through overhunting. In their "Pleistocene overkill hypothesis," they cite what seems to be a remarkable coincidence between the arrival of prehistoric peoples in North and South America and the time during which mammoths, giant ground sloths, the giant bison, and numerous other large mammals became extinct.
Perhaps the human species was driving others to extinction long before the dawn of history. Hunter-gatherers may have contributed to Pleistocene extinctions in more indirect ways. Besides overhunting, at least three other kinds of effects have been suggested: direct competition, imbalances between competing species of game animals, and early agricultural practices. Direct competition may have brought about the demise of large carnivores such as the saber-toothed cats. These animals simply may have been unable to compete with the increasingly sophisticated hunting skills of Pleistocene people.
Human hunters could have caused imbalances among game animals, leading to the extinctions of species less able to compete. When other predators such as the gray wolf prey upon large mammals, they generally take high proportions of each year's crop of young. Some human hunters, in contrast, tend to take the various age-groups of large animals in proportion to their actual occurrence. If such hunters first competed with the larger predators and then replaced them, they may have allowed more young to survive each year, gradually increasing the populations of favored species. As these populations expanded, they in turn may have competed with other game species for the same environmental niche, forcing the less hunted species into extinction. This theory, suggests that human hunters played an indirect role in Pleistocene extinctions by hunting one species more than another. | 375.txt | 2 |
[
"Oil.",
"Technological skill.",
"Natural resources",
"Education"
] | What is the decisive factor in future competition between nations? | As citizens of advanced but vulnerable economies, we must either relentlessly increase the quality of our skills or see our standard of living erode. For the future, competition between nations will be increasingly based on technological skill. Oil and natural resources will still be important, but they no longer will determine a nation's economic strength. This will now be a matter of the way people organize them selves and the nature and quality of their work. Japan and the "new Japans "of East Asia are demonstrating this point in ways that are becoming painfully obvious to the older industrial countries.
There is simply no way to rest on our past achievements. Today's competition renders obsolete huge chunks of what we know and what forces us to innovate. For each individual. Several careers will be customary, and continuing education and retraining will be inescapable. To attain this extraordinary level of education, government, business, schools, and even individuals will turn to technology for the answer.
In industry, processing the information and designing the changes necessary to keep up with the market has meant the growing use of computers. The schools are now following close behind. Already some colleges in the United States are requiting a computer for each student. It is estimated that 500,000 computers are already in use in American high schools and elementary schools. Although there is an abysmal lack of educational software, the number of computers in schools expands rapidly.
The computer is the Proteus of machines, as it takes on a thousand forms and serves a thousand functions. But its truly revolutionary character can be seen in its interactive potential. With advanced computers, learning can be individualized and self-paced. Teachers can become more productive and the entire learning environment enriched.
It is striking how much current teaching is a product of pencil and paper technology. With the computer's capacity for simulation and diverse kinds of feedback, all sorts of new possibilities open up for the redesign of curriculums. Seymour Papert, the inventor of the computer language LOGO, believes that concepts in physics and advanced mathematics can be taught in the early grades with the use of computers. On every-day level, word-processing significantly improves the capacity for written expression. In terms of drill and practice, self-paced computer-assisted instruction enables the student to advance rapidly-without being limited by the conflicting needs of the entire class. In short, once we learn to use this new brain outside the brain, education will never be the same.
Industry, faced with the pressures of a rapidly shifting market, is already designing new methods to retrain its workers, In the United States, a technological university has been set up to teach engineering courses by satellite. And the advances in telecommunications and computational power will dramatically expand the opportunities for national and international efforts in education and training.
Without romanticizing the machine, it is clear that computers uniquely change the potential for equipping today's citizens for unprecedented tasks of the future. Particularly in Europe and the United States, innovation will be the basis for continued prosperity.
New competitors are emerging to challenge the old economic arrangements. How successfully we respond will depend on how much we invest in people and how wisely we employ the learning tools of the new technology. | 324.txt | 1 |
[
"Knowledge of a Computer.",
"Importance of a Computer.",
"Function of Knowledge.",
"Function of Technology."
] | The main idea of this passage is | As citizens of advanced but vulnerable economies, we must either relentlessly increase the quality of our skills or see our standard of living erode. For the future, competition between nations will be increasingly based on technological skill. Oil and natural resources will still be important, but they no longer will determine a nation's economic strength. This will now be a matter of the way people organize them selves and the nature and quality of their work. Japan and the "new Japans "of East Asia are demonstrating this point in ways that are becoming painfully obvious to the older industrial countries.
There is simply no way to rest on our past achievements. Today's competition renders obsolete huge chunks of what we know and what forces us to innovate. For each individual. Several careers will be customary, and continuing education and retraining will be inescapable. To attain this extraordinary level of education, government, business, schools, and even individuals will turn to technology for the answer.
In industry, processing the information and designing the changes necessary to keep up with the market has meant the growing use of computers. The schools are now following close behind. Already some colleges in the United States are requiting a computer for each student. It is estimated that 500,000 computers are already in use in American high schools and elementary schools. Although there is an abysmal lack of educational software, the number of computers in schools expands rapidly.
The computer is the Proteus of machines, as it takes on a thousand forms and serves a thousand functions. But its truly revolutionary character can be seen in its interactive potential. With advanced computers, learning can be individualized and self-paced. Teachers can become more productive and the entire learning environment enriched.
It is striking how much current teaching is a product of pencil and paper technology. With the computer's capacity for simulation and diverse kinds of feedback, all sorts of new possibilities open up for the redesign of curriculums. Seymour Papert, the inventor of the computer language LOGO, believes that concepts in physics and advanced mathematics can be taught in the early grades with the use of computers. On every-day level, word-processing significantly improves the capacity for written expression. In terms of drill and practice, self-paced computer-assisted instruction enables the student to advance rapidly-without being limited by the conflicting needs of the entire class. In short, once we learn to use this new brain outside the brain, education will never be the same.
Industry, faced with the pressures of a rapidly shifting market, is already designing new methods to retrain its workers, In the United States, a technological university has been set up to teach engineering courses by satellite. And the advances in telecommunications and computational power will dramatically expand the opportunities for national and international efforts in education and training.
Without romanticizing the machine, it is clear that computers uniquely change the potential for equipping today's citizens for unprecedented tasks of the future. Particularly in Europe and the United States, innovation will be the basis for continued prosperity.
New competitors are emerging to challenge the old economic arrangements. How successfully we respond will depend on how much we invest in people and how wisely we employ the learning tools of the new technology. | 324.txt | 1 |
[
"People want to so more jobs.",
"People want to attain this extraordinary level of education.",
"People would not rest on the past achievements.",
"What we know becomes obsolete."
] | Why does further study become indispensable? | As citizens of advanced but vulnerable economies, we must either relentlessly increase the quality of our skills or see our standard of living erode. For the future, competition between nations will be increasingly based on technological skill. Oil and natural resources will still be important, but they no longer will determine a nation's economic strength. This will now be a matter of the way people organize them selves and the nature and quality of their work. Japan and the "new Japans "of East Asia are demonstrating this point in ways that are becoming painfully obvious to the older industrial countries.
There is simply no way to rest on our past achievements. Today's competition renders obsolete huge chunks of what we know and what forces us to innovate. For each individual. Several careers will be customary, and continuing education and retraining will be inescapable. To attain this extraordinary level of education, government, business, schools, and even individuals will turn to technology for the answer.
In industry, processing the information and designing the changes necessary to keep up with the market has meant the growing use of computers. The schools are now following close behind. Already some colleges in the United States are requiting a computer for each student. It is estimated that 500,000 computers are already in use in American high schools and elementary schools. Although there is an abysmal lack of educational software, the number of computers in schools expands rapidly.
The computer is the Proteus of machines, as it takes on a thousand forms and serves a thousand functions. But its truly revolutionary character can be seen in its interactive potential. With advanced computers, learning can be individualized and self-paced. Teachers can become more productive and the entire learning environment enriched.
It is striking how much current teaching is a product of pencil and paper technology. With the computer's capacity for simulation and diverse kinds of feedback, all sorts of new possibilities open up for the redesign of curriculums. Seymour Papert, the inventor of the computer language LOGO, believes that concepts in physics and advanced mathematics can be taught in the early grades with the use of computers. On every-day level, word-processing significantly improves the capacity for written expression. In terms of drill and practice, self-paced computer-assisted instruction enables the student to advance rapidly-without being limited by the conflicting needs of the entire class. In short, once we learn to use this new brain outside the brain, education will never be the same.
Industry, faced with the pressures of a rapidly shifting market, is already designing new methods to retrain its workers, In the United States, a technological university has been set up to teach engineering courses by satellite. And the advances in telecommunications and computational power will dramatically expand the opportunities for national and international efforts in education and training.
Without romanticizing the machine, it is clear that computers uniquely change the potential for equipping today's citizens for unprecedented tasks of the future. Particularly in Europe and the United States, innovation will be the basis for continued prosperity.
New competitors are emerging to challenge the old economic arrangements. How successfully we respond will depend on how much we invest in people and how wisely we employ the learning tools of the new technology. | 324.txt | 3 |
[
"flexibility.",
"diversity.",
"variety.",
"multiplicity."
] | The word "Proteus" is closest in meaning to | As citizens of advanced but vulnerable economies, we must either relentlessly increase the quality of our skills or see our standard of living erode. For the future, competition between nations will be increasingly based on technological skill. Oil and natural resources will still be important, but they no longer will determine a nation's economic strength. This will now be a matter of the way people organize them selves and the nature and quality of their work. Japan and the "new Japans "of East Asia are demonstrating this point in ways that are becoming painfully obvious to the older industrial countries.
There is simply no way to rest on our past achievements. Today's competition renders obsolete huge chunks of what we know and what forces us to innovate. For each individual. Several careers will be customary, and continuing education and retraining will be inescapable. To attain this extraordinary level of education, government, business, schools, and even individuals will turn to technology for the answer.
In industry, processing the information and designing the changes necessary to keep up with the market has meant the growing use of computers. The schools are now following close behind. Already some colleges in the United States are requiting a computer for each student. It is estimated that 500,000 computers are already in use in American high schools and elementary schools. Although there is an abysmal lack of educational software, the number of computers in schools expands rapidly.
The computer is the Proteus of machines, as it takes on a thousand forms and serves a thousand functions. But its truly revolutionary character can be seen in its interactive potential. With advanced computers, learning can be individualized and self-paced. Teachers can become more productive and the entire learning environment enriched.
It is striking how much current teaching is a product of pencil and paper technology. With the computer's capacity for simulation and diverse kinds of feedback, all sorts of new possibilities open up for the redesign of curriculums. Seymour Papert, the inventor of the computer language LOGO, believes that concepts in physics and advanced mathematics can be taught in the early grades with the use of computers. On every-day level, word-processing significantly improves the capacity for written expression. In terms of drill and practice, self-paced computer-assisted instruction enables the student to advance rapidly-without being limited by the conflicting needs of the entire class. In short, once we learn to use this new brain outside the brain, education will never be the same.
Industry, faced with the pressures of a rapidly shifting market, is already designing new methods to retrain its workers, In the United States, a technological university has been set up to teach engineering courses by satellite. And the advances in telecommunications and computational power will dramatically expand the opportunities for national and international efforts in education and training.
Without romanticizing the machine, it is clear that computers uniquely change the potential for equipping today's citizens for unprecedented tasks of the future. Particularly in Europe and the United States, innovation will be the basis for continued prosperity.
New competitors are emerging to challenge the old economic arrangements. How successfully we respond will depend on how much we invest in people and how wisely we employ the learning tools of the new technology. | 324.txt | 0 |
[
"children have little time to play with their parents",
"children are not taken good care of by their working parents",
"both parents and children suffer from lack of leisure time",
"both parents and children have trouble managing their time"
] | By mentioning "the same time crunch" (Line 1, Para. 2) Sandra Hofferth means _ . | On average, American kids ages 3 to 12 spent 29 hours a week in school, eight hours more that they did in 1981. They also did more household work and participated in more of such organized activities as soccer and ballet . Involvement in sports, in particular, rose almost 50% from 1981 to 1997: boys now spend an average of four hours a week playing sports; girls log hall that time. All in all, however, children's leisure time dropped from 40% of the day in 1981 to 25%
"Children are affected by the same time crunch that affects their parents," says Sandra Hofferth, who headed the recent study of children's timetable. A chief reason, she says, is that more mothers are working outside the home. (Nevertheless, children in both double-income and "male breadwinner" households spent comparable amounts of time interacting with their parents 19 hours and 22 hours respectively. In contrast, children spent only 9 hours with their single mothers.)
All work and no play could make for some very messed-up kids. "Play is the most powerful way a child explores the world and learns about himself," says T. Berry Brazelton, professor at Harvard Medical School Unstructured play encourages independent thinking and allows the young to negotiate their relationships with their peers, but kids ages 3 to 12 spent only 12 hours a week engaged in it.
The children sampled spent a quarter of their rapidly decreasing "free time" watching television. But that, believe it or not, was one of the findings parents might regard as good news. If they're spending less time in front of the TV set, however, kids aren't replacing it with reading. Despite efforts to get kids more interested in books, the children spent just over an hour a week reading. Let's face it, who's got the time? | 1253.txt | 3 |
[
"quite convincing",
"partially true",
"totally groundless",
"rather confusing"
] | According to the author, the reason given by Sandra Hofferth for the time crunch is _ . | On average, American kids ages 3 to 12 spent 29 hours a week in school, eight hours more that they did in 1981. They also did more household work and participated in more of such organized activities as soccer and ballet . Involvement in sports, in particular, rose almost 50% from 1981 to 1997: boys now spend an average of four hours a week playing sports; girls log hall that time. All in all, however, children's leisure time dropped from 40% of the day in 1981 to 25%
"Children are affected by the same time crunch that affects their parents," says Sandra Hofferth, who headed the recent study of children's timetable. A chief reason, she says, is that more mothers are working outside the home. (Nevertheless, children in both double-income and "male breadwinner" households spent comparable amounts of time interacting with their parents 19 hours and 22 hours respectively. In contrast, children spent only 9 hours with their single mothers.)
All work and no play could make for some very messed-up kids. "Play is the most powerful way a child explores the world and learns about himself," says T. Berry Brazelton, professor at Harvard Medical School Unstructured play encourages independent thinking and allows the young to negotiate their relationships with their peers, but kids ages 3 to 12 spent only 12 hours a week engaged in it.
The children sampled spent a quarter of their rapidly decreasing "free time" watching television. But that, believe it or not, was one of the findings parents might regard as good news. If they're spending less time in front of the TV set, however, kids aren't replacing it with reading. Despite efforts to get kids more interested in books, the children spent just over an hour a week reading. Let's face it, who's got the time? | 1253.txt | 1 |
[
"he has plenty of time reading and studying",
"he is left to play with his peers in his own way",
"he has more time participating in school activities",
"he is free to interact with his working parents"
] | According to the author a child develops better if _ . | On average, American kids ages 3 to 12 spent 29 hours a week in school, eight hours more that they did in 1981. They also did more household work and participated in more of such organized activities as soccer and ballet . Involvement in sports, in particular, rose almost 50% from 1981 to 1997: boys now spend an average of four hours a week playing sports; girls log hall that time. All in all, however, children's leisure time dropped from 40% of the day in 1981 to 25%
"Children are affected by the same time crunch that affects their parents," says Sandra Hofferth, who headed the recent study of children's timetable. A chief reason, she says, is that more mothers are working outside the home. (Nevertheless, children in both double-income and "male breadwinner" households spent comparable amounts of time interacting with their parents 19 hours and 22 hours respectively. In contrast, children spent only 9 hours with their single mothers.)
All work and no play could make for some very messed-up kids. "Play is the most powerful way a child explores the world and learns about himself," says T. Berry Brazelton, professor at Harvard Medical School Unstructured play encourages independent thinking and allows the young to negotiate their relationships with their peers, but kids ages 3 to 12 spent only 12 hours a week engaged in it.
The children sampled spent a quarter of their rapidly decreasing "free time" watching television. But that, believe it or not, was one of the findings parents might regard as good news. If they're spending less time in front of the TV set, however, kids aren't replacing it with reading. Despite efforts to get kids more interested in books, the children spent just over an hour a week reading. Let's face it, who's got the time? | 1253.txt | 3 |
[
"are engaged in more and more structured activities",
"are increasingly neglected by their working mothers",
"are spending more and more time watching TV",
"are involved less and less in household work"
] | The author is concerned about the fact that American kids _ . | On average, American kids ages 3 to 12 spent 29 hours a week in school, eight hours more that they did in 1981. They also did more household work and participated in more of such organized activities as soccer and ballet . Involvement in sports, in particular, rose almost 50% from 1981 to 1997: boys now spend an average of four hours a week playing sports; girls log hall that time. All in all, however, children's leisure time dropped from 40% of the day in 1981 to 25%
"Children are affected by the same time crunch that affects their parents," says Sandra Hofferth, who headed the recent study of children's timetable. A chief reason, she says, is that more mothers are working outside the home. (Nevertheless, children in both double-income and "male breadwinner" households spent comparable amounts of time interacting with their parents 19 hours and 22 hours respectively. In contrast, children spent only 9 hours with their single mothers.)
All work and no play could make for some very messed-up kids. "Play is the most powerful way a child explores the world and learns about himself," says T. Berry Brazelton, professor at Harvard Medical School Unstructured play encourages independent thinking and allows the young to negotiate their relationships with their peers, but kids ages 3 to 12 spent only 12 hours a week engaged in it.
The children sampled spent a quarter of their rapidly decreasing "free time" watching television. But that, believe it or not, was one of the findings parents might regard as good news. If they're spending less time in front of the TV set, however, kids aren't replacing it with reading. Despite efforts to get kids more interested in books, the children spent just over an hour a week reading. Let's face it, who's got the time? | 1253.txt | 0 |
[
"extracurricular activities promote children's intelligence",
"most children will turn to reading with TV sets switched off",
"efforts to get kids interested in reading have been fruitful",
"most parents believe reading to be beneficial to children"
] | We can infer from the passage that _ . | On average, American kids ages 3 to 12 spent 29 hours a week in school, eight hours more that they did in 1981. They also did more household work and participated in more of such organized activities as soccer and ballet . Involvement in sports, in particular, rose almost 50% from 1981 to 1997: boys now spend an average of four hours a week playing sports; girls log hall that time. All in all, however, children's leisure time dropped from 40% of the day in 1981 to 25%
"Children are affected by the same time crunch that affects their parents," says Sandra Hofferth, who headed the recent study of children's timetable. A chief reason, she says, is that more mothers are working outside the home. (Nevertheless, children in both double-income and "male breadwinner" households spent comparable amounts of time interacting with their parents 19 hours and 22 hours respectively. In contrast, children spent only 9 hours with their single mothers.)
All work and no play could make for some very messed-up kids. "Play is the most powerful way a child explores the world and learns about himself," says T. Berry Brazelton, professor at Harvard Medical School Unstructured play encourages independent thinking and allows the young to negotiate their relationships with their peers, but kids ages 3 to 12 spent only 12 hours a week engaged in it.
The children sampled spent a quarter of their rapidly decreasing "free time" watching television. But that, believe it or not, was one of the findings parents might regard as good news. If they're spending less time in front of the TV set, however, kids aren't replacing it with reading. Despite efforts to get kids more interested in books, the children spent just over an hour a week reading. Let's face it, who's got the time? | 1253.txt | 2 |
[
"it helps produce new cultural tools and technology",
"it can reflect the development of the nation",
"it helps understand the nation's Fast and present",
"it can demonstrate the nation's civilization"
] | Research into the material culture of a nation's of great importance ________. | Material culture refers to the touchable, material "things"-physical objects that can be seen, held, felt, used-that a culture produces. Examining a culture's tools and technology can tell us about the group's history and way of life. Similarly, research into the material culture of music can help us to understand the music-culture. The most vivid body of "things" in it, of course, are musical instruments. We cannot hear for ourselves the actual sound of any musical performance before the 1870s when the phonograph was invented, so we rely on instruments for important information about music-cultures it the remote past and their development. Here we have two kinds of evidence: instruments well preserved and instruments pictures in art. Through the study of instruments, as well preserved Paintings, written documents, and so on, we can explore the movement of music from the Neat East to China over a thousand years ago, or we can outline the spread of Near eastern influence to Europe that results in the development of most of the instruments on the symphony orchestra.
Sheet music or printed music, too is material culture. Scholars once defined folk music-cultures as those in with people learn and sing music by ear rather than from print, but research show mutual influence among oral and written sources during the past few centuries in Europe, Britain, and America, printed versions limit variety because they tend to standardize any song, yet they stimulate people to create new and different songs. Besides, the ability to read music notation has a far-reaching effect on musicians and, when it becomes widespread, on the music-culture as a whole.
One more important part of music's material culture should be singled out the influence of the electronic media-radio, record player, tape recorder, television, and videocassette, with the future promising talking and singing computers and other developments. This all part of the "information revolution," a twentieth century phenomenon as important as the industrial revolution was in the nineteenth. These electronic media are not just limited to modem nations; they have affected music-cultures all over the globe. | 2495.txt | 2 |
[
"the existence of the symphony was attributed to the spread of Near Eastern and Chinese music",
"Near Eastern music had influence on the of the instruments in the symphony orchestra",
"the development of the symphony shows the mutual influence of Eastern and Western music",
"the musical instruments in the symphony basis of Near Eastern music"
] | It can be learned from this passage that ________. | Material culture refers to the touchable, material "things"-physical objects that can be seen, held, felt, used-that a culture produces. Examining a culture's tools and technology can tell us about the group's history and way of life. Similarly, research into the material culture of music can help us to understand the music-culture. The most vivid body of "things" in it, of course, are musical instruments. We cannot hear for ourselves the actual sound of any musical performance before the 1870s when the phonograph was invented, so we rely on instruments for important information about music-cultures it the remote past and their development. Here we have two kinds of evidence: instruments well preserved and instruments pictures in art. Through the study of instruments, as well preserved Paintings, written documents, and so on, we can explore the movement of music from the Neat East to China over a thousand years ago, or we can outline the spread of Near eastern influence to Europe that results in the development of most of the instruments on the symphony orchestra.
Sheet music or printed music, too is material culture. Scholars once defined folk music-cultures as those in with people learn and sing music by ear rather than from print, but research show mutual influence among oral and written sources during the past few centuries in Europe, Britain, and America, printed versions limit variety because they tend to standardize any song, yet they stimulate people to create new and different songs. Besides, the ability to read music notation has a far-reaching effect on musicians and, when it becomes widespread, on the music-culture as a whole.
One more important part of music's material culture should be singled out the influence of the electronic media-radio, record player, tape recorder, television, and videocassette, with the future promising talking and singing computers and other developments. This all part of the "information revolution," a twentieth century phenomenon as important as the industrial revolution was in the nineteenth. These electronic media are not just limited to modem nations; they have affected music-cultures all over the globe. | 2495.txt | 1 |
[
"it has a great effect on the music-culture as more and more people are able to read it",
"it tends to standard folk sings when it is used by folk musicians",
"it is the printed version of standardized folk music",
"it encourages people to popularize printed versions of songs"
] | According to the author, music notation is important because ________. | Material culture refers to the touchable, material "things"-physical objects that can be seen, held, felt, used-that a culture produces. Examining a culture's tools and technology can tell us about the group's history and way of life. Similarly, research into the material culture of music can help us to understand the music-culture. The most vivid body of "things" in it, of course, are musical instruments. We cannot hear for ourselves the actual sound of any musical performance before the 1870s when the phonograph was invented, so we rely on instruments for important information about music-cultures it the remote past and their development. Here we have two kinds of evidence: instruments well preserved and instruments pictures in art. Through the study of instruments, as well preserved Paintings, written documents, and so on, we can explore the movement of music from the Neat East to China over a thousand years ago, or we can outline the spread of Near eastern influence to Europe that results in the development of most of the instruments on the symphony orchestra.
Sheet music or printed music, too is material culture. Scholars once defined folk music-cultures as those in with people learn and sing music by ear rather than from print, but research show mutual influence among oral and written sources during the past few centuries in Europe, Britain, and America, printed versions limit variety because they tend to standardize any song, yet they stimulate people to create new and different songs. Besides, the ability to read music notation has a far-reaching effect on musicians and, when it becomes widespread, on the music-culture as a whole.
One more important part of music's material culture should be singled out the influence of the electronic media-radio, record player, tape recorder, television, and videocassette, with the future promising talking and singing computers and other developments. This all part of the "information revolution," a twentieth century phenomenon as important as the industrial revolution was in the nineteenth. These electronic media are not just limited to modem nations; they have affected music-cultures all over the globe. | 2495.txt | 0 |
[
"has brought about an information revolution",
"has speeded up the arrival of a new generation of computers",
"has given rise to new forms of music culture",
"has given to the transformation of traditional musical instruments"
] | It can be concluded from the passage that the introduction of electronic media into the world of music ________. | Material culture refers to the touchable, material "things"-physical objects that can be seen, held, felt, used-that a culture produces. Examining a culture's tools and technology can tell us about the group's history and way of life. Similarly, research into the material culture of music can help us to understand the music-culture. The most vivid body of "things" in it, of course, are musical instruments. We cannot hear for ourselves the actual sound of any musical performance before the 1870s when the phonograph was invented, so we rely on instruments for important information about music-cultures it the remote past and their development. Here we have two kinds of evidence: instruments well preserved and instruments pictures in art. Through the study of instruments, as well preserved Paintings, written documents, and so on, we can explore the movement of music from the Neat East to China over a thousand years ago, or we can outline the spread of Near eastern influence to Europe that results in the development of most of the instruments on the symphony orchestra.
Sheet music or printed music, too is material culture. Scholars once defined folk music-cultures as those in with people learn and sing music by ear rather than from print, but research show mutual influence among oral and written sources during the past few centuries in Europe, Britain, and America, printed versions limit variety because they tend to standardize any song, yet they stimulate people to create new and different songs. Besides, the ability to read music notation has a far-reaching effect on musicians and, when it becomes widespread, on the music-culture as a whole.
One more important part of music's material culture should be singled out the influence of the electronic media-radio, record player, tape recorder, television, and videocassette, with the future promising talking and singing computers and other developments. This all part of the "information revolution," a twentieth century phenomenon as important as the industrial revolution was in the nineteenth. These electronic media are not just limited to modem nations; they have affected music-cultures all over the globe. | 2495.txt | 2 |
[
"Musical instruments developed through the years will sooner later be replaced by computers.",
"Music cannot be passed on to future generation unless it is recorded.",
"Folk songs cannot spread far unless they are printed on music sheets.",
"The development of music culture is highly dependent or its material aspect."
] | Which of the following best summarized the main idea of the passage? | Material culture refers to the touchable, material "things"-physical objects that can be seen, held, felt, used-that a culture produces. Examining a culture's tools and technology can tell us about the group's history and way of life. Similarly, research into the material culture of music can help us to understand the music-culture. The most vivid body of "things" in it, of course, are musical instruments. We cannot hear for ourselves the actual sound of any musical performance before the 1870s when the phonograph was invented, so we rely on instruments for important information about music-cultures it the remote past and their development. Here we have two kinds of evidence: instruments well preserved and instruments pictures in art. Through the study of instruments, as well preserved Paintings, written documents, and so on, we can explore the movement of music from the Neat East to China over a thousand years ago, or we can outline the spread of Near eastern influence to Europe that results in the development of most of the instruments on the symphony orchestra.
Sheet music or printed music, too is material culture. Scholars once defined folk music-cultures as those in with people learn and sing music by ear rather than from print, but research show mutual influence among oral and written sources during the past few centuries in Europe, Britain, and America, printed versions limit variety because they tend to standardize any song, yet they stimulate people to create new and different songs. Besides, the ability to read music notation has a far-reaching effect on musicians and, when it becomes widespread, on the music-culture as a whole.
One more important part of music's material culture should be singled out the influence of the electronic media-radio, record player, tape recorder, television, and videocassette, with the future promising talking and singing computers and other developments. This all part of the "information revolution," a twentieth century phenomenon as important as the industrial revolution was in the nineteenth. These electronic media are not just limited to modem nations; they have affected music-cultures all over the globe. | 2495.txt | 3 |
[
"impatient",
"considerate",
"aggressive",
"agreeable"
] | According to the passage, A-type individuals are usually _ . | Personality is to a large extent inherent-A-type parents usually bring about A-type offspring. But the environment must also have a profound effect, since if competition is important to the parents; it is likely to become a major factor in the lives of their children.
One place where children soak up A-characteristics is school, which is, by its very nature, a highly competitive institution. Too many schools adopt the "win at all costs" moral standard and measure their success by sporting achievements. The current passion for making children compete against their classmates or against the clock produces a two-layer system , in which competitive A types seem in some way better than their B-type fellows. Being too keen to win can have dangerous consequences: remember that Pheidippides, the first marathon runner, dropped dead seconds after saying: "Rejoice, we conquer!"
By far the worst form of competition in schools is the disproportionate emphasis on examinations. It is a rare school that allows pupils to concentrate on those things they do well. The merits of competition by examination are somewhat questionable, but competition in the certain knowledge of failure is positively harmful.
Obviously, it is neither practical nor desirable that all A youngsters change into B's. The world needs types, and schools have an important duty to try to fit a child's personality to his possible future employment. It is top management.
If the preoccupation of schools with academic work was lessened, more time might be spent teaching children surer values. Perhaps selection for the caring professions, especially medicine, could be made less by good grades in chemistry and more by such considerations as sensitivity and sympathy. It is surely a mistake to choose our doctors exclusively from A type stock. B's are important and should be encouraged. | 1086.txt | 2 |
[
"the pressure is too great on the students",
"some students are bound to fail",
"failure rates are too high",
"the results of exanimations are doubtful"
] | The author is strongly opposed to the practice of examinations at schools because _ . | Personality is to a large extent inherent-A-type parents usually bring about A-type offspring. But the environment must also have a profound effect, since if competition is important to the parents; it is likely to become a major factor in the lives of their children.
One place where children soak up A-characteristics is school, which is, by its very nature, a highly competitive institution. Too many schools adopt the "win at all costs" moral standard and measure their success by sporting achievements. The current passion for making children compete against their classmates or against the clock produces a two-layer system , in which competitive A types seem in some way better than their B-type fellows. Being too keen to win can have dangerous consequences: remember that Pheidippides, the first marathon runner, dropped dead seconds after saying: "Rejoice, we conquer!"
By far the worst form of competition in schools is the disproportionate emphasis on examinations. It is a rare school that allows pupils to concentrate on those things they do well. The merits of competition by examination are somewhat questionable, but competition in the certain knowledge of failure is positively harmful.
Obviously, it is neither practical nor desirable that all A youngsters change into B's. The world needs types, and schools have an important duty to try to fit a child's personality to his possible future employment. It is top management.
If the preoccupation of schools with academic work was lessened, more time might be spent teaching children surer values. Perhaps selection for the caring professions, especially medicine, could be made less by good grades in chemistry and more by such considerations as sensitivity and sympathy. It is surely a mistake to choose our doctors exclusively from A type stock. B's are important and should be encouraged. | 1086.txt | 1 |
[
"candidates' sensitivity",
"academic achievements",
"competitive spirit",
"surer values"
] | The selection of medical professionals is currently based on _ . | Personality is to a large extent inherent-A-type parents usually bring about A-type offspring. But the environment must also have a profound effect, since if competition is important to the parents; it is likely to become a major factor in the lives of their children.
One place where children soak up A-characteristics is school, which is, by its very nature, a highly competitive institution. Too many schools adopt the "win at all costs" moral standard and measure their success by sporting achievements. The current passion for making children compete against their classmates or against the clock produces a two-layer system , in which competitive A types seem in some way better than their B-type fellows. Being too keen to win can have dangerous consequences: remember that Pheidippides, the first marathon runner, dropped dead seconds after saying: "Rejoice, we conquer!"
By far the worst form of competition in schools is the disproportionate emphasis on examinations. It is a rare school that allows pupils to concentrate on those things they do well. The merits of competition by examination are somewhat questionable, but competition in the certain knowledge of failure is positively harmful.
Obviously, it is neither practical nor desirable that all A youngsters change into B's. The world needs types, and schools have an important duty to try to fit a child's personality to his possible future employment. It is top management.
If the preoccupation of schools with academic work was lessened, more time might be spent teaching children surer values. Perhaps selection for the caring professions, especially medicine, could be made less by good grades in chemistry and more by such considerations as sensitivity and sympathy. It is surely a mistake to choose our doctors exclusively from A type stock. B's are important and should be encouraged. | 1086.txt | 1 |
[
"the personality of a child is well established at birth",
"family influence dominates the shaping of one's characteristics",
"the development of one's personality is due to multiple factors",
"B-type characteristics can find no place in competitive society"
] | From the passage we can draw the conclusion that _ . | Personality is to a large extent inherent-A-type parents usually bring about A-type offspring. But the environment must also have a profound effect, since if competition is important to the parents; it is likely to become a major factor in the lives of their children.
One place where children soak up A-characteristics is school, which is, by its very nature, a highly competitive institution. Too many schools adopt the "win at all costs" moral standard and measure their success by sporting achievements. The current passion for making children compete against their classmates or against the clock produces a two-layer system , in which competitive A types seem in some way better than their B-type fellows. Being too keen to win can have dangerous consequences: remember that Pheidippides, the first marathon runner, dropped dead seconds after saying: "Rejoice, we conquer!"
By far the worst form of competition in schools is the disproportionate emphasis on examinations. It is a rare school that allows pupils to concentrate on those things they do well. The merits of competition by examination are somewhat questionable, but competition in the certain knowledge of failure is positively harmful.
Obviously, it is neither practical nor desirable that all A youngsters change into B's. The world needs types, and schools have an important duty to try to fit a child's personality to his possible future employment. It is top management.
If the preoccupation of schools with academic work was lessened, more time might be spent teaching children surer values. Perhaps selection for the caring professions, especially medicine, could be made less by good grades in chemistry and more by such considerations as sensitivity and sympathy. It is surely a mistake to choose our doctors exclusively from A type stock. B's are important and should be encouraged. | 1086.txt | 2 |
[
"Bats and seals most probably originated in New Zealand and then migrated to other parts of the world.",
"Most mammal species were already present in Gondwanaland before it broke up, between 80 to 85 million years ago.",
"No mammals that evolved after New Zealand separated from Gondwanaland were able to migrate to New Zealand.",
"No mammals evolved from the animals that originally inhabited New Zealand."
] | Paragraph 1 supports which of the following inferences about mammal evolution? | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 3 |
[
"abundant",
"attention getting",
"familiar",
"important"
] | The word "striking" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 1 |
[
"at the present time",
"officially",
"normally",
"easily"
] | The word "currently" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 0 |
[
"had large wings",
"hatched many eggs at one time",
"had no mammals that preyed on them",
"were ordinarily small in size and light in weight"
] | According to paragraph 2, moa | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 2 |
[
"To eliminate what might seem to be a plausible explanation of the extinction of moa.",
"To explain why some moa species may still have existed at the time of Captain Cook's first visit to New Zealand.",
"To explain why, in the late 1700s, moa most likely lived in remote areas of New Zealand.",
"To suggest that climate conditions in New Zealand varied widely when moa were plentiful."
] | Why does the author include the information "Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct"? | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 0 |
[
"gradual",
"complete",
"predicted",
"sudden"
] | The word "abrupt" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 3 |
[
"Forest burning was far less intense on New Zealand's South Island, where the majority of moa habitats were located.",
"Moa populations had already been significantly reduced before most of the forest burning started.",
"Moa became extinct long after the Maori had stopped the practice of forest burning.",
"Moa gradually adapted to changes that resulted from forest burning."
] | According to paragraph 4, why is forest burning considered only a partial explanation for the disappearance of moa? | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 1 |
[
"To indicate how large the moa population was before it was hunted.",
"To indicate that scientists were very interested in learning details about moa.",
"To illustrate the intensity with which the Maori hunted moa.",
"To suggest that moa hunting was largely limited to New Zealand's South Island."
] | Why does the author say that "At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars."? | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 2 |
[
"The length of the period during which moa were intensively hunted.",
"The decline in the size of the Maori population in the period after moa were intensively hunted.",
"The large number of Maori living today in areas that were moa habitats.",
"The large number of hunting weapons that archaeologists have excaved."
] | Paragraph 5 presents which of the following as evidence that hunting was one of the factors responsible for the decline of moa? | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 1 |
[
"previous research to establish the role of diseases in the extinction of animals did not yield any significant findings.",
"scientists have difficulty identifying past diseases from paleoecological and archaeological data.",
"moa's fossilized remains contain no DNA.",
"conducting such research is time-consuming and expensive."
] | According to paragraph 6, scientists may never know if diseases contributed to the extinction of moa because | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 1 |
[
"historically",
"remarkably",
"possibly",
"certainly"
] | The word "potentially" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Between 80 and 85 million years ago, Gondwanaland, a giant continent made up of what today is Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America, broke up, thus causing what is now New Zealand to become separated from the larger landmass. After the separation, any creature unable to cross a considerable distance of ocean could not migrate to New Zealand. Snakes and most mammals evolved after the separation. Thus there are no New Zealand snakes, and bats, which flew there, and seals, which swam there, were the only mammals on New Zealand when Polynesian settlers (the Maori) arrived there about a thousand years ago.
When the Maori arrived in New Zealand, they encountered birds that had been evolving for 80 million years without the presence of mammalian predators. The most striking of these animals must have been moa. Now extinct, moa were gigantic wingless birds that stood as much as 10 feet (3 meters) tall and weighed as much as 550 pounds (250 kilograms). They are known from a diverse array of remains including eggshells, eggs, a few mummified carcasses, vast numbers of bones, and some older fossilized bones. The species of moa that are currently recognized occupied ecological niches customarily filled elsewhere by large mammalian browsing herbivores. They may have had relatively low reproductive rates; apparently, they usually laid only one egg at a time.
It seems possible that when Captain James Cook first visited New Zealand in 1769, moa (or at least one of the moa species) may have still survived in the remote areas in the western part of New Zealand's South Island. If so, these individuals would have been the last of their kind. Climatic conditions in New Zealand appear to have been relatively stable over the period during which moa became extinct. Different factors could have worked in concert to account for their abrupt disappearance.
Vegetation was considerably altered by the Maori occupation of New Zealand, a change not easily explained by climate variation or other possible factors. Forest and shrubland burning appears to have reduced the prime habitat of many moa species. However, the main forest burning started around 700 years ago, after what current archaeological evidence indicates was the most intensive stage of moa hunting. While there appears to have been extensive burning on the east side of New Zealand's South Island, large forest tracts remained in the most southern part of the island. Because major habitat destruction seems to have occurred after moa populations already were depleted, and because some habitat that could have sheltered moa populations remained, it would seem that other factors were also at work in the extinction of these birds.
For South Island, human predation appears to have been a significant factor in the depletion of the population of moa. At one excavated Maori site, moa remains filled six railway cars. The density of Maori settlements and artifacts increased substantially at the time of the most intensive moa hunting (900 to 600 years ago). This period was followed by a time of decline in the Maori population and a societal transition to smaller, less numerous settlements. The apparent decline fits the pattern expected as a consequence of the Maori's overexploitation of moa.
Finally, the Maori introduced the Polynesian rat and the dog to New Zealand. The actions of these potential nest predators could have reduced moa populations without leaving much direct evidence. The Maori may have also inadvertently brought pests and disease organisms in fowls, which could have crossed over to eradicate moa populations. The possibility of analyzing ancient DNA to identify past diseases of extinct animals is being explored. However, evidence of such diseases is difficult to determine directly from paleoecological or archaeological remains. For these reasons, it is hard to determine the likelihood that introduced disease organisms were a cause of the decline of moa, but they are potentially significant.
While the last of these possible causes remains speculative, definite clues exist for the action of the first two causes. The story of moa species and their demise raises ecological issues on the vulnerability of species to human-caused changesincluding altered vegetative cover of the landscape, change in the physical environment, and modification of the flora and fauna of a region by eliminating some species and introducing others. | 3169.txt | 2 |
[
"an unparalleled increase in the number of public relations companies",
"shrinking cultural differences and new communications technologies",
"the decreasing number of multinational corporations in the U.S.",
"increased efforts of other countries in public relations"
] | According to the passage, America's relations is being threatened because of _ . | The rise of multinational corporations , global marketing, new communications technologies, and shrinking cultural differences have led to an unparalleled increase in global public relations or PR.
Surprisingly, since modern PR was largely an American invention, America's relations is being threatened by PR efforts in other countries. Ten years ago, for example, the world's top five public relations agencies were American-owned. In 1991, only one was. The British in particular are becoming more sophisticated and creative. A recent survey found that more than half of all British companies include PR as part of their corporate planning activities, compared to about one-third of U.S. companies. It may not be long before London replaces New York as the capital of PR.
Why is America lagging behind in the global PR race? First, Americans as a whole tend to be fairly provincial and take more of an interest in local affairs. Knowledge of world geography, for example, has never been strong in this country. Secondly, Americans lag behind their European and Asian counterparts in knowing a second language. Less than 5 percent of Burson-Marshall's U.S. employees know two languages. Ogilvy and Mather has about the same percentage. Conversely, some European firms have half or more of their employees fluent in a second language. Finally, people involved in PR abroad tend to keep a closereye on international affairs. In the financial PR area, for instance, most Americans read the Wall Street Journal. Overseas, their counterparts read the Journal as well as the Financial Times of London and The Economist, publications not often read in this country.
Perhaps the PR industry might take a lesson from Ted Turner of CNN (Cable News Network). Turner recently announced that the word "foreign"would no longer be used on CNN news broadcasts. According to Turner, global communications have made the nations of the world so interdependent that there is no longer any such things as foreign. | 2339.txt | 3 |
[
"British companies are more ambitious than U.S. companies",
"British companies place more importance on PR than U.S. companies",
"British companies are heavily involved in planning activities",
"four of the world's top public relations agencies are British-owned"
] | London could soon replace New York as the center of PR because _ . | The rise of multinational corporations , global marketing, new communications technologies, and shrinking cultural differences have led to an unparalleled increase in global public relations or PR.
Surprisingly, since modern PR was largely an American invention, America's relations is being threatened by PR efforts in other countries. Ten years ago, for example, the world's top five public relations agencies were American-owned. In 1991, only one was. The British in particular are becoming more sophisticated and creative. A recent survey found that more than half of all British companies include PR as part of their corporate planning activities, compared to about one-third of U.S. companies. It may not be long before London replaces New York as the capital of PR.
Why is America lagging behind in the global PR race? First, Americans as a whole tend to be fairly provincial and take more of an interest in local affairs. Knowledge of world geography, for example, has never been strong in this country. Secondly, Americans lag behind their European and Asian counterparts in knowing a second language. Less than 5 percent of Burson-Marshall's U.S. employees know two languages. Ogilvy and Mather has about the same percentage. Conversely, some European firms have half or more of their employees fluent in a second language. Finally, people involved in PR abroad tend to keep a closereye on international affairs. In the financial PR area, for instance, most Americans read the Wall Street Journal. Overseas, their counterparts read the Journal as well as the Financial Times of London and The Economist, publications not often read in this country.
Perhaps the PR industry might take a lesson from Ted Turner of CNN (Cable News Network). Turner recently announced that the word "foreign"would no longer be used on CNN news broadcasts. According to Turner, global communications have made the nations of the world so interdependent that there is no longer any such things as foreign. | 2339.txt | 1 |
[
"limited in outlook",
"like people from the provinces",
"rigid in thinking",
"interested in world financial affairs"
] | The word "provincial" (Line 2, Para. 3) means " _ ". | The rise of multinational corporations , global marketing, new communications technologies, and shrinking cultural differences have led to an unparalleled increase in global public relations or PR.
Surprisingly, since modern PR was largely an American invention, America's relations is being threatened by PR efforts in other countries. Ten years ago, for example, the world's top five public relations agencies were American-owned. In 1991, only one was. The British in particular are becoming more sophisticated and creative. A recent survey found that more than half of all British companies include PR as part of their corporate planning activities, compared to about one-third of U.S. companies. It may not be long before London replaces New York as the capital of PR.
Why is America lagging behind in the global PR race? First, Americans as a whole tend to be fairly provincial and take more of an interest in local affairs. Knowledge of world geography, for example, has never been strong in this country. Secondly, Americans lag behind their European and Asian counterparts in knowing a second language. Less than 5 percent of Burson-Marshall's U.S. employees know two languages. Ogilvy and Mather has about the same percentage. Conversely, some European firms have half or more of their employees fluent in a second language. Finally, people involved in PR abroad tend to keep a closereye on international affairs. In the financial PR area, for instance, most Americans read the Wall Street Journal. Overseas, their counterparts read the Journal as well as the Financial Times of London and The Economist, publications not often read in this country.
Perhaps the PR industry might take a lesson from Ted Turner of CNN (Cable News Network). Turner recently announced that the word "foreign"would no longer be used on CNN news broadcasts. According to Turner, global communications have made the nations of the world so interdependent that there is no longer any such things as foreign. | 2339.txt | 0 |
[
"speak at least one foreign language fluently",
"are ignorant about world geography",
"are not as sophisticated as their European counterparts",
"enjoy reading a great variety of English business publications"
] | We learn from the third paragraph that employees in the American PR industry _ . | The rise of multinational corporations , global marketing, new communications technologies, and shrinking cultural differences have led to an unparalleled increase in global public relations or PR.
Surprisingly, since modern PR was largely an American invention, America's relations is being threatened by PR efforts in other countries. Ten years ago, for example, the world's top five public relations agencies were American-owned. In 1991, only one was. The British in particular are becoming more sophisticated and creative. A recent survey found that more than half of all British companies include PR as part of their corporate planning activities, compared to about one-third of U.S. companies. It may not be long before London replaces New York as the capital of PR.
Why is America lagging behind in the global PR race? First, Americans as a whole tend to be fairly provincial and take more of an interest in local affairs. Knowledge of world geography, for example, has never been strong in this country. Secondly, Americans lag behind their European and Asian counterparts in knowing a second language. Less than 5 percent of Burson-Marshall's U.S. employees know two languages. Ogilvy and Mather has about the same percentage. Conversely, some European firms have half or more of their employees fluent in a second language. Finally, people involved in PR abroad tend to keep a closereye on international affairs. In the financial PR area, for instance, most Americans read the Wall Street Journal. Overseas, their counterparts read the Journal as well as the Financial Times of London and The Economist, publications not often read in this country.
Perhaps the PR industry might take a lesson from Ted Turner of CNN (Cable News Network). Turner recently announced that the word "foreign"would no longer be used on CNN news broadcasts. According to Turner, global communications have made the nations of the world so interdependent that there is no longer any such things as foreign. | 2339.txt | 2 |
[
"American PR companies should be more internationally-minded.",
"The American PR industry should develop global communications technologies.",
"People working in PR should be more fluent in foreign languages.",
"People involved in PR should avoid using the word \"foreign\"."
] | What PR industry take from Ted Turner of CNN? | The rise of multinational corporations , global marketing, new communications technologies, and shrinking cultural differences have led to an unparalleled increase in global public relations or PR.
Surprisingly, since modern PR was largely an American invention, America's relations is being threatened by PR efforts in other countries. Ten years ago, for example, the world's top five public relations agencies were American-owned. In 1991, only one was. The British in particular are becoming more sophisticated and creative. A recent survey found that more than half of all British companies include PR as part of their corporate planning activities, compared to about one-third of U.S. companies. It may not be long before London replaces New York as the capital of PR.
Why is America lagging behind in the global PR race? First, Americans as a whole tend to be fairly provincial and take more of an interest in local affairs. Knowledge of world geography, for example, has never been strong in this country. Secondly, Americans lag behind their European and Asian counterparts in knowing a second language. Less than 5 percent of Burson-Marshall's U.S. employees know two languages. Ogilvy and Mather has about the same percentage. Conversely, some European firms have half or more of their employees fluent in a second language. Finally, people involved in PR abroad tend to keep a closereye on international affairs. In the financial PR area, for instance, most Americans read the Wall Street Journal. Overseas, their counterparts read the Journal as well as the Financial Times of London and The Economist, publications not often read in this country.
Perhaps the PR industry might take a lesson from Ted Turner of CNN (Cable News Network). Turner recently announced that the word "foreign"would no longer be used on CNN news broadcasts. According to Turner, global communications have made the nations of the world so interdependent that there is no longer any such things as foreign. | 2339.txt | 0 |
[
"By its productivity.",
"By its sustainability.",
"By its impact on the environment.",
"By its contribution to economic growth."
] | How do people often measure progress in agriculture? | Sustainable development is applied to just about everything from energy to clean water and economic growth, and as a result it has become difficult to question either the basic assumptions behind it or the way the concept is put to use. This is especially true in agriculture, where sustainable development is often taken as the sole measure of progress without a proper appreciation of historical and cultural perspectives.
To start with, it is important to remember that the nature of agriculture has changed markedly throughout history, and will continue to do so. Medieval agriculture in northern Europe fed, clothed and sheltered a predominantly rural society with a much lower population density than it is today. It had minimal effect on biodiversity, and any pollution it caused was typically localised. In terms of energy use and the nutrients captured in the product it was relatively inefficient.
Contrast this with farming since the start of the industrial revolution. Competition from overseas led farmers to specialise and increase yields. Throughout this period food became cheaper, safer and more reliable. However, these changes have also led to habitat loss and to diminishing biodiversity.
What's more, demand for animal products in developing countries is growing so fast that meeting it will require an extra 300 million tons of grain a year by 2050. Yet the growth of cities and industry is reducing the amount of water available for agriculture in many regions.
All this means that agriculture in the 21st century will have to be very different from how it was in the 20th. This will require radical thinking. For example, we need to move away from the idea that traditional practices are inevitably more sustainable than new ones. We also need to abandon the notion that agriculture can be "zero impact". The key will be to abandon the rather simple and static measures of sustainability, which centre on the need to maintain production without increasing damage.
Instead we need a more dynamic interpretation, one that looks at the pros and cons of all the various way land is used. There are many different ways to measure agricultural performance besides food yield: energy use, environmental costs, water purity, carbon footprint and biodiversity. It is clear, for example, that the carbon of transporting tomatoes from Spain to the UK is less than that of producing them in the UK with additional heating and lighting. But we do not know whether lower carbon footprints will always be better for biodiversity.
What is crucial is recognising that sustainable agriculture is not just about sustainable food production. | 933.txt | 1 |
[
"localised pollution",
"the shrinking of farmland",
"competition from overseas",
"the decrease of biodiversity"
] | Specialisation and the effort to increase yields have resulted in ________. | Sustainable development is applied to just about everything from energy to clean water and economic growth, and as a result it has become difficult to question either the basic assumptions behind it or the way the concept is put to use. This is especially true in agriculture, where sustainable development is often taken as the sole measure of progress without a proper appreciation of historical and cultural perspectives.
To start with, it is important to remember that the nature of agriculture has changed markedly throughout history, and will continue to do so. Medieval agriculture in northern Europe fed, clothed and sheltered a predominantly rural society with a much lower population density than it is today. It had minimal effect on biodiversity, and any pollution it caused was typically localised. In terms of energy use and the nutrients captured in the product it was relatively inefficient.
Contrast this with farming since the start of the industrial revolution. Competition from overseas led farmers to specialise and increase yields. Throughout this period food became cheaper, safer and more reliable. However, these changes have also led to habitat loss and to diminishing biodiversity.
What's more, demand for animal products in developing countries is growing so fast that meeting it will require an extra 300 million tons of grain a year by 2050. Yet the growth of cities and industry is reducing the amount of water available for agriculture in many regions.
All this means that agriculture in the 21st century will have to be very different from how it was in the 20th. This will require radical thinking. For example, we need to move away from the idea that traditional practices are inevitably more sustainable than new ones. We also need to abandon the notion that agriculture can be "zero impact". The key will be to abandon the rather simple and static measures of sustainability, which centre on the need to maintain production without increasing damage.
Instead we need a more dynamic interpretation, one that looks at the pros and cons of all the various way land is used. There are many different ways to measure agricultural performance besides food yield: energy use, environmental costs, water purity, carbon footprint and biodiversity. It is clear, for example, that the carbon of transporting tomatoes from Spain to the UK is less than that of producing them in the UK with additional heating and lighting. But we do not know whether lower carbon footprints will always be better for biodiversity.
What is crucial is recognising that sustainable agriculture is not just about sustainable food production. | 933.txt | 3 |
[
"They have remained the same over the centuries.",
"They have not kept pace with population growth.",
"They are not necessarily sustainable.",
"They are environmentally friendly."
] | What does the author think of traditional farming practices? | Sustainable development is applied to just about everything from energy to clean water and economic growth, and as a result it has become difficult to question either the basic assumptions behind it or the way the concept is put to use. This is especially true in agriculture, where sustainable development is often taken as the sole measure of progress without a proper appreciation of historical and cultural perspectives.
To start with, it is important to remember that the nature of agriculture has changed markedly throughout history, and will continue to do so. Medieval agriculture in northern Europe fed, clothed and sheltered a predominantly rural society with a much lower population density than it is today. It had minimal effect on biodiversity, and any pollution it caused was typically localised. In terms of energy use and the nutrients captured in the product it was relatively inefficient.
Contrast this with farming since the start of the industrial revolution. Competition from overseas led farmers to specialise and increase yields. Throughout this period food became cheaper, safer and more reliable. However, these changes have also led to habitat loss and to diminishing biodiversity.
What's more, demand for animal products in developing countries is growing so fast that meeting it will require an extra 300 million tons of grain a year by 2050. Yet the growth of cities and industry is reducing the amount of water available for agriculture in many regions.
All this means that agriculture in the 21st century will have to be very different from how it was in the 20th. This will require radical thinking. For example, we need to move away from the idea that traditional practices are inevitably more sustainable than new ones. We also need to abandon the notion that agriculture can be "zero impact". The key will be to abandon the rather simple and static measures of sustainability, which centre on the need to maintain production without increasing damage.
Instead we need a more dynamic interpretation, one that looks at the pros and cons of all the various way land is used. There are many different ways to measure agricultural performance besides food yield: energy use, environmental costs, water purity, carbon footprint and biodiversity. It is clear, for example, that the carbon of transporting tomatoes from Spain to the UK is less than that of producing them in the UK with additional heating and lighting. But we do not know whether lower carbon footprints will always be better for biodiversity.
What is crucial is recognising that sustainable agriculture is not just about sustainable food production. | 933.txt | 2 |
[
"It will go through radical changes.",
"It will supply more animal products.",
"It will abandon traditional farming practices.",
"It will cause zero damage to the environment."
] | What will agriculture be like in the 21st century? | Sustainable development is applied to just about everything from energy to clean water and economic growth, and as a result it has become difficult to question either the basic assumptions behind it or the way the concept is put to use. This is especially true in agriculture, where sustainable development is often taken as the sole measure of progress without a proper appreciation of historical and cultural perspectives.
To start with, it is important to remember that the nature of agriculture has changed markedly throughout history, and will continue to do so. Medieval agriculture in northern Europe fed, clothed and sheltered a predominantly rural society with a much lower population density than it is today. It had minimal effect on biodiversity, and any pollution it caused was typically localised. In terms of energy use and the nutrients captured in the product it was relatively inefficient.
Contrast this with farming since the start of the industrial revolution. Competition from overseas led farmers to specialise and increase yields. Throughout this period food became cheaper, safer and more reliable. However, these changes have also led to habitat loss and to diminishing biodiversity.
What's more, demand for animal products in developing countries is growing so fast that meeting it will require an extra 300 million tons of grain a year by 2050. Yet the growth of cities and industry is reducing the amount of water available for agriculture in many regions.
All this means that agriculture in the 21st century will have to be very different from how it was in the 20th. This will require radical thinking. For example, we need to move away from the idea that traditional practices are inevitably more sustainable than new ones. We also need to abandon the notion that agriculture can be "zero impact". The key will be to abandon the rather simple and static measures of sustainability, which centre on the need to maintain production without increasing damage.
Instead we need a more dynamic interpretation, one that looks at the pros and cons of all the various way land is used. There are many different ways to measure agricultural performance besides food yield: energy use, environmental costs, water purity, carbon footprint and biodiversity. It is clear, for example, that the carbon of transporting tomatoes from Spain to the UK is less than that of producing them in the UK with additional heating and lighting. But we do not know whether lower carbon footprints will always be better for biodiversity.
What is crucial is recognising that sustainable agriculture is not just about sustainable food production. | 933.txt | 0 |
[
"To remind people of the need of sustainable development.",
"To suggest ways of ensuring sustainable food production.",
"To advance new criteria for measuring farming progress.",
"To urge people to rethink what sustainable agriculture is."
] | What is the author's purpose in writing this passage? | Sustainable development is applied to just about everything from energy to clean water and economic growth, and as a result it has become difficult to question either the basic assumptions behind it or the way the concept is put to use. This is especially true in agriculture, where sustainable development is often taken as the sole measure of progress without a proper appreciation of historical and cultural perspectives.
To start with, it is important to remember that the nature of agriculture has changed markedly throughout history, and will continue to do so. Medieval agriculture in northern Europe fed, clothed and sheltered a predominantly rural society with a much lower population density than it is today. It had minimal effect on biodiversity, and any pollution it caused was typically localised. In terms of energy use and the nutrients captured in the product it was relatively inefficient.
Contrast this with farming since the start of the industrial revolution. Competition from overseas led farmers to specialise and increase yields. Throughout this period food became cheaper, safer and more reliable. However, these changes have also led to habitat loss and to diminishing biodiversity.
What's more, demand for animal products in developing countries is growing so fast that meeting it will require an extra 300 million tons of grain a year by 2050. Yet the growth of cities and industry is reducing the amount of water available for agriculture in many regions.
All this means that agriculture in the 21st century will have to be very different from how it was in the 20th. This will require radical thinking. For example, we need to move away from the idea that traditional practices are inevitably more sustainable than new ones. We also need to abandon the notion that agriculture can be "zero impact". The key will be to abandon the rather simple and static measures of sustainability, which centre on the need to maintain production without increasing damage.
Instead we need a more dynamic interpretation, one that looks at the pros and cons of all the various way land is used. There are many different ways to measure agricultural performance besides food yield: energy use, environmental costs, water purity, carbon footprint and biodiversity. It is clear, for example, that the carbon of transporting tomatoes from Spain to the UK is less than that of producing them in the UK with additional heating and lighting. But we do not know whether lower carbon footprints will always be better for biodiversity.
What is crucial is recognising that sustainable agriculture is not just about sustainable food production. | 933.txt | 3 |
[
"most of us are consumers while most of them are producers of music",
"we are musical performers and they are semiprofessional musicians",
"most of us are passive spectators while they are active spectators",
"we are the audience and they are the additional performers"
] | The difference between us and Africans, as far as music is concerned, is that ________. | It has been thought and said that Africans are born with musical talent. Because music is so important in the lives of many Africans and because so much music is performed in Africa, we are inclined to think that Africans are musicians. The impression is strengthened when we look at ourselves and find that we have become largely a society of musical spectators . Music is important to us, but most of us can be considered consumers rather than producers of music. We have records, television, concerts, and radio to fulfill many of our musical needs. In most situations where music is performed in our culture it is not difficult to distinguish the audience from the performers, but such is often not the case in Africa. Alban Ayipaga, a Kasena semiprofessional musician from northern Ghana, says that when his flute and drum ensemble is performing. "Anybody can take part". This is true, but Kasena musicians recognize that not all people are equally capable of taking part in the music. Some can sing along with the drummers, but relatively few can drum and even fewer can play the flute along with the ensemble. It is fairly common in Africa for there to be an ensemble of expert musicians surrounded by others who join in by clapping, singing, or somehow adding to the totality of musical sound. Performances often take place in an open area (that is, not on a stage) and so the lines between the performing nucleus and the additional performers, active spectators, and passive spectators may be difficult to draw from our point of view. | 3694.txt | 2 |
[
"music is performed with the participation of the audience",
"music is performed without the participation of the audience",
"people tend to distinguish the audience from the performers",
"people have records, television sets and radio to fulfill their musical needs"
] | The word "such" (Line 6) refers to the fact that ________. | It has been thought and said that Africans are born with musical talent. Because music is so important in the lives of many Africans and because so much music is performed in Africa, we are inclined to think that Africans are musicians. The impression is strengthened when we look at ourselves and find that we have become largely a society of musical spectators . Music is important to us, but most of us can be considered consumers rather than producers of music. We have records, television, concerts, and radio to fulfill many of our musical needs. In most situations where music is performed in our culture it is not difficult to distinguish the audience from the performers, but such is often not the case in Africa. Alban Ayipaga, a Kasena semiprofessional musician from northern Ghana, says that when his flute and drum ensemble is performing. "Anybody can take part". This is true, but Kasena musicians recognize that not all people are equally capable of taking part in the music. Some can sing along with the drummers, but relatively few can drum and even fewer can play the flute along with the ensemble. It is fairly common in Africa for there to be an ensemble of expert musicians surrounded by others who join in by clapping, singing, or somehow adding to the totality of musical sound. Performances often take place in an open area (that is, not on a stage) and so the lines between the performing nucleus and the additional performers, active spectators, and passive spectators may be difficult to draw from our point of view. | 3694.txt | 1 |
[
"all Africans are musical and therefore much music is performed in Africa",
"not all Africans are born with musical talent although music is important in their lives",
"most Africans are capable of joining in the music by playing musical instruments",
"most Africans perform as well as professional musicians"
] | The author of the passage implies that ________. | It has been thought and said that Africans are born with musical talent. Because music is so important in the lives of many Africans and because so much music is performed in Africa, we are inclined to think that Africans are musicians. The impression is strengthened when we look at ourselves and find that we have become largely a society of musical spectators . Music is important to us, but most of us can be considered consumers rather than producers of music. We have records, television, concerts, and radio to fulfill many of our musical needs. In most situations where music is performed in our culture it is not difficult to distinguish the audience from the performers, but such is often not the case in Africa. Alban Ayipaga, a Kasena semiprofessional musician from northern Ghana, says that when his flute and drum ensemble is performing. "Anybody can take part". This is true, but Kasena musicians recognize that not all people are equally capable of taking part in the music. Some can sing along with the drummers, but relatively few can drum and even fewer can play the flute along with the ensemble. It is fairly common in Africa for there to be an ensemble of expert musicians surrounded by others who join in by clapping, singing, or somehow adding to the totality of musical sound. Performances often take place in an open area (that is, not on a stage) and so the lines between the performing nucleus and the additional performers, active spectators, and passive spectators may be difficult to draw from our point of view. | 3694.txt | 1 |
[
"musicians famous in Africa",
"musicians at the center of attention",
"musicians acting as the core in a performance",
"active participants in a musical performance"
] | The word "nucleus" (Line 13) probably refers to ________. | It has been thought and said that Africans are born with musical talent. Because music is so important in the lives of many Africans and because so much music is performed in Africa, we are inclined to think that Africans are musicians. The impression is strengthened when we look at ourselves and find that we have become largely a society of musical spectators . Music is important to us, but most of us can be considered consumers rather than producers of music. We have records, television, concerts, and radio to fulfill many of our musical needs. In most situations where music is performed in our culture it is not difficult to distinguish the audience from the performers, but such is often not the case in Africa. Alban Ayipaga, a Kasena semiprofessional musician from northern Ghana, says that when his flute and drum ensemble is performing. "Anybody can take part". This is true, but Kasena musicians recognize that not all people are equally capable of taking part in the music. Some can sing along with the drummers, but relatively few can drum and even fewer can play the flute along with the ensemble. It is fairly common in Africa for there to be an ensemble of expert musicians surrounded by others who join in by clapping, singing, or somehow adding to the totality of musical sound. Performances often take place in an open area (that is, not on a stage) and so the lines between the performing nucleus and the additional performers, active spectators, and passive spectators may be difficult to draw from our point of view. | 3694.txt | 3 |
[
"The Importance of Music to African People",
"Differences Between African Music and Music of Other Countries",
"The Relationship Between Musicians and Their Audience",
"A Characteristic Feature of African Musical Performances"
] | The best title for this passage would be ________. | It has been thought and said that Africans are born with musical talent. Because music is so important in the lives of many Africans and because so much music is performed in Africa, we are inclined to think that Africans are musicians. The impression is strengthened when we look at ourselves and find that we have become largely a society of musical spectators . Music is important to us, but most of us can be considered consumers rather than producers of music. We have records, television, concerts, and radio to fulfill many of our musical needs. In most situations where music is performed in our culture it is not difficult to distinguish the audience from the performers, but such is often not the case in Africa. Alban Ayipaga, a Kasena semiprofessional musician from northern Ghana, says that when his flute and drum ensemble is performing. "Anybody can take part". This is true, but Kasena musicians recognize that not all people are equally capable of taking part in the music. Some can sing along with the drummers, but relatively few can drum and even fewer can play the flute along with the ensemble. It is fairly common in Africa for there to be an ensemble of expert musicians surrounded by others who join in by clapping, singing, or somehow adding to the totality of musical sound. Performances often take place in an open area (that is, not on a stage) and so the lines between the performing nucleus and the additional performers, active spectators, and passive spectators may be difficult to draw from our point of view. | 3694.txt | 3 |
[
"choose his career very carefully",
"make up his mind but be prepared to change it later",
"choose a career that fits the kind of life he leads",
"try to foresee how a career will affect his life"
] | The main idea of Paragraph 2 is that a person choosing a career should _ . | In order to give you as much help as possible, I have drawn up a list of questions that you ought to ask yourself.
"Have I given thought to what I would like to be doing in 15 to 20 years from now?" Bear in mind that the career you choose will affect the future course of your life. It will partially determine your range of friends, your choice of husband or wife, where you live, your recreational activities, and other important aspects of your life.
"Have I a clear knowledge of my abilities and aptitudes, as well as my interests and aims?" Be honest about your weak points as well as your strong ones. Take a really good look at yourself and give real thought to the kind of person you are, what you are good at, and what kind of person you want to be.
"Do I know the kind of occupation in which people like myself tend to find success and satisfaction?" Once you have examined and found out about yourself, your next question is what you can really do with yourself. You can gain some idea of what other people, with similar abilities and interests, consider to be important and challenging in the careers that interest you. Watch these people at work.
"Have I weighed carefully the immediate advantages against the long-term prospects offered by the jobs I am considering?" Will the occupation you select give you satisfaction, not just when you start, but in the years to come? Realize now the importance of education in all fields, technical and professional. Remember that when promotion occurs, preference is usually given to educated persons-other things being equal.
"Have I talked about my job preference with my careers master, my parents, teachers and my headmaster?" Remember they have a tremendous fund of experience from which you should benefit. They can stimulate you to give careful thought to what you really want to do, and offer useful suggestions as to how you might take full advantage of your personal qualities and qualifications. | 910.txt | 0 |
[
"Talents.",
"Preferences.",
"Standards.",
"Attitudes."
] | Which of these words is nearest in meaning to "aptitudes"? | In order to give you as much help as possible, I have drawn up a list of questions that you ought to ask yourself.
"Have I given thought to what I would like to be doing in 15 to 20 years from now?" Bear in mind that the career you choose will affect the future course of your life. It will partially determine your range of friends, your choice of husband or wife, where you live, your recreational activities, and other important aspects of your life.
"Have I a clear knowledge of my abilities and aptitudes, as well as my interests and aims?" Be honest about your weak points as well as your strong ones. Take a really good look at yourself and give real thought to the kind of person you are, what you are good at, and what kind of person you want to be.
"Do I know the kind of occupation in which people like myself tend to find success and satisfaction?" Once you have examined and found out about yourself, your next question is what you can really do with yourself. You can gain some idea of what other people, with similar abilities and interests, consider to be important and challenging in the careers that interest you. Watch these people at work.
"Have I weighed carefully the immediate advantages against the long-term prospects offered by the jobs I am considering?" Will the occupation you select give you satisfaction, not just when you start, but in the years to come? Realize now the importance of education in all fields, technical and professional. Remember that when promotion occurs, preference is usually given to educated persons-other things being equal.
"Have I talked about my job preference with my careers master, my parents, teachers and my headmaster?" Remember they have a tremendous fund of experience from which you should benefit. They can stimulate you to give careful thought to what you really want to do, and offer useful suggestions as to how you might take full advantage of your personal qualities and qualifications. | 910.txt | 0 |
[
"the present",
"education",
"long-term prospects",
"immediate advantages"
] | The fifth paragraph is mainly concerned with _ . | In order to give you as much help as possible, I have drawn up a list of questions that you ought to ask yourself.
"Have I given thought to what I would like to be doing in 15 to 20 years from now?" Bear in mind that the career you choose will affect the future course of your life. It will partially determine your range of friends, your choice of husband or wife, where you live, your recreational activities, and other important aspects of your life.
"Have I a clear knowledge of my abilities and aptitudes, as well as my interests and aims?" Be honest about your weak points as well as your strong ones. Take a really good look at yourself and give real thought to the kind of person you are, what you are good at, and what kind of person you want to be.
"Do I know the kind of occupation in which people like myself tend to find success and satisfaction?" Once you have examined and found out about yourself, your next question is what you can really do with yourself. You can gain some idea of what other people, with similar abilities and interests, consider to be important and challenging in the careers that interest you. Watch these people at work.
"Have I weighed carefully the immediate advantages against the long-term prospects offered by the jobs I am considering?" Will the occupation you select give you satisfaction, not just when you start, but in the years to come? Realize now the importance of education in all fields, technical and professional. Remember that when promotion occurs, preference is usually given to educated persons-other things being equal.
"Have I talked about my job preference with my careers master, my parents, teachers and my headmaster?" Remember they have a tremendous fund of experience from which you should benefit. They can stimulate you to give careful thought to what you really want to do, and offer useful suggestions as to how you might take full advantage of your personal qualities and qualifications. | 910.txt | 2 |
[
"demanding",
"easy",
"well-paid",
"satisfying"
] | When we say that a career has "challenge", we mean that it is _ . | In order to give you as much help as possible, I have drawn up a list of questions that you ought to ask yourself.
"Have I given thought to what I would like to be doing in 15 to 20 years from now?" Bear in mind that the career you choose will affect the future course of your life. It will partially determine your range of friends, your choice of husband or wife, where you live, your recreational activities, and other important aspects of your life.
"Have I a clear knowledge of my abilities and aptitudes, as well as my interests and aims?" Be honest about your weak points as well as your strong ones. Take a really good look at yourself and give real thought to the kind of person you are, what you are good at, and what kind of person you want to be.
"Do I know the kind of occupation in which people like myself tend to find success and satisfaction?" Once you have examined and found out about yourself, your next question is what you can really do with yourself. You can gain some idea of what other people, with similar abilities and interests, consider to be important and challenging in the careers that interest you. Watch these people at work.
"Have I weighed carefully the immediate advantages against the long-term prospects offered by the jobs I am considering?" Will the occupation you select give you satisfaction, not just when you start, but in the years to come? Realize now the importance of education in all fields, technical and professional. Remember that when promotion occurs, preference is usually given to educated persons-other things being equal.
"Have I talked about my job preference with my careers master, my parents, teachers and my headmaster?" Remember they have a tremendous fund of experience from which you should benefit. They can stimulate you to give careful thought to what you really want to do, and offer useful suggestions as to how you might take full advantage of your personal qualities and qualifications. | 910.txt | 0 |
[
"how you can choose the right career",
"whether you know your abilities and aptitudes",
"whether you have weighed the immediate advantages against the long-term prospects offered by the job",
"whether you have talked about your job preferences with your careers master, your parents, teachers and headmaster"
] | This passage focuses on _ . | In order to give you as much help as possible, I have drawn up a list of questions that you ought to ask yourself.
"Have I given thought to what I would like to be doing in 15 to 20 years from now?" Bear in mind that the career you choose will affect the future course of your life. It will partially determine your range of friends, your choice of husband or wife, where you live, your recreational activities, and other important aspects of your life.
"Have I a clear knowledge of my abilities and aptitudes, as well as my interests and aims?" Be honest about your weak points as well as your strong ones. Take a really good look at yourself and give real thought to the kind of person you are, what you are good at, and what kind of person you want to be.
"Do I know the kind of occupation in which people like myself tend to find success and satisfaction?" Once you have examined and found out about yourself, your next question is what you can really do with yourself. You can gain some idea of what other people, with similar abilities and interests, consider to be important and challenging in the careers that interest you. Watch these people at work.
"Have I weighed carefully the immediate advantages against the long-term prospects offered by the jobs I am considering?" Will the occupation you select give you satisfaction, not just when you start, but in the years to come? Realize now the importance of education in all fields, technical and professional. Remember that when promotion occurs, preference is usually given to educated persons-other things being equal.
"Have I talked about my job preference with my careers master, my parents, teachers and my headmaster?" Remember they have a tremendous fund of experience from which you should benefit. They can stimulate you to give careful thought to what you really want to do, and offer useful suggestions as to how you might take full advantage of your personal qualities and qualifications. | 910.txt | 0 |
[
"dreams cannot be said to be prophetic even though a few have come true",
"dreams are prophetic because some of them did come true",
"dreams may come true if clearly remembered",
"dreams and reality are closely related"
] | In the first paragraph the author states that _ . | People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they fail to notice the many that have not. Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower." If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that nonevent probably won't even register.
People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes." Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. If three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end points reinforce such beliefs.
We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use criteria that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities he values: careful drivers give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy," This way everyone ranks high on his own scale.
Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautious in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading. | 3140.txt | 0 |
[
"personal misfortunes tend to happen every now and then",
"personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths usually happen together",
"misfortunes tend to occur according to certain patterns",
"misfortunes will never occur more than three times to a person in his lifetime"
] | By "things like..." "happen in threes" (Para. 3, Line 2), the author indicates that people believe _ . | People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they fail to notice the many that have not. Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower." If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that nonevent probably won't even register.
People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes." Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. If three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end points reinforce such beliefs.
We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use criteria that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities he values: careful drivers give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy," This way everyone ranks high on his own scale.
Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautious in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading. | 3140.txt | 2 |
[
"good manners",
"appropriate speech",
"friendly relations",
"satisfactory service"
] | Ten word "courtesy" (Para. 4, line 6) probably means _ . | People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they fail to notice the many that have not. Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower." If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that nonevent probably won't even register.
People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes." Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. If three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end points reinforce such beliefs.
We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use criteria that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities he values: careful drivers give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy," This way everyone ranks high on his own scale.
Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautious in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading. | 3140.txt | 0 |
[
"Happenings that go unnoticed deserve more attention.",
"In a series of misfortunes the third one is usually the most serious.",
"People tend to make use of evidence that supports their own beliefs.",
"Believers of misfortunes happening in threes are cautious in interpreting events."
] | What can be inferred from the passage? _ . | People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they fail to notice the many that have not. Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower." If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that nonevent probably won't even register.
People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes." Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. If three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end points reinforce such beliefs.
We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use criteria that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities he values: careful drivers give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy," This way everyone ranks high on his own scale.
Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautious in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading. | 3140.txt | 0 |
[
"there is some truth even in the wildest dreams",
"one should take notice of other people's merits",
"there is no order or pattern in world events",
"we should not base our conclusions on accidental evidence"
] | It can be concluded from the passage that _ . | People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they fail to notice the many that have not. Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower." If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that nonevent probably won't even register.
People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes." Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. If three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end points reinforce such beliefs.
We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use criteria that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities he values: careful drivers give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy," This way everyone ranks high on his own scale.
Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautious in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading. | 3140.txt | 3 |
[
"an unwritten agreement",
"a U.S. Supreme Court decision",
"an international conference",
"a written agreement"
] | The idea that the sea‖ belongs equally to all‖ was put out by _ . | The sea is the common possession of allnations. It belongs equally to all. No one can take itentirely to themselves; nor is it‘foreign'to any one.
This was the decision of John Marshall, chiefJustice of the United States from 1801 to 1835. Itwas made known as a basic rule of the sea that noone, and therefore everyone, owns the ocean. Thismeans that outside territorial waters (the waters within three miles of a country‘s coast),the lawis whatever nations agree on in peacetime and whatever the strongest navy powers can enforcein wartime.
After the United States bought Alaska, Americans began to seize Canadians who werehunting seals outside Alaskan territorial waters. The Americans said that the seals wereAmerican possession because they often came into the Alaskan shores owned by the UnitedStates. International judges disagreed with this reasoning. In some cases, however, thespecial rights of a nation that makes good use of an open-sea area are recognized.
All of the sea‘s rules are set up by international conferences and agreements. | 2563.txt | 1 |
[
"any powerful nation may control the sea",
"any area of the sea belongs to the nation closest to it",
"no one has whole rights to the open sea",
"no nation has any sea rights"
] | The basic rule of the sea means that _ . | The sea is the common possession of allnations. It belongs equally to all. No one can take itentirely to themselves; nor is it‘foreign'to any one.
This was the decision of John Marshall, chiefJustice of the United States from 1801 to 1835. Itwas made known as a basic rule of the sea that noone, and therefore everyone, owns the ocean. Thismeans that outside territorial waters (the waters within three miles of a country‘s coast),the lawis whatever nations agree on in peacetime and whatever the strongest navy powers can enforcein wartime.
After the United States bought Alaska, Americans began to seize Canadians who werehunting seals outside Alaskan territorial waters. The Americans said that the seals wereAmerican possession because they often came into the Alaskan shores owned by the UnitedStates. International judges disagreed with this reasoning. In some cases, however, thespecial rights of a nation that makes good use of an open-sea area are recognized.
All of the sea‘s rules are set up by international conferences and agreements. | 2563.txt | 2 |
[
"Canada had no sealing rights off Alaska",
"the Canadians could hunt the seals",
"the United States could own the seals",
"the Americans could not hunt the seals"
] | International judges decided that _ . | The sea is the common possession of allnations. It belongs equally to all. No one can take itentirely to themselves; nor is it‘foreign'to any one.
This was the decision of John Marshall, chiefJustice of the United States from 1801 to 1835. Itwas made known as a basic rule of the sea that noone, and therefore everyone, owns the ocean. Thismeans that outside territorial waters (the waters within three miles of a country‘s coast),the lawis whatever nations agree on in peacetime and whatever the strongest navy powers can enforcein wartime.
After the United States bought Alaska, Americans began to seize Canadians who werehunting seals outside Alaskan territorial waters. The Americans said that the seals wereAmerican possession because they often came into the Alaskan shores owned by the UnitedStates. International judges disagreed with this reasoning. In some cases, however, thespecial rights of a nation that makes good use of an open-sea area are recognized.
All of the sea‘s rules are set up by international conferences and agreements. | 2563.txt | 1 |
[
"overrunning those waters",
"guarding the waters",
"using the waters regularly",
"spreading out their territorial waters"
] | Nations may obtain special rights on open waters by _ . | The sea is the common possession of allnations. It belongs equally to all. No one can take itentirely to themselves; nor is it‘foreign'to any one.
This was the decision of John Marshall, chiefJustice of the United States from 1801 to 1835. Itwas made known as a basic rule of the sea that noone, and therefore everyone, owns the ocean. Thismeans that outside territorial waters (the waters within three miles of a country‘s coast),the lawis whatever nations agree on in peacetime and whatever the strongest navy powers can enforcein wartime.
After the United States bought Alaska, Americans began to seize Canadians who werehunting seals outside Alaskan territorial waters. The Americans said that the seals wereAmerican possession because they often came into the Alaskan shores owned by the UnitedStates. International judges disagreed with this reasoning. In some cases, however, thespecial rights of a nation that makes good use of an open-sea area are recognized.
All of the sea‘s rules are set up by international conferences and agreements. | 2563.txt | 2 |
[
"the rule of the sea was made known by John Marshall",
"some nations are able to acquire special open-sea rights.",
"every nation owns its territorial waters",
"the laws of the sea should be set up by international agreements"
] | The main idea of this passage is that _ . | The sea is the common possession of allnations. It belongs equally to all. No one can take itentirely to themselves; nor is it‘foreign'to any one.
This was the decision of John Marshall, chiefJustice of the United States from 1801 to 1835. Itwas made known as a basic rule of the sea that noone, and therefore everyone, owns the ocean. Thismeans that outside territorial waters (the waters within three miles of a country‘s coast),the lawis whatever nations agree on in peacetime and whatever the strongest navy powers can enforcein wartime.
After the United States bought Alaska, Americans began to seize Canadians who werehunting seals outside Alaskan territorial waters. The Americans said that the seals wereAmerican possession because they often came into the Alaskan shores owned by the UnitedStates. International judges disagreed with this reasoning. In some cases, however, thespecial rights of a nation that makes good use of an open-sea area are recognized.
All of the sea‘s rules are set up by international conferences and agreements. | 2563.txt | 3 |
[
"showed the size and speed of the mass of locusts",
"suggested the great damage that locusts can cause",
"warned that locusts would sweep the continent like rain clouds",
"both A and B"
] | By using "dark cloud" to describe locusts in the first para-graph, the author of thearticle _ . | Parts of Africa are covered by a dark cloud. But thisis no rain cloud. It is a living cloud made of billions oflocusts that are traveling across the continenteating everything in their path.
And now in the battle to stop this disaster, a radiostation in Senegal, West Africa, is offering listeners50 kilograms of rice if they can catch and kill 50kilograms of locusts. "We think this idea will get more people to take part in the war on thelocusts," said Abdoulaye Ba, from Sud-Fm, a radio station in one of Senegal's worst affectedarea.
This is West Africa's biggest locust disaster in 15 years, and it is moving east, causing hugedamage to crops. As they move they produce young and increase their number and will soonthreaten Sudan in the northeast of Africa. Some say it could reach Asia.
Experts say the harmful effect on crops in areas already suf-fering from food shortage and warcould cause many people to go hungry. Governments in the areas are not well equipped to fightthe pest.
Although leaders of 12 countries have agreed on a plan, it is not expected to be enough. "Weare now treating 6,000 hectares per day with pesticide , but we need to treat20,000 hectares per day in order to have any hope of controlling this disaster," said MohamedAbdallahi Ould Babah, director of locust control in Mauritania.
Requests are being made for international aid, which is the only way to limit the disaster, theUN's Food and Agricul-ture Organization warned. | 2364.txt | 3 |
[
"West Africa's united effort in fighting a disaster",
"the difficulty in controlling locusts",
"how locusts caused great damage to West Africa",
"a struggle to fight against a disaster brought by locusts in West Africa"
] | The story is mainly about _ . | Parts of Africa are covered by a dark cloud. But thisis no rain cloud. It is a living cloud made of billions oflocusts that are traveling across the continenteating everything in their path.
And now in the battle to stop this disaster, a radiostation in Senegal, West Africa, is offering listeners50 kilograms of rice if they can catch and kill 50kilograms of locusts. "We think this idea will get more people to take part in the war on thelocusts," said Abdoulaye Ba, from Sud-Fm, a radio station in one of Senegal's worst affectedarea.
This is West Africa's biggest locust disaster in 15 years, and it is moving east, causing hugedamage to crops. As they move they produce young and increase their number and will soonthreaten Sudan in the northeast of Africa. Some say it could reach Asia.
Experts say the harmful effect on crops in areas already suf-fering from food shortage and warcould cause many people to go hungry. Governments in the areas are not well equipped to fightthe pest.
Although leaders of 12 countries have agreed on a plan, it is not expected to be enough. "Weare now treating 6,000 hectares per day with pesticide , but we need to treat20,000 hectares per day in order to have any hope of controlling this disaster," said MohamedAbdallahi Ould Babah, director of locust control in Mauritania.
Requests are being made for international aid, which is the only way to limit the disaster, theUN's Food and Agricul-ture Organization warned. | 2364.txt | 3 |
[
"would be even more serious in Asia",
"is(was)out of control",
"affected only the warning areas",
"can not be stopped unless twice as much pesticide is provided for the affected areas"
] | The locust disaster _ . | Parts of Africa are covered by a dark cloud. But thisis no rain cloud. It is a living cloud made of billions oflocusts that are traveling across the continenteating everything in their path.
And now in the battle to stop this disaster, a radiostation in Senegal, West Africa, is offering listeners50 kilograms of rice if they can catch and kill 50kilograms of locusts. "We think this idea will get more people to take part in the war on thelocusts," said Abdoulaye Ba, from Sud-Fm, a radio station in one of Senegal's worst affectedarea.
This is West Africa's biggest locust disaster in 15 years, and it is moving east, causing hugedamage to crops. As they move they produce young and increase their number and will soonthreaten Sudan in the northeast of Africa. Some say it could reach Asia.
Experts say the harmful effect on crops in areas already suf-fering from food shortage and warcould cause many people to go hungry. Governments in the areas are not well equipped to fightthe pest.
Although leaders of 12 countries have agreed on a plan, it is not expected to be enough. "Weare now treating 6,000 hectares per day with pesticide , but we need to treat20,000 hectares per day in order to have any hope of controlling this disaster," said MohamedAbdallahi Ould Babah, director of locust control in Mauritania.
Requests are being made for international aid, which is the only way to limit the disaster, theUN's Food and Agricul-ture Organization warned. | 2364.txt | 1 |
[
"Sud-Fm offered a reward for fighting locusts so that more people would join in the effort.",
"Senegal is to the southwest of Sudan.",
"The locusts can cause such damage mainly because it has no natural enemy in West Africa.",
"12 countries affected by locusts have united but still lack pesticide."
] | Which of the following is WRONG? | Parts of Africa are covered by a dark cloud. But thisis no rain cloud. It is a living cloud made of billions oflocusts that are traveling across the continenteating everything in their path.
And now in the battle to stop this disaster, a radiostation in Senegal, West Africa, is offering listeners50 kilograms of rice if they can catch and kill 50kilograms of locusts. "We think this idea will get more people to take part in the war on thelocusts," said Abdoulaye Ba, from Sud-Fm, a radio station in one of Senegal's worst affectedarea.
This is West Africa's biggest locust disaster in 15 years, and it is moving east, causing hugedamage to crops. As they move they produce young and increase their number and will soonthreaten Sudan in the northeast of Africa. Some say it could reach Asia.
Experts say the harmful effect on crops in areas already suf-fering from food shortage and warcould cause many people to go hungry. Governments in the areas are not well equipped to fightthe pest.
Although leaders of 12 countries have agreed on a plan, it is not expected to be enough. "Weare now treating 6,000 hectares per day with pesticide , but we need to treat20,000 hectares per day in order to have any hope of controlling this disaster," said MohamedAbdallahi Ould Babah, director of locust control in Mauritania.
Requests are being made for international aid, which is the only way to limit the disaster, theUN's Food and Agricul-ture Organization warned. | 2364.txt | 2 |
[
"Because every coin has two sides，without the exception of export of palm oil.",
"Because it is both a stimulation of economy increase and climate warming.",
"Because it both makes contribution to climate improvement and economy decline.",
"Because it is both the driver of large income and huge destruction of forests."
] | Why is the great export of palm oil both a blessing and a curse? | Until recently,I had liale idea what palm oilis and why some people consider it one of the most controversial ingredients found in nearly half of our supermarket products.But when I found out why people were upset，1 was moved to take action.
The Southeast Asian country of Indonesia is the world's biggest exporter of palm oil，which has been both a blessing and a curse.It's a massive industry,providing income for thousands of workers，but palm oilis also the largest driver of the mass destruction of Indonesia's rain forests.The consequences of this destruction are significant：the loss of biodiversity,conflicts with communities who depend on the forest for their own livelihoods，and increasing emissions of greerthouse gases that cause climate change.
Forests are home to countless species.There are as few as 400 Sumatran tigers left in Indonesia,and their time on earth is running out.Greenpeace has released research showing that the expansion of oil palm and pulpwood plantations was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the destruction of Sumatran tiger habitat from 2009 to 20 11.Sumatran tigers，forced to flee from the destruction of their homes,also find themselves in direct contact with humans.Many are killed or maimed as local residents try to protect themselves from the scared animals. The decline of Sumatlan tigers is a measure of the loss of rain forest，biodiversity and also climate stability.If the tigers disappear,then we are facing all environmentA. tragedy.
If you eat chocolate，wash your hair or your clothes，there's a good chance you are being made a part of this cycle of destruction.And not by choice.Palm oil can and must make a genuine contribution to Indonesia and its people.And part of the solution rests with global brands that make the products we consume daily.Palm oil that results from forest destruction is traded around the world.But together we can say enough is enough.It's time big brands guarantee you and me that forest destruction is not a part of their products.
We are all a part of the future，and together we can ensure these magnificent animals are.too. | 1238.txt | 3 |
[
"The dramatic decrease of biological diversity in rain forests.",
"Huge profits benefit from the great exportation of palm oil.",
"Frequent clashes with people who live on those rain forests.",
"Increasing release of a great deal of greenhouse gases."
] | Which one is not included in the negative consequences of rain forests destruction? | Until recently,I had liale idea what palm oilis and why some people consider it one of the most controversial ingredients found in nearly half of our supermarket products.But when I found out why people were upset，1 was moved to take action.
The Southeast Asian country of Indonesia is the world's biggest exporter of palm oil，which has been both a blessing and a curse.It's a massive industry,providing income for thousands of workers，but palm oilis also the largest driver of the mass destruction of Indonesia's rain forests.The consequences of this destruction are significant：the loss of biodiversity,conflicts with communities who depend on the forest for their own livelihoods，and increasing emissions of greerthouse gases that cause climate change.
Forests are home to countless species.There are as few as 400 Sumatran tigers left in Indonesia,and their time on earth is running out.Greenpeace has released research showing that the expansion of oil palm and pulpwood plantations was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the destruction of Sumatran tiger habitat from 2009 to 20 11.Sumatran tigers，forced to flee from the destruction of their homes,also find themselves in direct contact with humans.Many are killed or maimed as local residents try to protect themselves from the scared animals. The decline of Sumatlan tigers is a measure of the loss of rain forest，biodiversity and also climate stability.If the tigers disappear,then we are facing all environmentA. tragedy.
If you eat chocolate，wash your hair or your clothes，there's a good chance you are being made a part of this cycle of destruction.And not by choice.Palm oil can and must make a genuine contribution to Indonesia and its people.And part of the solution rests with global brands that make the products we consume daily.Palm oil that results from forest destruction is traded around the world.But together we can say enough is enough.It's time big brands guarantee you and me that forest destruction is not a part of their products.
We are all a part of the future，and together we can ensure these magnificent animals are.too. | 1238.txt | 1 |
[
"People who killed or maimed those scared animals.",
"People who cut down the rain forests in abundance.",
"The extension of oil palm and pulpwood cultivation.",
"The loss of lain forests owing to palm plantations."
] | What is responsible for the destruction of Sumatlan tiger habitat? | Until recently,I had liale idea what palm oilis and why some people consider it one of the most controversial ingredients found in nearly half of our supermarket products.But when I found out why people were upset，1 was moved to take action.
The Southeast Asian country of Indonesia is the world's biggest exporter of palm oil，which has been both a blessing and a curse.It's a massive industry,providing income for thousands of workers，but palm oilis also the largest driver of the mass destruction of Indonesia's rain forests.The consequences of this destruction are significant：the loss of biodiversity,conflicts with communities who depend on the forest for their own livelihoods，and increasing emissions of greerthouse gases that cause climate change.
Forests are home to countless species.There are as few as 400 Sumatran tigers left in Indonesia,and their time on earth is running out.Greenpeace has released research showing that the expansion of oil palm and pulpwood plantations was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the destruction of Sumatran tiger habitat from 2009 to 20 11.Sumatran tigers，forced to flee from the destruction of their homes,also find themselves in direct contact with humans.Many are killed or maimed as local residents try to protect themselves from the scared animals. The decline of Sumatlan tigers is a measure of the loss of rain forest，biodiversity and also climate stability.If the tigers disappear,then we are facing all environmentA. tragedy.
If you eat chocolate，wash your hair or your clothes，there's a good chance you are being made a part of this cycle of destruction.And not by choice.Palm oil can and must make a genuine contribution to Indonesia and its people.And part of the solution rests with global brands that make the products we consume daily.Palm oil that results from forest destruction is traded around the world.But together we can say enough is enough.It's time big brands guarantee you and me that forest destruction is not a part of their products.
We are all a part of the future，and together we can ensure these magnificent animals are.too. | 1238.txt | 2 |
[
"Global brands should not be at cost of forest destruction.",
"They should guarantee the protection of lain forests.",
"They should pay attention to law materials of products.",
"They should not demand anything from rain forests."
] | What advice does the author give to the productive process of global brands? | Until recently,I had liale idea what palm oilis and why some people consider it one of the most controversial ingredients found in nearly half of our supermarket products.But when I found out why people were upset，1 was moved to take action.
The Southeast Asian country of Indonesia is the world's biggest exporter of palm oil，which has been both a blessing and a curse.It's a massive industry,providing income for thousands of workers，but palm oilis also the largest driver of the mass destruction of Indonesia's rain forests.The consequences of this destruction are significant：the loss of biodiversity,conflicts with communities who depend on the forest for their own livelihoods，and increasing emissions of greerthouse gases that cause climate change.
Forests are home to countless species.There are as few as 400 Sumatran tigers left in Indonesia,and their time on earth is running out.Greenpeace has released research showing that the expansion of oil palm and pulpwood plantations was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the destruction of Sumatran tiger habitat from 2009 to 20 11.Sumatran tigers，forced to flee from the destruction of their homes,also find themselves in direct contact with humans.Many are killed or maimed as local residents try to protect themselves from the scared animals. The decline of Sumatlan tigers is a measure of the loss of rain forest，biodiversity and also climate stability.If the tigers disappear,then we are facing all environmentA. tragedy.
If you eat chocolate，wash your hair or your clothes，there's a good chance you are being made a part of this cycle of destruction.And not by choice.Palm oil can and must make a genuine contribution to Indonesia and its people.And part of the solution rests with global brands that make the products we consume daily.Palm oil that results from forest destruction is traded around the world.But together we can say enough is enough.It's time big brands guarantee you and me that forest destruction is not a part of their products.
We are all a part of the future，and together we can ensure these magnificent animals are.too. | 1238.txt | 0 |
[
"Critical.",
"Positive.",
"Partial.",
"Negative."
] | What is the attitude of author to plentiful palm oil production? | Until recently,I had liale idea what palm oilis and why some people consider it one of the most controversial ingredients found in nearly half of our supermarket products.But when I found out why people were upset，1 was moved to take action.
The Southeast Asian country of Indonesia is the world's biggest exporter of palm oil，which has been both a blessing and a curse.It's a massive industry,providing income for thousands of workers，but palm oilis also the largest driver of the mass destruction of Indonesia's rain forests.The consequences of this destruction are significant：the loss of biodiversity,conflicts with communities who depend on the forest for their own livelihoods，and increasing emissions of greerthouse gases that cause climate change.
Forests are home to countless species.There are as few as 400 Sumatran tigers left in Indonesia,and their time on earth is running out.Greenpeace has released research showing that the expansion of oil palm and pulpwood plantations was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the destruction of Sumatran tiger habitat from 2009 to 20 11.Sumatran tigers，forced to flee from the destruction of their homes,also find themselves in direct contact with humans.Many are killed or maimed as local residents try to protect themselves from the scared animals. The decline of Sumatlan tigers is a measure of the loss of rain forest，biodiversity and also climate stability.If the tigers disappear,then we are facing all environmentA. tragedy.
If you eat chocolate，wash your hair or your clothes，there's a good chance you are being made a part of this cycle of destruction.And not by choice.Palm oil can and must make a genuine contribution to Indonesia and its people.And part of the solution rests with global brands that make the products we consume daily.Palm oil that results from forest destruction is traded around the world.But together we can say enough is enough.It's time big brands guarantee you and me that forest destruction is not a part of their products.
We are all a part of the future，and together we can ensure these magnificent animals are.too. | 1238.txt | 0 |
[
"One individual at a time viewed a film.",
"Customers could view one film after another.",
"Prizefights were the most popular subjects for films.",
"Each film was short."
] | According toparagraph 1, all of the following were true of viewing films in Kinetoscopeparlors EXCEPT: | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 2 |
[
"Explain Edison's financial success",
"Describe the model used to design Kinetoscope parlors",
"Contrast their popularity to that of Kinetoscope parlors",
"Illustrate how much more technologically advanced Kinetoscope parlors were"
] | The authordiscusses phonograph parlors in paragraph 2 in order to | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 1 |
[
"Frequently",
"Easily",
"Intelligently",
"Obviously"
] | The wordreadily(paragraph 3)in the passage is closest in meaning to | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 1 |
[
"Criticism",
"Leadership",
"Help",
"Approval"
] | The wordassistance in the passage is closest in meaning to | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 2 |
[
"They were a more expensive form of entertainment.",
"They were view edby larger audiences.",
"They were more educational.",
"They did not require live entertainers."
] | According toparagraph 4, how did the early movies differ from previous spectacles that werepresented to large audiences? | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 3 |
[
"They decided how to combine various components of the film program.",
"They advised film-makers on appropriate movie content.",
"They often took part in the live-action performances.",
"They produced and prerecorded the material that was shown in the theaters."
] | According toparagraph 5, what role did early exhibitors play in the presentation of moviesin theaters? | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 0 |
[
"Sound and motion were simultaneously produced in the Mutoscope.",
"More than one person could view the images at the same time with the Mutoscope.",
"The Mutoscope was a less sophisticated earlier prototype of the Kinetoscope.",
"A different type of material was used to produce the images used in the Mutocope."
] | Which of the following is mentioned in paragraph 6 as one of the ways the Mutoscope differedfrom the Kinetoscope? | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 3 |
[
"The advent of projection",
"The viewer's relationship with the image",
"A similar machine",
"Celluloid"
] | The word it inthe passage refers to | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 1 |
[
"Small in size",
"Inexpensive to create",
"Unfocused",
"Limited in subject matter"
] | According toparagraph 6, the images seen by viewers in the earlier peepshows, compared tothe images projected on the screen, were relatively | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 0 |
[
"Was enlarged",
"Was improved",
"Was varied",
"Was rejected"
] | The wordexpanded in the passage is closest in meaning to | The cinema did not emerge as a form of mass consumption until its technology evolved from the initial "peepshow" format to the point where images were projected on a screen in a darkened theater. In the peepshow format, a film was viewed through a small opening in a machine that was created for that purpose. Thomas Edison's peepshow device, the Kinetoscope, was introduced to the public in 1894. It was designed for use in Kinetoscope parlors, or arcades, which contained only a few individual machines and permitted only one customer to view a short, 50-foot film at any one time. The first Kinetoscope parlors contained five machines. For the price of 25 cents (or 5 cents per machine), customers moved from machine to machine to watch five different films (or, in the case of famous prizefights, successive rounds of a single fight).
These Kinetoscope arcades were modeled on phonograph parlors, which had proven successful for Edison several years earlier. In the phonograph parlors, customers listened to recordings through individual ear tubes, moving from one machine to the next to hear different recorded speeches or pieces of music. The Kinetoscope parlors functioned in a similar way. Edison was more interested in the sale of Kinetoscopes (for roughly $1,000 apiece) to these parlors than in the films that would be run in them (which cost approximately $10 to $15 each). He refused to develop projection technology, reasoning that if he made and sold projectors, then exhibitors would purchase only one machine-a projector-from him instead of several.
Exhibitors, however, wanted to maximize their profits, which they could do more readily by projecting a handful of films to hundreds of customers at a time (rather than one at a time) and by charging 25 to 50 cents admission. About a year after the opening of the first Kinetoscope parlor in 1894, showmen such as Louis and Auguste Lumiere, Thomas Armat and Charles Francis Jenkins, and Orville and Woodville Latham (with the assistance of Edison's former assistant, William Dickson) perfected projection devices. These early projection devices were used in vaudeville theaters, legitimate theaters, local town halls, makeshift storefront theaters, fairgrounds, and amusement parks to show films to a mass audience.
With the advent of projection in 1895-1896, motion pictures became the ultimate form of mass consumption. Previously, large audiences had viewed spectacles at the theater, where vaudeville, popular dramas, musical and minstrel shows, classical plays, lectures, and slide-and-lantern shows had been presented to several hundred spectators at a time. But the movies differed significantly from these other forms of entertainment, which depended on either live performance or (in the case of the slide-and-lantern shows) the active involvement of a master of ceremonies who assembled the final program.
Although early exhibitors regularly accompanied movies with live acts, the substance of the movies themselves is mass-produced, prerecorded material that can easily be reproduced by theaters with little or no active participation by the exhibitor. Even though early exhibitors shaped their film programs by mixing films and other entertainments together in whichever way they thought would be most attractive to audiences or by accompanying them with lectures, their creative control remained limited. What audiences came to see was the technological marvel of the movies; the lifelike reproduction of the commonplace motion of trains, of waves striking the shore, and of people walking in the street; and the magic made possible by trick photography and the manipulation of the camera.
With the advent of projection, the viewer's relationship with the image was no longer private, as it had been with earlier peepshow devices such as the Kinetoscope and the Mutoscope, which was a similar machine that reproduced motion by means of successive images on individual photographic cards instead of on strips of celluloid.It suddenly became public-an experience that the viewer shared with dozens, scores, and even hundreds of others. At the same time, the image that the spectator looked at expanded from the minuscule peepshow dimensions of 1 or 2 inches (in height) to the life-size proportions of 6 or 9 feet. | 1360.txt | 0 |
[
"Professor Walker's Research",
"How to Make Big Money.",
"Differences Between Science and Arts Degrees.",
"Studying Arts Has Negative Financial Outcome."
] | What is the best title for the passage? | One of the bitterest and most time-worm debates in student union bars up and down the country is resolved as academic research confirms that in financial terms at least, arts degrees are a complete waste of time.Getting through university boosts students'earnings by 25%, on a weighted average, or $220,000 over theirlifetime, according to Professor Ian Walker of Warwick University-but if they study Shakespeare or the peasants'revolt instead of anatomy of contract law, those gains are likely to be completely wiped out.
The government is about to allow universities to charge students up to $3,000 a year for their degrees, arguing that it's a small price to pay compared with the financial rewards graduates reap later in life. But Prof. Walker's research shows there are sharp variations in returns according to which subject a student takes.
Law, medicine and economics or business are the most lucrative choices, making their average earnings 25% higher, according to the article, published in the office for national statistics'monthly journal. Scientists get 10-15% extra. At the bottom of the list are arts subjects, which make only a " small " differenceto earnings- a small negative one, in fact. Just ahead are degrees in education-which leave hard pressed teachers anaverage of 5% better off a year than if they had left school at 18.
" it's hard to resist the conclusion that what students learn does matter a lot; and some subject areas givemore modest financial returns than others," Prof. Walker said. As an economist, he was quick to point outthat students might gain non-financial returns from arts degrees:" Studying economics might be very dull, forexample, and studying post-modernism might be a lot of fun." | 837.txt | 3 |
[
"they provide the students with very prosperous subjects to learn",
"they assume that their graduates can earn much more than they had paid",
"they don't get financial support from the government",
"they need much revenue to support the educational expenses"
] | Universities charge students a rather high tuition mainly because _ | One of the bitterest and most time-worm debates in student union bars up and down the country is resolved as academic research confirms that in financial terms at least, arts degrees are a complete waste of time.Getting through university boosts students'earnings by 25%, on a weighted average, or $220,000 over theirlifetime, according to Professor Ian Walker of Warwick University-but if they study Shakespeare or the peasants'revolt instead of anatomy of contract law, those gains are likely to be completely wiped out.
The government is about to allow universities to charge students up to $3,000 a year for their degrees, arguing that it's a small price to pay compared with the financial rewards graduates reap later in life. But Prof. Walker's research shows there are sharp variations in returns according to which subject a student takes.
Law, medicine and economics or business are the most lucrative choices, making their average earnings 25% higher, according to the article, published in the office for national statistics'monthly journal. Scientists get 10-15% extra. At the bottom of the list are arts subjects, which make only a " small " differenceto earnings- a small negative one, in fact. Just ahead are degrees in education-which leave hard pressed teachers anaverage of 5% better off a year than if they had left school at 18.
" it's hard to resist the conclusion that what students learn does matter a lot; and some subject areas givemore modest financial returns than others," Prof. Walker said. As an economist, he was quick to point outthat students might gain non-financial returns from arts degrees:" Studying economics might be very dull, forexample, and studying post-modernism might be a lot of fun." | 837.txt | 1 |
[
"sensible",
"creative",
"profitable",
"reliable"
] | The word " lucrative" (Line 1, Para. 4) most probably means _ | One of the bitterest and most time-worm debates in student union bars up and down the country is resolved as academic research confirms that in financial terms at least, arts degrees are a complete waste of time.Getting through university boosts students'earnings by 25%, on a weighted average, or $220,000 over theirlifetime, according to Professor Ian Walker of Warwick University-but if they study Shakespeare or the peasants'revolt instead of anatomy of contract law, those gains are likely to be completely wiped out.
The government is about to allow universities to charge students up to $3,000 a year for their degrees, arguing that it's a small price to pay compared with the financial rewards graduates reap later in life. But Prof. Walker's research shows there are sharp variations in returns according to which subject a student takes.
Law, medicine and economics or business are the most lucrative choices, making their average earnings 25% higher, according to the article, published in the office for national statistics'monthly journal. Scientists get 10-15% extra. At the bottom of the list are arts subjects, which make only a " small " differenceto earnings- a small negative one, in fact. Just ahead are degrees in education-which leave hard pressed teachers anaverage of 5% better off a year than if they had left school at 18.
" it's hard to resist the conclusion that what students learn does matter a lot; and some subject areas givemore modest financial returns than others," Prof. Walker said. As an economist, he was quick to point outthat students might gain non-financial returns from arts degrees:" Studying economics might be very dull, forexample, and studying post-modernism might be a lot of fun." | 837.txt | 2 |
[
"education graduates",
"arts graduates",
"those who had not studied at the university",
"the average income"
] | Law, medical and business graduates could earn 25% more than _ | One of the bitterest and most time-worm debates in student union bars up and down the country is resolved as academic research confirms that in financial terms at least, arts degrees are a complete waste of time.Getting through university boosts students'earnings by 25%, on a weighted average, or $220,000 over theirlifetime, according to Professor Ian Walker of Warwick University-but if they study Shakespeare or the peasants'revolt instead of anatomy of contract law, those gains are likely to be completely wiped out.
The government is about to allow universities to charge students up to $3,000 a year for their degrees, arguing that it's a small price to pay compared with the financial rewards graduates reap later in life. But Prof. Walker's research shows there are sharp variations in returns according to which subject a student takes.
Law, medicine and economics or business are the most lucrative choices, making their average earnings 25% higher, according to the article, published in the office for national statistics'monthly journal. Scientists get 10-15% extra. At the bottom of the list are arts subjects, which make only a " small " differenceto earnings- a small negative one, in fact. Just ahead are degrees in education-which leave hard pressed teachers anaverage of 5% better off a year than if they had left school at 18.
" it's hard to resist the conclusion that what students learn does matter a lot; and some subject areas givemore modest financial returns than others," Prof. Walker said. As an economist, he was quick to point outthat students might gain non-financial returns from arts degrees:" Studying economics might be very dull, forexample, and studying post-modernism might be a lot of fun." | 837.txt | 2 |
[
"regards arts degrees as meaningless",
"finds this result disappointing and unfair",
"wants the students to think twice before they decide what to learn in college",
"holds that arts degrees are still rewarding despite its scarce financial returns"
] | We can safely conclude that the author _ | One of the bitterest and most time-worm debates in student union bars up and down the country is resolved as academic research confirms that in financial terms at least, arts degrees are a complete waste of time.Getting through university boosts students'earnings by 25%, on a weighted average, or $220,000 over theirlifetime, according to Professor Ian Walker of Warwick University-but if they study Shakespeare or the peasants'revolt instead of anatomy of contract law, those gains are likely to be completely wiped out.
The government is about to allow universities to charge students up to $3,000 a year for their degrees, arguing that it's a small price to pay compared with the financial rewards graduates reap later in life. But Prof. Walker's research shows there are sharp variations in returns according to which subject a student takes.
Law, medicine and economics or business are the most lucrative choices, making their average earnings 25% higher, according to the article, published in the office for national statistics'monthly journal. Scientists get 10-15% extra. At the bottom of the list are arts subjects, which make only a " small " differenceto earnings- a small negative one, in fact. Just ahead are degrees in education-which leave hard pressed teachers anaverage of 5% better off a year than if they had left school at 18.
" it's hard to resist the conclusion that what students learn does matter a lot; and some subject areas givemore modest financial returns than others," Prof. Walker said. As an economist, he was quick to point outthat students might gain non-financial returns from arts degrees:" Studying economics might be very dull, forexample, and studying post-modernism might be a lot of fun." | 837.txt | 3 |
[
"The Problems and Frustrations of a Business Student",
"The Importance of Business Studies",
"The Capitalization of Federal Express",
"The Implementation of a Successful Business"
] | The most appropriate title for this passage is " _ " . | Federal Express is a company that specializes in rapid overnight delivery of high-priority packages. The first company of its type, Federal Express was founded by the youthful Fred Smith in 1971, when he was only28 years old. Smith had actually developed the idea for the rapid delivery service in a term paper for an economics class when he was a student at Yale University.
The term paper received a less-than-stellar grade because of the infeasibility of the project that Smith had outlined. The model that Smith proposed had never been tried; it was a model that was efficient to operate but at the same time very difficult to institute.
Smith achieved efficiency in his model by designing a system that was separate from the passenger system and could, therefore, focus on how to deliver packages most efficiently. His strategy was to have his own planes so that he could create his own schedules and to ship all packages through the centralized hub city of Memphis, a set-up which resembles the spokes on the wheel of a bicycle. With this combination ofhis own planes and hub set-up, he could get packages anywhere in the United States overnight.
What made Smith's idea difficult to institute was the fact that the entire system had to be created before the company could begin operations. He needed a fleet of aircraft to collect packages from airports every night and deliver them to Memphis, where they were immediately sorted and flown out to their new destinations; he needed a fleet of trucks to deliver packages to and from the various airports; he needed facilities and trained staff all in place to handle the operation. Smith had a $4 million inheritance from his father, and he managed to raise an additional 91 million dollars from venture capitalists to get the companyoperating. | 4138.txt | 3 |
[
"Smith submitted it through a delivery service.",
"It was written by a student of Smith's.",
"The grade was not quite satisfactory.",
"The professor thought it had great potential."
] | What is stated in the passage about Smith's term paper? | Federal Express is a company that specializes in rapid overnight delivery of high-priority packages. The first company of its type, Federal Express was founded by the youthful Fred Smith in 1971, when he was only28 years old. Smith had actually developed the idea for the rapid delivery service in a term paper for an economics class when he was a student at Yale University.
The term paper received a less-than-stellar grade because of the infeasibility of the project that Smith had outlined. The model that Smith proposed had never been tried; it was a model that was efficient to operate but at the same time very difficult to institute.
Smith achieved efficiency in his model by designing a system that was separate from the passenger system and could, therefore, focus on how to deliver packages most efficiently. His strategy was to have his own planes so that he could create his own schedules and to ship all packages through the centralized hub city of Memphis, a set-up which resembles the spokes on the wheel of a bicycle. With this combination ofhis own planes and hub set-up, he could get packages anywhere in the United States overnight.
What made Smith's idea difficult to institute was the fact that the entire system had to be created before the company could begin operations. He needed a fleet of aircraft to collect packages from airports every night and deliver them to Memphis, where they were immediately sorted and flown out to their new destinations; he needed a fleet of trucks to deliver packages to and from the various airports; he needed facilities and trained staff all in place to handle the operation. Smith had a $4 million inheritance from his father, and he managed to raise an additional 91 million dollars from venture capitalists to get the companyoperating. | 4138.txt | 2 |
[
"That he should focus on passenger service.",
"That package delivery should be separate from passenger service.",
"That packages could be delivered on other companies' planes.",
"That passenger service had to be efficient."
] | What was Smith's key idea? | Federal Express is a company that specializes in rapid overnight delivery of high-priority packages. The first company of its type, Federal Express was founded by the youthful Fred Smith in 1971, when he was only28 years old. Smith had actually developed the idea for the rapid delivery service in a term paper for an economics class when he was a student at Yale University.
The term paper received a less-than-stellar grade because of the infeasibility of the project that Smith had outlined. The model that Smith proposed had never been tried; it was a model that was efficient to operate but at the same time very difficult to institute.
Smith achieved efficiency in his model by designing a system that was separate from the passenger system and could, therefore, focus on how to deliver packages most efficiently. His strategy was to have his own planes so that he could create his own schedules and to ship all packages through the centralized hub city of Memphis, a set-up which resembles the spokes on the wheel of a bicycle. With this combination ofhis own planes and hub set-up, he could get packages anywhere in the United States overnight.
What made Smith's idea difficult to institute was the fact that the entire system had to be created before the company could begin operations. He needed a fleet of aircraft to collect packages from airports every night and deliver them to Memphis, where they were immediately sorted and flown out to their new destinations; he needed a fleet of trucks to deliver packages to and from the various airports; he needed facilities and trained staff all in place to handle the operation. Smith had a $4 million inheritance from his father, and he managed to raise an additional 91 million dollars from venture capitalists to get the companyoperating. | 4138.txt | 1 |
[
"was near the middle of the country",
"had a large number of passenger aircraft",
"already had a large package delivery service",
"was a favorite passenger airport"
] | It can be inferred from the passage that Smith selected Memphis as his hub city because it _ . | Federal Express is a company that specializes in rapid overnight delivery of high-priority packages. The first company of its type, Federal Express was founded by the youthful Fred Smith in 1971, when he was only28 years old. Smith had actually developed the idea for the rapid delivery service in a term paper for an economics class when he was a student at Yale University.
The term paper received a less-than-stellar grade because of the infeasibility of the project that Smith had outlined. The model that Smith proposed had never been tried; it was a model that was efficient to operate but at the same time very difficult to institute.
Smith achieved efficiency in his model by designing a system that was separate from the passenger system and could, therefore, focus on how to deliver packages most efficiently. His strategy was to have his own planes so that he could create his own schedules and to ship all packages through the centralized hub city of Memphis, a set-up which resembles the spokes on the wheel of a bicycle. With this combination ofhis own planes and hub set-up, he could get packages anywhere in the United States overnight.
What made Smith's idea difficult to institute was the fact that the entire system had to be created before the company could begin operations. He needed a fleet of aircraft to collect packages from airports every night and deliver them to Memphis, where they were immediately sorted and flown out to their new destinations; he needed a fleet of trucks to deliver packages to and from the various airports; he needed facilities and trained staff all in place to handle the operation. Smith had a $4 million inheritance from his father, and he managed to raise an additional 91 million dollars from venture capitalists to get the companyoperating. | 4138.txt | 0 |
[
"remains",
"evidence",
"results",
"reminders"
] | The word "remnants" in the passage is closest in meaning | During the peak of the last ice age, northeast Asia (SiberiA. and Alaska were connected by a broad land mass called the Bering Land Bridge. This land bridge existed because so much of Earth's water was frozen in the great ice sheets that sea levels were over 100 meters lower than they are today. Between 25,000 and 10,000 years ago, Siberia, the Bering Land Bndge, and Alaska shared many environmental characteristics. These included a common mammalian fauna of large mammals, a common flora composed of broad grasslands as well as wind-swept dunes and tundra, and a common climate with cold, dry winters and somewhat warmer summers. The recognition that many aspects of the modem flora and fauna were present on both sides of the Bering Sea as remnants of the ice-age landscape led to this region being named Beringia.
It is through Beringia that small groups of large mammal hunters, slowly expanding their hunting territories, eventually colonized North and South America. On this archaeologists generally agree, but that is where the agreement stops. One broad area of disagreement in explaining the peopling of the Americas is the domain of paleoecologists, but it is critical to understanding human history: what was Beringia like?
The Beringian landscape was very different from what it is today. Broad, windswept valleys; glaciated mountains; sparse vegetation; and less moisture created a rather forbidding land mass. This land mass supported herds of now-extinct species of mammoth, bison, and horse and somewhat modern versions of caribou, musk ox, elk, and saiga antelope. These grazers supported in turn a number of impressive carnivores, including the giant short-faced bear, the saber-tooth cat, and a large species of lion.
The presence of mammal species that require grassland vegetation has led Arctic biologist Dale Guthrie to argue that while cold and dry, there must have been broad areas of dense vegetation to support herds of mammoth, horse, and bison. Further, nearly all of the ice-age fauna had teeth that indicate an adaptation to grasses and sedges; they could not have been supported by a modern flora of mosses and lichens. Guthrie has also demonstrated that the landscape must have been subject to intense and continuous winds, especially in winter. He makes this argument based on the anatomy of horse and bison, which do not have the ability to search for food through deep snow cover. They need landscapes with strong winds that remove the winter snows, exposing the dry grasses beneath. Guthrie applied the term " mammoth steppe" to characterize this landscape.
In contrast, Paul Colinvaux has offered a counterargument based on the analysis of pollen in lake sediments dating to the last ice age. He found that the amount of pollen recovered in these sediments is so low that the Beringian landscape during the peak of the last glaciation was more likely to have been what he termed a "polar desert," with little or only sparse vegetation, in no way was it possible that this region could have supported large herds of mammals and thus, human hunters. Guthrie has argued against this view by pointing out that radiocarbon analysis of mammoth, horse, and bison bones from Beringian deposits revealed that the bones date to the period of most intense glaciation.
The argument seemed to be at a standstill until a number of recent studies resulted in a spectacular suite of new finds. The first was the discovery of a 1,000-square-kilometer preserved patch of Beringian vegetation dating to just over 17,000 years ago-the peak of the last ice age The plants were preserved under a thick ash fall from a volcanic eruption. Investigations of the plants found grasses, sedges, mosses, and many other varieties in a nearly continuous cover, as was predicted by Guthrie. But this vegetation had a thin root mat with no soil formation, demonstrating that there was little long-term stability in plant cover, a finding supporting some of the arguments of Colinvaux. A mixture of continuous but thin vegetation supporting herds of large mammals is one that seems plausible and realistic with the available data. | 2464.txt | 0 |
[
"field of expertise",
"challenge",
"interest",
"responsibility"
] | The word "domain" in the passage is closest in meaning to | During the peak of the last ice age, northeast Asia (SiberiA. and Alaska were connected by a broad land mass called the Bering Land Bridge. This land bridge existed because so much of Earth's water was frozen in the great ice sheets that sea levels were over 100 meters lower than they are today. Between 25,000 and 10,000 years ago, Siberia, the Bering Land Bndge, and Alaska shared many environmental characteristics. These included a common mammalian fauna of large mammals, a common flora composed of broad grasslands as well as wind-swept dunes and tundra, and a common climate with cold, dry winters and somewhat warmer summers. The recognition that many aspects of the modem flora and fauna were present on both sides of the Bering Sea as remnants of the ice-age landscape led to this region being named Beringia.
It is through Beringia that small groups of large mammal hunters, slowly expanding their hunting territories, eventually colonized North and South America. On this archaeologists generally agree, but that is where the agreement stops. One broad area of disagreement in explaining the peopling of the Americas is the domain of paleoecologists, but it is critical to understanding human history: what was Beringia like?
The Beringian landscape was very different from what it is today. Broad, windswept valleys; glaciated mountains; sparse vegetation; and less moisture created a rather forbidding land mass. This land mass supported herds of now-extinct species of mammoth, bison, and horse and somewhat modern versions of caribou, musk ox, elk, and saiga antelope. These grazers supported in turn a number of impressive carnivores, including the giant short-faced bear, the saber-tooth cat, and a large species of lion.
The presence of mammal species that require grassland vegetation has led Arctic biologist Dale Guthrie to argue that while cold and dry, there must have been broad areas of dense vegetation to support herds of mammoth, horse, and bison. Further, nearly all of the ice-age fauna had teeth that indicate an adaptation to grasses and sedges; they could not have been supported by a modern flora of mosses and lichens. Guthrie has also demonstrated that the landscape must have been subject to intense and continuous winds, especially in winter. He makes this argument based on the anatomy of horse and bison, which do not have the ability to search for food through deep snow cover. They need landscapes with strong winds that remove the winter snows, exposing the dry grasses beneath. Guthrie applied the term " mammoth steppe" to characterize this landscape.
In contrast, Paul Colinvaux has offered a counterargument based on the analysis of pollen in lake sediments dating to the last ice age. He found that the amount of pollen recovered in these sediments is so low that the Beringian landscape during the peak of the last glaciation was more likely to have been what he termed a "polar desert," with little or only sparse vegetation, in no way was it possible that this region could have supported large herds of mammals and thus, human hunters. Guthrie has argued against this view by pointing out that radiocarbon analysis of mammoth, horse, and bison bones from Beringian deposits revealed that the bones date to the period of most intense glaciation.
The argument seemed to be at a standstill until a number of recent studies resulted in a spectacular suite of new finds. The first was the discovery of a 1,000-square-kilometer preserved patch of Beringian vegetation dating to just over 17,000 years ago-the peak of the last ice age The plants were preserved under a thick ash fall from a volcanic eruption. Investigations of the plants found grasses, sedges, mosses, and many other varieties in a nearly continuous cover, as was predicted by Guthrie. But this vegetation had a thin root mat with no soil formation, demonstrating that there was little long-term stability in plant cover, a finding supporting some of the arguments of Colinvaux. A mixture of continuous but thin vegetation supporting herds of large mammals is one that seems plausible and realistic with the available data. | 2464.txt | 0 |
[
"There was little vegetation.",
"The mammal species there all survived into modern versions.",
"The climate was drier than it is today.",
"There were mountains with glaciers."
] | According to paragraph 3, all of the following are true of the Beringian landscape EXCEPT. | During the peak of the last ice age, northeast Asia (SiberiA. and Alaska were connected by a broad land mass called the Bering Land Bridge. This land bridge existed because so much of Earth's water was frozen in the great ice sheets that sea levels were over 100 meters lower than they are today. Between 25,000 and 10,000 years ago, Siberia, the Bering Land Bndge, and Alaska shared many environmental characteristics. These included a common mammalian fauna of large mammals, a common flora composed of broad grasslands as well as wind-swept dunes and tundra, and a common climate with cold, dry winters and somewhat warmer summers. The recognition that many aspects of the modem flora and fauna were present on both sides of the Bering Sea as remnants of the ice-age landscape led to this region being named Beringia.
It is through Beringia that small groups of large mammal hunters, slowly expanding their hunting territories, eventually colonized North and South America. On this archaeologists generally agree, but that is where the agreement stops. One broad area of disagreement in explaining the peopling of the Americas is the domain of paleoecologists, but it is critical to understanding human history: what was Beringia like?
The Beringian landscape was very different from what it is today. Broad, windswept valleys; glaciated mountains; sparse vegetation; and less moisture created a rather forbidding land mass. This land mass supported herds of now-extinct species of mammoth, bison, and horse and somewhat modern versions of caribou, musk ox, elk, and saiga antelope. These grazers supported in turn a number of impressive carnivores, including the giant short-faced bear, the saber-tooth cat, and a large species of lion.
The presence of mammal species that require grassland vegetation has led Arctic biologist Dale Guthrie to argue that while cold and dry, there must have been broad areas of dense vegetation to support herds of mammoth, horse, and bison. Further, nearly all of the ice-age fauna had teeth that indicate an adaptation to grasses and sedges; they could not have been supported by a modern flora of mosses and lichens. Guthrie has also demonstrated that the landscape must have been subject to intense and continuous winds, especially in winter. He makes this argument based on the anatomy of horse and bison, which do not have the ability to search for food through deep snow cover. They need landscapes with strong winds that remove the winter snows, exposing the dry grasses beneath. Guthrie applied the term " mammoth steppe" to characterize this landscape.
In contrast, Paul Colinvaux has offered a counterargument based on the analysis of pollen in lake sediments dating to the last ice age. He found that the amount of pollen recovered in these sediments is so low that the Beringian landscape during the peak of the last glaciation was more likely to have been what he termed a "polar desert," with little or only sparse vegetation, in no way was it possible that this region could have supported large herds of mammals and thus, human hunters. Guthrie has argued against this view by pointing out that radiocarbon analysis of mammoth, horse, and bison bones from Beringian deposits revealed that the bones date to the period of most intense glaciation.
The argument seemed to be at a standstill until a number of recent studies resulted in a spectacular suite of new finds. The first was the discovery of a 1,000-square-kilometer preserved patch of Beringian vegetation dating to just over 17,000 years ago-the peak of the last ice age The plants were preserved under a thick ash fall from a volcanic eruption. Investigations of the plants found grasses, sedges, mosses, and many other varieties in a nearly continuous cover, as was predicted by Guthrie. But this vegetation had a thin root mat with no soil formation, demonstrating that there was little long-term stability in plant cover, a finding supporting some of the arguments of Colinvaux. A mixture of continuous but thin vegetation supporting herds of large mammals is one that seems plausible and realistic with the available data. | 2464.txt | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.