option
list | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"Take it seriously.",
"Don't rely on others.",
"Do something else.",
"Don't lose heart."
] | What does the author advise us to do the next time we are waiting? | The very purest form of waiting is the Watched-Pot Wait. It is without doubt the most annoying of all. Take filling up the kitchen sink as an example. There is absolutely nothing you can do while this is going on but keep both eyes fixed on the sink until it's full. During these waits, the brain slips away from the body and wanders about until the water runs over the edge of the counter and onto your socks. This kind of wait makes the waiter helpless and mindless.
A cousin to the Watched-Pot Wait is the Forced Wait. This one requires a bit of discipline. Properly preparing packaged noodle soup requires a Forced Wait. Directions are very specific. "Bring three cups of water to boil, add mix, simmer three minutes, remove from heat, let stand five minutes."I have my doubts that anyone has actually followed the procedures strictly. After all, Forced Waiting requires patience.
Perhaps the most powerful type of waiting is the Lucky-Break Wait. This type of wait is unusual in that it is for the most part voluntary. Unlike the Forced Wait, which is also voluntary, waiting for your lucky break does not necessarily mean that it will happen.
Turning one's life into a waiting game requires faith and hope, and is strictly for the optimists among us. On the surface it seems as ridiculous as following the directions on soup mixes, but the Lucky-Break Wait well serves those who are willing to do it. As long as one doesn't come to rely on it, wishing for a few good things to happen never hurts anybody.
We certainly do spend a good deal of our time waiting. The next time you're standing at the sink waiting for it to fill while cooking noodle soup that you'll have to eat until a large bag of cash falls out of the sky, don't be desperate. You're probably just as busy as the next guy. | 3861.txt | 3 |
[
"exploring various causes of \"waits\".",
"describing detailed processes of \"waits\".",
"analyzing different categories of \"waits\"",
"revealing frustrating consequences of \"waits\""
] | The author supports his view by _ . | The very purest form of waiting is the Watched-Pot Wait. It is without doubt the most annoying of all. Take filling up the kitchen sink as an example. There is absolutely nothing you can do while this is going on but keep both eyes fixed on the sink until it's full. During these waits, the brain slips away from the body and wanders about until the water runs over the edge of the counter and onto your socks. This kind of wait makes the waiter helpless and mindless.
A cousin to the Watched-Pot Wait is the Forced Wait. This one requires a bit of discipline. Properly preparing packaged noodle soup requires a Forced Wait. Directions are very specific. "Bring three cups of water to boil, add mix, simmer three minutes, remove from heat, let stand five minutes."I have my doubts that anyone has actually followed the procedures strictly. After all, Forced Waiting requires patience.
Perhaps the most powerful type of waiting is the Lucky-Break Wait. This type of wait is unusual in that it is for the most part voluntary. Unlike the Forced Wait, which is also voluntary, waiting for your lucky break does not necessarily mean that it will happen.
Turning one's life into a waiting game requires faith and hope, and is strictly for the optimists among us. On the surface it seems as ridiculous as following the directions on soup mixes, but the Lucky-Break Wait well serves those who are willing to do it. As long as one doesn't come to rely on it, wishing for a few good things to happen never hurts anybody.
We certainly do spend a good deal of our time waiting. The next time you're standing at the sink waiting for it to fill while cooking noodle soup that you'll have to eat until a large bag of cash falls out of the sky, don't be desperate. You're probably just as busy as the next guy. | 3861.txt | 2 |
[
"The Right to Live",
"The Right to Die",
"The Doctor's Duty",
"Life is Better Than Death"
] | The best title for this passage would be. | In recent years advances in medical technology have made it possible for people to live longer than in the past. New medicines and instruments are being developed every day to extend life. However, some people, including some doctors, are not in favour of these life extending measures, and they argue that people should have the right to die when they want. They say that the quality of life is as important as life itself, and that people should not be forced to go on living when conditions of life have become unbearable. They say that people should be allowed to die with dignity and to decide when they want to die. Others argue that life under any conditions is better. | 1122.txt | 1 |
[
"the development of medical technology",
"big hospitals",
"good doctors",
"both B and C"
] | In recent years, people can live longer than in the past, It's because of. | In recent years advances in medical technology have made it possible for people to live longer than in the past. New medicines and instruments are being developed every day to extend life. However, some people, including some doctors, are not in favour of these life extending measures, and they argue that people should have the right to die when they want. They say that the quality of life is as important as life itself, and that people should not be forced to go on living when conditions of life have become unbearable. They say that people should be allowed to die with dignity and to decide when they want to die. Others argue that life under any conditions is better. | 1122.txt | 0 |
[
"the doctors",
"the surroundings",
"his or her family",
"the patient himself or herself"
] | According to some people, whether a dying patient has the right to die or not is up to. | In recent years advances in medical technology have made it possible for people to live longer than in the past. New medicines and instruments are being developed every day to extend life. However, some people, including some doctors, are not in favour of these life extending measures, and they argue that people should have the right to die when they want. They say that the quality of life is as important as life itself, and that people should not be forced to go on living when conditions of life have become unbearable. They say that people should be allowed to die with dignity and to decide when they want to die. Others argue that life under any conditions is better. | 1122.txt | 3 |
[
"death is better than life",
"life is better than death",
"neither death nor life is good",
"none of the above"
] | The writer's opinion is. | In recent years advances in medical technology have made it possible for people to live longer than in the past. New medicines and instruments are being developed every day to extend life. However, some people, including some doctors, are not in favour of these life extending measures, and they argue that people should have the right to die when they want. They say that the quality of life is as important as life itself, and that people should not be forced to go on living when conditions of life have become unbearable. They say that people should be allowed to die with dignity and to decide when they want to die. Others argue that life under any conditions is better. | 1122.txt | 3 |
[
"Most of the medical workers join in the argument.",
"The argument has ended in favour of the patients.",
"The argument hasn't ended yet.",
"The quality of life is not as important as life itself, so it is generally thought that people should not be allowed to die under any conditions."
] | Which of the following statements is true according to the passage? | In recent years advances in medical technology have made it possible for people to live longer than in the past. New medicines and instruments are being developed every day to extend life. However, some people, including some doctors, are not in favour of these life extending measures, and they argue that people should have the right to die when they want. They say that the quality of life is as important as life itself, and that people should not be forced to go on living when conditions of life have become unbearable. They say that people should be allowed to die with dignity and to decide when they want to die. Others argue that life under any conditions is better. | 1122.txt | 2 |
[
"its standard of living",
"its money",
"its ability to provide goods and services",
"its ability to provide transport and entertainment"
] | A country's wealth depends upon_ . , | The "standard of living" of any country means the average person's share of the goods and services which the country produces. A country's standard of living, therefore, depends first and foremost on its capacity to produce wealth. "Wealth" in this sense is not money, for we do not live on money but on things that money can buy: "goods" such as food and clothing, and "services" such as transport and entertainment.
A country's capacity to produce wealth depends upon many factors, most of which have an effect on one another. Wealth depends to a great extent upon a country's natural resources, such as coal, gold, and other minerals, water supply and so on. Some regions of the world are well supplied with coal and minerals, and have a fertile soil and a favorable climate; other regions possess perhaps only one of these things, and some regions possess none of them. The U. S. A is one of the wealthiest regions of the world because she has vast natural resources within her borders, her soil is fertile, and her climate is varied. The Sahara Desert, on the other hand, is one of the least wealthy.
Next to natural resources comes the ability to turn them to use. China is perhaps as well off as the U. S. A. in natural resources, but suffered for many years from civil and external wars, and for this and other reasons was. unable to develop her resources. Sound and stable political conditions, and freedom from foreign invasion, enable a country to develop its natural resources peacefully and steadily, and to produce more wealth than another country equally well served by nature but less well ordered. Another important factor is the technical efficiency of a country's people. Old countries that have, through many centuries, trained up numerous skilled craftsmen and technicians are better placed to produce wealth than countries whose workers are largely unskilled. Wealth also produces wealth. As a country becomes wealthier, its people have a large margin for saving, and can put their savings into factories and machines which will help workers to turn out more goods in their working day. | 1784.txt | 2 |
[
"most importantly",
"firstly",
"largely",
"for the most part"
] | The word "foremost" means_ . | The "standard of living" of any country means the average person's share of the goods and services which the country produces. A country's standard of living, therefore, depends first and foremost on its capacity to produce wealth. "Wealth" in this sense is not money, for we do not live on money but on things that money can buy: "goods" such as food and clothing, and "services" such as transport and entertainment.
A country's capacity to produce wealth depends upon many factors, most of which have an effect on one another. Wealth depends to a great extent upon a country's natural resources, such as coal, gold, and other minerals, water supply and so on. Some regions of the world are well supplied with coal and minerals, and have a fertile soil and a favorable climate; other regions possess perhaps only one of these things, and some regions possess none of them. The U. S. A is one of the wealthiest regions of the world because she has vast natural resources within her borders, her soil is fertile, and her climate is varied. The Sahara Desert, on the other hand, is one of the least wealthy.
Next to natural resources comes the ability to turn them to use. China is perhaps as well off as the U. S. A. in natural resources, but suffered for many years from civil and external wars, and for this and other reasons was. unable to develop her resources. Sound and stable political conditions, and freedom from foreign invasion, enable a country to develop its natural resources peacefully and steadily, and to produce more wealth than another country equally well served by nature but less well ordered. Another important factor is the technical efficiency of a country's people. Old countries that have, through many centuries, trained up numerous skilled craftsmen and technicians are better placed to produce wealth than countries whose workers are largely unskilled. Wealth also produces wealth. As a country becomes wealthier, its people have a large margin for saving, and can put their savings into factories and machines which will help workers to turn out more goods in their working day. | 1784.txt | 0 |
[
"a country's wealth depends on many factors",
"the U. S. A. is one of the wealthiest countries in the world",
"the Sahara Desert is a very poor region",
"natural resources are an important factor in the wealth or poverty of a country"
] | The main idea of the second paragraph is that_ . | The "standard of living" of any country means the average person's share of the goods and services which the country produces. A country's standard of living, therefore, depends first and foremost on its capacity to produce wealth. "Wealth" in this sense is not money, for we do not live on money but on things that money can buy: "goods" such as food and clothing, and "services" such as transport and entertainment.
A country's capacity to produce wealth depends upon many factors, most of which have an effect on one another. Wealth depends to a great extent upon a country's natural resources, such as coal, gold, and other minerals, water supply and so on. Some regions of the world are well supplied with coal and minerals, and have a fertile soil and a favorable climate; other regions possess perhaps only one of these things, and some regions possess none of them. The U. S. A is one of the wealthiest regions of the world because she has vast natural resources within her borders, her soil is fertile, and her climate is varied. The Sahara Desert, on the other hand, is one of the least wealthy.
Next to natural resources comes the ability to turn them to use. China is perhaps as well off as the U. S. A. in natural resources, but suffered for many years from civil and external wars, and for this and other reasons was. unable to develop her resources. Sound and stable political conditions, and freedom from foreign invasion, enable a country to develop its natural resources peacefully and steadily, and to produce more wealth than another country equally well served by nature but less well ordered. Another important factor is the technical efficiency of a country's people. Old countries that have, through many centuries, trained up numerous skilled craftsmen and technicians are better placed to produce wealth than countries whose workers are largely unskilled. Wealth also produces wealth. As a country becomes wealthier, its people have a large margin for saving, and can put their savings into factories and machines which will help workers to turn out more goods in their working day. | 1784.txt | 0 |
[
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | The third paragraph mentions some of the advantages which one country may have over another in making use of its resources. How many such advantages are mentioned in this paragraph? | The "standard of living" of any country means the average person's share of the goods and services which the country produces. A country's standard of living, therefore, depends first and foremost on its capacity to produce wealth. "Wealth" in this sense is not money, for we do not live on money but on things that money can buy: "goods" such as food and clothing, and "services" such as transport and entertainment.
A country's capacity to produce wealth depends upon many factors, most of which have an effect on one another. Wealth depends to a great extent upon a country's natural resources, such as coal, gold, and other minerals, water supply and so on. Some regions of the world are well supplied with coal and minerals, and have a fertile soil and a favorable climate; other regions possess perhaps only one of these things, and some regions possess none of them. The U. S. A is one of the wealthiest regions of the world because she has vast natural resources within her borders, her soil is fertile, and her climate is varied. The Sahara Desert, on the other hand, is one of the least wealthy.
Next to natural resources comes the ability to turn them to use. China is perhaps as well off as the U. S. A. in natural resources, but suffered for many years from civil and external wars, and for this and other reasons was. unable to develop her resources. Sound and stable political conditions, and freedom from foreign invasion, enable a country to develop its natural resources peacefully and steadily, and to produce more wealth than another country equally well served by nature but less well ordered. Another important factor is the technical efficiency of a country's people. Old countries that have, through many centuries, trained up numerous skilled craftsmen and technicians are better placed to produce wealth than countries whose workers are largely unskilled. Wealth also produces wealth. As a country becomes wealthier, its people have a large margin for saving, and can put their savings into factories and machines which will help workers to turn out more goods in their working day. | 1784.txt | 1 |
[
"the main idea of the paragraph",
"an example supporting the main idea of the paragraph",
"the conclusion of the paragraph",
"not related to the paragraph"
] | The second sentence.in Paragraph 3 is_ . | The "standard of living" of any country means the average person's share of the goods and services which the country produces. A country's standard of living, therefore, depends first and foremost on its capacity to produce wealth. "Wealth" in this sense is not money, for we do not live on money but on things that money can buy: "goods" such as food and clothing, and "services" such as transport and entertainment.
A country's capacity to produce wealth depends upon many factors, most of which have an effect on one another. Wealth depends to a great extent upon a country's natural resources, such as coal, gold, and other minerals, water supply and so on. Some regions of the world are well supplied with coal and minerals, and have a fertile soil and a favorable climate; other regions possess perhaps only one of these things, and some regions possess none of them. The U. S. A is one of the wealthiest regions of the world because she has vast natural resources within her borders, her soil is fertile, and her climate is varied. The Sahara Desert, on the other hand, is one of the least wealthy.
Next to natural resources comes the ability to turn them to use. China is perhaps as well off as the U. S. A. in natural resources, but suffered for many years from civil and external wars, and for this and other reasons was. unable to develop her resources. Sound and stable political conditions, and freedom from foreign invasion, enable a country to develop its natural resources peacefully and steadily, and to produce more wealth than another country equally well served by nature but less well ordered. Another important factor is the technical efficiency of a country's people. Old countries that have, through many centuries, trained up numerous skilled craftsmen and technicians are better placed to produce wealth than countries whose workers are largely unskilled. Wealth also produces wealth. As a country becomes wealthier, its people have a large margin for saving, and can put their savings into factories and machines which will help workers to turn out more goods in their working day. | 1784.txt | 1 |
[
"They have been competing for the leading position.",
"California has been superior to Texas in many ways.",
"They are both models of development for other states.",
"Texas's cowboy culture is less known than California's."
] | What does the author say about California and Texas in Paragraph 17 | America's recent history has been a persistent tilt to the West--of people, ideas, commerce and even political power. California and Texas are the twin poles of the West, but very different ones. For most of the 20th century the home of Silicon Valley and Hollywood has been the brainier and trendier of the two. Texas has trailed behind: its stereotype has been a conservative Christian in cowboy boots. But twins can change places. Is that happening now?
It is easy to find evidence that California is in a panic. At the start of this month the once golden state started paying creditors in IOUs . The gap between projected outgoings and income for the current fiscal year has leapt to a horrible $26 billion. With no sign of a new budget to close this gulf, one credit agency has already downgraded California's debt. As budgets are cut, universities will let in fewer students, prisoners will be released early and schemes to protect the vulnerable will be rolled back.
By contrast, Texas has coped well with the recession, with an unemployment rate two points below the national average and one of the lowest rates of housing repossession. In part this is because Texan banks, hard hit in the last property bust, did not overexpand this time. Texas also clearly offers a different model, based on small government. It has no state capital-gains or income tax, and a business-friendly and immigrant-tolerant attitude. It is home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other state.
Despite all this, it still seems too early to hand over America's future to Texas. To begin with, that lean Texan model has its own problems. It has not invested enough in education, and many experts rightly worry about a "lost generation" of mostly Hispanic Texans with insufficient skills for the demands of the knowledge economy.
Second, it has never paid to bet against a state with as many inventive people as California. Even if Hollywood has gone into depression, it still boasts an unequalled array of sunrise industries and the most brisk venture-capital industry on the planet. The state also has an awesome ability to reinvent itself--as it did when its defence industry collapsed at the end of the cold war.
The truth is that both states could learn from each other. Texas still lacks California's great universities and lags in terms of culture. California could adopt not just Texas's leaner state, but also its more bipartisan approach to politics. There is no perfect model of government: it is America's
genius to have 50 public-policy laboratories competing to find out what works best. | 1373.txt | 1 |
[
"Its debts are pushing it into bankruptcy.",
"Its budgets have been cut by $26 billion.",
"It is faced with a serious financial crisis.",
"It is trying hard to protect the vulnerable."
] | What does the author say about today's California? | America's recent history has been a persistent tilt to the West--of people, ideas, commerce and even political power. California and Texas are the twin poles of the West, but very different ones. For most of the 20th century the home of Silicon Valley and Hollywood has been the brainier and trendier of the two. Texas has trailed behind: its stereotype has been a conservative Christian in cowboy boots. But twins can change places. Is that happening now?
It is easy to find evidence that California is in a panic. At the start of this month the once golden state started paying creditors in IOUs . The gap between projected outgoings and income for the current fiscal year has leapt to a horrible $26 billion. With no sign of a new budget to close this gulf, one credit agency has already downgraded California's debt. As budgets are cut, universities will let in fewer students, prisoners will be released early and schemes to protect the vulnerable will be rolled back.
By contrast, Texas has coped well with the recession, with an unemployment rate two points below the national average and one of the lowest rates of housing repossession. In part this is because Texan banks, hard hit in the last property bust, did not overexpand this time. Texas also clearly offers a different model, based on small government. It has no state capital-gains or income tax, and a business-friendly and immigrant-tolerant attitude. It is home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other state.
Despite all this, it still seems too early to hand over America's future to Texas. To begin with, that lean Texan model has its own problems. It has not invested enough in education, and many experts rightly worry about a "lost generation" of mostly Hispanic Texans with insufficient skills for the demands of the knowledge economy.
Second, it has never paid to bet against a state with as many inventive people as California. Even if Hollywood has gone into depression, it still boasts an unequalled array of sunrise industries and the most brisk venture-capital industry on the planet. The state also has an awesome ability to reinvent itself--as it did when its defence industry collapsed at the end of the cold war.
The truth is that both states could learn from each other. Texas still lacks California's great universities and lags in terms of culture. California could adopt not just Texas's leaner state, but also its more bipartisan approach to politics. There is no perfect model of government: it is America's
genius to have 50 public-policy laboratories competing to find out what works best. | 1373.txt | 2 |
[
"It practices small government.",
"It is home to traditional industries.",
"It has a large Hispanic population.",
"It has an enviable welfare system."
] | In what way is Texas different from California? | America's recent history has been a persistent tilt to the West--of people, ideas, commerce and even political power. California and Texas are the twin poles of the West, but very different ones. For most of the 20th century the home of Silicon Valley and Hollywood has been the brainier and trendier of the two. Texas has trailed behind: its stereotype has been a conservative Christian in cowboy boots. But twins can change places. Is that happening now?
It is easy to find evidence that California is in a panic. At the start of this month the once golden state started paying creditors in IOUs . The gap between projected outgoings and income for the current fiscal year has leapt to a horrible $26 billion. With no sign of a new budget to close this gulf, one credit agency has already downgraded California's debt. As budgets are cut, universities will let in fewer students, prisoners will be released early and schemes to protect the vulnerable will be rolled back.
By contrast, Texas has coped well with the recession, with an unemployment rate two points below the national average and one of the lowest rates of housing repossession. In part this is because Texan banks, hard hit in the last property bust, did not overexpand this time. Texas also clearly offers a different model, based on small government. It has no state capital-gains or income tax, and a business-friendly and immigrant-tolerant attitude. It is home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other state.
Despite all this, it still seems too early to hand over America's future to Texas. To begin with, that lean Texan model has its own problems. It has not invested enough in education, and many experts rightly worry about a "lost generation" of mostly Hispanic Texans with insufficient skills for the demands of the knowledge economy.
Second, it has never paid to bet against a state with as many inventive people as California. Even if Hollywood has gone into depression, it still boasts an unequalled array of sunrise industries and the most brisk venture-capital industry on the planet. The state also has an awesome ability to reinvent itself--as it did when its defence industry collapsed at the end of the cold war.
The truth is that both states could learn from each other. Texas still lacks California's great universities and lags in terms of culture. California could adopt not just Texas's leaner state, but also its more bipartisan approach to politics. There is no perfect model of government: it is America's
genius to have 50 public-policy laboratories competing to find out what works best. | 1373.txt | 0 |
[
"Its Hispanic population is mostly illiterate.",
"Its sunrise industries are shrinking rapidly.",
"Its education cannot meet the needs of the knowledge economy.",
"Its immigrants have a hard time adapting to its cowboy culture."
] | What problem is Texas confronted with? | America's recent history has been a persistent tilt to the West--of people, ideas, commerce and even political power. California and Texas are the twin poles of the West, but very different ones. For most of the 20th century the home of Silicon Valley and Hollywood has been the brainier and trendier of the two. Texas has trailed behind: its stereotype has been a conservative Christian in cowboy boots. But twins can change places. Is that happening now?
It is easy to find evidence that California is in a panic. At the start of this month the once golden state started paying creditors in IOUs . The gap between projected outgoings and income for the current fiscal year has leapt to a horrible $26 billion. With no sign of a new budget to close this gulf, one credit agency has already downgraded California's debt. As budgets are cut, universities will let in fewer students, prisoners will be released early and schemes to protect the vulnerable will be rolled back.
By contrast, Texas has coped well with the recession, with an unemployment rate two points below the national average and one of the lowest rates of housing repossession. In part this is because Texan banks, hard hit in the last property bust, did not overexpand this time. Texas also clearly offers a different model, based on small government. It has no state capital-gains or income tax, and a business-friendly and immigrant-tolerant attitude. It is home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other state.
Despite all this, it still seems too early to hand over America's future to Texas. To begin with, that lean Texan model has its own problems. It has not invested enough in education, and many experts rightly worry about a "lost generation" of mostly Hispanic Texans with insufficient skills for the demands of the knowledge economy.
Second, it has never paid to bet against a state with as many inventive people as California. Even if Hollywood has gone into depression, it still boasts an unequalled array of sunrise industries and the most brisk venture-capital industry on the planet. The state also has an awesome ability to reinvent itself--as it did when its defence industry collapsed at the end of the cold war.
The truth is that both states could learn from each other. Texas still lacks California's great universities and lags in terms of culture. California could adopt not just Texas's leaner state, but also its more bipartisan approach to politics. There is no perfect model of government: it is America's
genius to have 50 public-policy laboratories competing to find out what works best. | 1373.txt | 2 |
[
"Each state has its own way of governing.",
"Most states favor a bipartisan approach.",
"Parties collaborate in drawing public policies.",
"All states believe in government for the people."
] | What do we learn about American politics from the passage? | America's recent history has been a persistent tilt to the West--of people, ideas, commerce and even political power. California and Texas are the twin poles of the West, but very different ones. For most of the 20th century the home of Silicon Valley and Hollywood has been the brainier and trendier of the two. Texas has trailed behind: its stereotype has been a conservative Christian in cowboy boots. But twins can change places. Is that happening now?
It is easy to find evidence that California is in a panic. At the start of this month the once golden state started paying creditors in IOUs . The gap between projected outgoings and income for the current fiscal year has leapt to a horrible $26 billion. With no sign of a new budget to close this gulf, one credit agency has already downgraded California's debt. As budgets are cut, universities will let in fewer students, prisoners will be released early and schemes to protect the vulnerable will be rolled back.
By contrast, Texas has coped well with the recession, with an unemployment rate two points below the national average and one of the lowest rates of housing repossession. In part this is because Texan banks, hard hit in the last property bust, did not overexpand this time. Texas also clearly offers a different model, based on small government. It has no state capital-gains or income tax, and a business-friendly and immigrant-tolerant attitude. It is home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other state.
Despite all this, it still seems too early to hand over America's future to Texas. To begin with, that lean Texan model has its own problems. It has not invested enough in education, and many experts rightly worry about a "lost generation" of mostly Hispanic Texans with insufficient skills for the demands of the knowledge economy.
Second, it has never paid to bet against a state with as many inventive people as California. Even if Hollywood has gone into depression, it still boasts an unequalled array of sunrise industries and the most brisk venture-capital industry on the planet. The state also has an awesome ability to reinvent itself--as it did when its defence industry collapsed at the end of the cold war.
The truth is that both states could learn from each other. Texas still lacks California's great universities and lags in terms of culture. California could adopt not just Texas's leaner state, but also its more bipartisan approach to politics. There is no perfect model of government: it is America's
genius to have 50 public-policy laboratories competing to find out what works best. | 1373.txt | 0 |
[
"The current tap water.",
"The quality of current tap water.",
"National standards.",
"The tap water of the European Union and the US."
] | What does the italicied word"it"mean in the second paragraph? | People in Shanghai can quench their thirst with high quality water if the Shanghai Water Authority (SWA) is able to make good on its word.It has vowed to make the city's water match its status as a worldclass city。
"The current tap water quality me ets national standards,but,compared with that of the European Union and the United States,it still needs to be improved,"said the SWA's director general,hang Jiayi.
The Shanghai Special Water Supply Layout calls for residents to be able to drinkthe tap water without boiling it,in less than a decade.
In other developed countries,water fountains can be found almost everywhere-people do not bother with bottled drinking water.
By 2020,the water of the Huangpu River will be treated to reduce the amount of organic waste in it.This initiative is to be completed in the first half of this year,hang said.
Major water works that draw water from the Huangpu will need more treatment facilities to improve the color,texture,ammoniaand nitrogen content before 2010.
These treatment facilities are expected to cost 4 billion yuan,something that could affect the price of water,according to Chen Yin,SWA's deputy director general.
Chen said that replacing water pipes was also a key project.The city's aged pipes are mostly to blame for the bad water quality.
The SWA has started the water facilities renovation work,including the more than 14,000 kilometers of indoor piping,107,000 tanks on top of the buildings,and more than 6,000 underground facilities.
World Water Day came on March 22,and this year's theme is"water for the future".Beijing is also drawing up plans during China's Water Week,which runs until March 28.
By 2008,the water for the Olympic Games is to above World Health Organiation standards.And,the people of Beijing will be able to drink their tap water as well. | 3430.txt | 1 |
[
"By 2020",
"in the first half of this year",
"before 2010",
"by 2008"
] | People in Shanghai can drink their tap water _ . | People in Shanghai can quench their thirst with high quality water if the Shanghai Water Authority (SWA) is able to make good on its word.It has vowed to make the city's water match its status as a worldclass city。
"The current tap water quality me ets national standards,but,compared with that of the European Union and the United States,it still needs to be improved,"said the SWA's director general,hang Jiayi.
The Shanghai Special Water Supply Layout calls for residents to be able to drinkthe tap water without boiling it,in less than a decade.
In other developed countries,water fountains can be found almost everywhere-people do not bother with bottled drinking water.
By 2020,the water of the Huangpu River will be treated to reduce the amount of organic waste in it.This initiative is to be completed in the first half of this year,hang said.
Major water works that draw water from the Huangpu will need more treatment facilities to improve the color,texture,ammoniaand nitrogen content before 2010.
These treatment facilities are expected to cost 4 billion yuan,something that could affect the price of water,according to Chen Yin,SWA's deputy director general.
Chen said that replacing water pipes was also a key project.The city's aged pipes are mostly to blame for the bad water quality.
The SWA has started the water facilities renovation work,including the more than 14,000 kilometers of indoor piping,107,000 tanks on top of the buildings,and more than 6,000 underground facilities.
World Water Day came on March 22,and this year's theme is"water for the future".Beijing is also drawing up plans during China's Water Week,which runs until March 28.
By 2008,the water for the Olympic Games is to above World Health Organiation standards.And,the people of Beijing will be able to drink their tap water as well. | 3430.txt | 2 |
[
"The water of the Huangpu River will be treated.",
"Aged water pipes will be treated.",
"Water facilities must be renovated.",
"Water fountains must be found."
] | What step need not be taken in order to improve the tap water? | People in Shanghai can quench their thirst with high quality water if the Shanghai Water Authority (SWA) is able to make good on its word.It has vowed to make the city's water match its status as a worldclass city。
"The current tap water quality me ets national standards,but,compared with that of the European Union and the United States,it still needs to be improved,"said the SWA's director general,hang Jiayi.
The Shanghai Special Water Supply Layout calls for residents to be able to drinkthe tap water without boiling it,in less than a decade.
In other developed countries,water fountains can be found almost everywhere-people do not bother with bottled drinking water.
By 2020,the water of the Huangpu River will be treated to reduce the amount of organic waste in it.This initiative is to be completed in the first half of this year,hang said.
Major water works that draw water from the Huangpu will need more treatment facilities to improve the color,texture,ammoniaand nitrogen content before 2010.
These treatment facilities are expected to cost 4 billion yuan,something that could affect the price of water,according to Chen Yin,SWA's deputy director general.
Chen said that replacing water pipes was also a key project.The city's aged pipes are mostly to blame for the bad water quality.
The SWA has started the water facilities renovation work,including the more than 14,000 kilometers of indoor piping,107,000 tanks on top of the buildings,and more than 6,000 underground facilities.
World Water Day came on March 22,and this year's theme is"water for the future".Beijing is also drawing up plans during China's Water Week,which runs until March 28.
By 2008,the water for the Olympic Games is to above World Health Organiation standards.And,the people of Beijing will be able to drink their tap water as well. | 3430.txt | 3 |
[
"e,d,a,b,c",
"b,d,e,a,c",
"e,d,b,c,a",
"b,e,d,c,a"
] | Which is the correct order of the following events? a.People of Shanghai can quench their thirst with high quality water. b.The tap water quality meets national standards. c.The water of Shanghai reaches the standards of developed countries. d.The people of Beijing drink their tap water. e.The treatment of the water of Huangpu River has been finished. | People in Shanghai can quench their thirst with high quality water if the Shanghai Water Authority (SWA) is able to make good on its word.It has vowed to make the city's water match its status as a worldclass city。
"The current tap water quality me ets national standards,but,compared with that of the European Union and the United States,it still needs to be improved,"said the SWA's director general,hang Jiayi.
The Shanghai Special Water Supply Layout calls for residents to be able to drinkthe tap water without boiling it,in less than a decade.
In other developed countries,water fountains can be found almost everywhere-people do not bother with bottled drinking water.
By 2020,the water of the Huangpu River will be treated to reduce the amount of organic waste in it.This initiative is to be completed in the first half of this year,hang said.
Major water works that draw water from the Huangpu will need more treatment facilities to improve the color,texture,ammoniaand nitrogen content before 2010.
These treatment facilities are expected to cost 4 billion yuan,something that could affect the price of water,according to Chen Yin,SWA's deputy director general.
Chen said that replacing water pipes was also a key project.The city's aged pipes are mostly to blame for the bad water quality.
The SWA has started the water facilities renovation work,including the more than 14,000 kilometers of indoor piping,107,000 tanks on top of the buildings,and more than 6,000 underground facilities.
World Water Day came on March 22,and this year's theme is"water for the future".Beijing is also drawing up plans during China's Water Week,which runs until March 28.
By 2008,the water for the Olympic Games is to above World Health Organiation standards.And,the people of Beijing will be able to drink their tap water as well. | 3430.txt | 1 |
[
"The cost of treating the tap water.",
"How to reach the water standards of developed countries.",
"The project for making tap water drinkable in Shanghai and Beijing.",
"The progress of treating the water of Huangpu River."
] | What is the main idea of the passage? | People in Shanghai can quench their thirst with high quality water if the Shanghai Water Authority (SWA) is able to make good on its word.It has vowed to make the city's water match its status as a worldclass city。
"The current tap water quality me ets national standards,but,compared with that of the European Union and the United States,it still needs to be improved,"said the SWA's director general,hang Jiayi.
The Shanghai Special Water Supply Layout calls for residents to be able to drinkthe tap water without boiling it,in less than a decade.
In other developed countries,water fountains can be found almost everywhere-people do not bother with bottled drinking water.
By 2020,the water of the Huangpu River will be treated to reduce the amount of organic waste in it.This initiative is to be completed in the first half of this year,hang said.
Major water works that draw water from the Huangpu will need more treatment facilities to improve the color,texture,ammoniaand nitrogen content before 2010.
These treatment facilities are expected to cost 4 billion yuan,something that could affect the price of water,according to Chen Yin,SWA's deputy director general.
Chen said that replacing water pipes was also a key project.The city's aged pipes are mostly to blame for the bad water quality.
The SWA has started the water facilities renovation work,including the more than 14,000 kilometers of indoor piping,107,000 tanks on top of the buildings,and more than 6,000 underground facilities.
World Water Day came on March 22,and this year's theme is"water for the future".Beijing is also drawing up plans during China's Water Week,which runs until March 28.
By 2008,the water for the Olympic Games is to above World Health Organiation standards.And,the people of Beijing will be able to drink their tap water as well. | 3430.txt | 2 |
[
"beautiful hair",
"pretty clothes",
"lovely smile",
"young age"
] | The guests praised Kelly for carrying coats upstairs because of her _ . | We have two daughters: Kristen is seven years old and Kelly is four. Last Sunday evening, we invited some people home for dinner. I dressed them nicely for the party, and told them that their job was to join Mommy in answering the door when the bell rang. Mommy would introduce them to the guests, and then they would take the guests' coats upstairs and put them on the bed in the second bedroom.
The guests arrived. I introduced my two daughters to each of them. The adults were nice and kind and said how lucky we were to have such good kids.
Each of the guests made a particular fuss over Kelly, the younger one, admiring her dress, her hair and her smile. They said she was a remarkable girl to be carrying coats upstairs at her age.
I thought to myself that we adults usually make a big "to do" over the younger one because she's the one who seems more easily hurt. We do it with the best of intentions.
But we seldom think of how it might affect the other child. I was a little worried that Kristen would feel she was being outshined. I was about to serve dinner when I realized that she had been missing for twenty minutes. I ran upstairs and found her in the bedroom, crying.
I said, "What are you doing, my dear?" She turned to me with a sad expression and said, "Mommy, why don't people like me the way they like my sister? Is it because I'm not pretty? Is that why they don't say nice things about me as much?"
I tried to explain to her, kissing and hugging her to make her feel better.
Now, whenever I visit a friend's home, I make it a point to speak to the elder child first. | 3604.txt | 3 |
[
"the guest gave her more coats to carry",
"she didn't look as pretty as Kelly",
"the guests praised her sister more than her",
"her mother didn't introduce her to the guests"
] | Kristen felt sad and cried because _ . | We have two daughters: Kristen is seven years old and Kelly is four. Last Sunday evening, we invited some people home for dinner. I dressed them nicely for the party, and told them that their job was to join Mommy in answering the door when the bell rang. Mommy would introduce them to the guests, and then they would take the guests' coats upstairs and put them on the bed in the second bedroom.
The guests arrived. I introduced my two daughters to each of them. The adults were nice and kind and said how lucky we were to have such good kids.
Each of the guests made a particular fuss over Kelly, the younger one, admiring her dress, her hair and her smile. They said she was a remarkable girl to be carrying coats upstairs at her age.
I thought to myself that we adults usually make a big "to do" over the younger one because she's the one who seems more easily hurt. We do it with the best of intentions.
But we seldom think of how it might affect the other child. I was a little worried that Kristen would feel she was being outshined. I was about to serve dinner when I realized that she had been missing for twenty minutes. I ran upstairs and found her in the bedroom, crying.
I said, "What are you doing, my dear?" She turned to me with a sad expression and said, "Mommy, why don't people like me the way they like my sister? Is it because I'm not pretty? Is that why they don't say nice things about me as much?"
I tried to explain to her, kissing and hugging her to make her feel better.
Now, whenever I visit a friend's home, I make it a point to speak to the elder child first. | 3604.txt | 2 |
[
"parents should pay more attention to the elder children",
"the younger children are usually more easily hurt",
"people usually like the younger children more",
"adults should treat children equally"
] | We can conclude from the passage that _ . | We have two daughters: Kristen is seven years old and Kelly is four. Last Sunday evening, we invited some people home for dinner. I dressed them nicely for the party, and told them that their job was to join Mommy in answering the door when the bell rang. Mommy would introduce them to the guests, and then they would take the guests' coats upstairs and put them on the bed in the second bedroom.
The guests arrived. I introduced my two daughters to each of them. The adults were nice and kind and said how lucky we were to have such good kids.
Each of the guests made a particular fuss over Kelly, the younger one, admiring her dress, her hair and her smile. They said she was a remarkable girl to be carrying coats upstairs at her age.
I thought to myself that we adults usually make a big "to do" over the younger one because she's the one who seems more easily hurt. We do it with the best of intentions.
But we seldom think of how it might affect the other child. I was a little worried that Kristen would feel she was being outshined. I was about to serve dinner when I realized that she had been missing for twenty minutes. I ran upstairs and found her in the bedroom, crying.
I said, "What are you doing, my dear?" She turned to me with a sad expression and said, "Mommy, why don't people like me the way they like my sister? Is it because I'm not pretty? Is that why they don't say nice things about me as much?"
I tried to explain to her, kissing and hugging her to make her feel better.
Now, whenever I visit a friend's home, I make it a point to speak to the elder child first. | 3604.txt | 3 |
[
"similar",
"inaccurate",
"small",
"significant"
] | The word "trivial" in the passage is closest in meaning to | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 2 |
[
"provide detailed records of the most significant floods in the history of the Nile",
"develop a way of calculating the age of geologic features",
"conclude that the Nile River Delta was as old as Earth",
"predict when the river would flood and when it would not"
] | According to paragraph 1. Herodotus' observations of the Nile River Delta were significant because they allowed him to | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 1 |
[
"understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record",
"work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment.",
"realize that geologic processes happen in cycles.",
"describe the forces associated with subterranean heat."
] | According to paragraph 2, James Hutton was the first person to | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 2 |
[
"replace",
"show",
"cover",
"expand"
] | The word "exhibit" in the passage is closest in meaning to | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 1 |
[
"occurrence",
"locations",
"effects",
"combinations"
] | The word "episodes" in the passage is closest in meaning to | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 0 |
[
"They ignored Hutton's findings about rates of sedimentation and thus tended to underestimate the age by a factor of 10 to 50.",
"Using the sedimentary record, they were able to guess the correct age within 100 million to 400 million years.",
"They did not realize that much of the sedimentary record is missing and thus assumed that Earth is much younger than it actually is.",
"They did not correctly calculate the rates of sedimentation and thus concluded that Earth is much older than it actually is."
] | According to paragraph 4, what happened when geologists at the turn of the twentieth century tried to estimate Earth's age? | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 2 |
[
"several",
"specific",
"early",
"incorrect"
] | The word "flawed" in the passage is closest in meaning to | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 3 |
[
"To show that questions about the Sun's energy source were as interesting to early scientists as questions about Earth's age.",
"To provide evidence that Hutton's ideas led to advances in physics and astronomy as well as in geology.",
"To explain why there is such a tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun.",
"To cite a method for estimating the age of the Sun that was used to determine Earth s age."
] | Why is "gravitational contraction" mentioned in the passage? | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 3 |
[
"could not be sustained through chemical reactions over the long term.",
"came from compression resulting from the force of gravity.",
"was largely the result of chemical reactions that took place over a period of more than a millennium.",
"was necessary to fuel most of the chemical reactions on Earth."
] | According to paragraph 5, Immanuel Kant recognized that the Sun's energy | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 0 |
[
"It is based on information taken from the examination of meteorites.",
"It is surprisingly consistent with estimates from the nineteenth century.",
"It is confirmed by solar evolution models.",
"It puts the age of Earth at about 4 5 billion years."
] | According to paragraph 6, which of the following is NOT true about scientists most recent estimate of Earth's age? | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 1 |
[
"The Sun was already billions of years old when the planets were formed.",
"The planets closest to the Sun formed first.",
"Meteorites entered the solar system sometime after the planets were formed.",
"All parts of the solar system formed at approximately the same time."
] | Which of the following can be inferred from paragraph 6 about the formation of the solar system? | One of the first recorded observers to surmise a long age for Earth was the Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from approximately 480 B.C. to 425 B.C. He observed that the Nile River Delta was in fact a series of sediment deposits built up in successive floods. By noting that individual floods deposit only thin layers of sediment, he was able to conclude that the Nile Delta had taken many thousands of years to build up. More important than the amount of time Herodotus computed, which turns out to be trivial compared with the age of Earth, was the notion that one could estimate ages of geologic features by determining rates of the processes responsible for such features, and then assuming the rates to be roughly constant over time. Similar applications of this concept were to be used again and again in later centuries to estimate the ages of rock formations and, in particular, of layers of sediment that had compacted and cemented to form sedimentary rocks.
It was not until the seventeenth century that attempts were made again to understand clues to Earth's history through the rock record. Nicolaus Steno (1638-1686) was the first to work out principles of the progressive depositing of sediment in Tuscany. However, James Hutton (1726-1797), known as the founder of modern geology, was the first to have the important insight that geologic processes are cyclic in nature. Forces associated with subterranean heat cause land to be uplifted into plateaus and mountain ranges. The effects of wind and water then break down the masses of uplifted rock, producing sediment that is transported by water downward to ultimately form layers in lakes, seashores, or even oceans. Over time, the layers become sedimentary rock. These rocks are then uplifted sometime in the future to form new mountain ranges, which exhibit the sedimentary layers (and the remains of life within those layers) of the earlier episodes of erosion and deposition.
Hutton's concept represented a remarkable insight because it unified many individual phenomena and observations into a conceptual picture of Earth's history. With the further assumption that these geologic processes were generally no more or less vigorous than they are today, Hutton's examination of sedimentary layers led him to realize that Earth's history must be enormous, that geologic time is an abyss and human history a speck by comparison.
After Hutton, geologists tried to determine rates of sedimentation so as to estimate the age of Earth from the total length of the sedimentary or stratigraphic record. Typical numbers produced at the turn of the twentieth century were 100 million to 400 million years. These underestimated the actual age by factors of 10 to 50 because much of the sedimentary record is missing in various locations and because there is a long rock sequence that is older than half a billion years that is far less well defined in terms of fossils and less well preserved.
Various other techniques to estimate Earth's age fell short, and particularly noteworthy in this regard were flawed determinations of the Sun's age. It had been recognized by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) that chemical reactions could not supply the tremendous amount of energy flowing from the Sun for more than about a millennium. Two physicists during the nineteenth century both came up with ages for the Sun based on the Sun's energy coming from gravitational contraction. Under the force of gravity, the compression resulting from a collapse of the object must release energy. Ages for Earth were derived that were in the tens of millions of years, much less than the geologic estimates of the lime.
It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the nineteenth century that opened the door to determining both the Sun's energy source and the age of Earth. From the initial work came a suite of discoveries leading to radio isotopic dating, which quickly ted to the realization that Earth must be billions of years old, and to the discovery of nuclear fusion as an energy source capable of sustaining the Sun's luminosity for that amount of time. By the 1960s, both analysis of meteorites and refinements of solar evolution models converged on an age for the solar system, and hence for Earth, of 4 5 billion years. | 3492.txt | 3 |
[
"A crime quite experienced and tactful.",
"A crime by operating at the middle place.",
"A crime attempting to temper police to work for him.",
"A crime in money-laundering."
] | What kind of crime was Daniel Dantas convicted of according to the passage? | Many bankers may be worried about whether some fancy product dreamed up might yet lead to a visit from the police. Daniel Dantas, a financier, who has profited by operating at the middle place where business and government meet in Brazil, has been opening the door to find the police outside for much of the past decade. On December 2nd he was convicted of a less sophisticated crime: trying to bribe police officers. Mr. Dantas, who has acquired great notoriety in Brazil, was fined $ 5 million and sentenced to ten years in prison. He has appealed against his conviction.
The charge stems from a police investigation into money-laundering known as Operation Satiagraha. It grew out of a previous investigation into Mr. Dantas' use of Kroll, a security consultancy, to watch over his business partners. During this investigation the police seized a computer from Opportunity, Mr. Dantas's investment bank, which contained data from the mid-1990s to 2004 and apparently showed suspicious movements of money.
The judge found that Mr. Dantas tried to pay bribes, via two go-betweens, to keep his name out of the Satiagraha investigation. A man fitted with a bugging device was offered $1 million in cash, with another $ 4 million to follow, the police say. They claim that Mr. Dantas's trick involved money travelling to the Cayman Islands, then via the British Virgin Islands to an account in Ireland, on to Delaware, and then re-entering Brazil as foreign investment.
For Mr. Dantas his crime is a steep fall from grace. A man who sleeps little and socializes less, he is a vegetarian and self-made billionaire, a gifted financier who has serially fallen out with his business partners. He once controlled a large telecoms firm, acting for investors who included Citigroup. He says he is the victim of a conspiracy mounted by the government.
It is Mr. Dantas' supposed influence in government circles that has added to his notoriety. During the1990s, when many state-owned businesses were privatized, Mr. Dantas positioned himself as the man with the needed expertise and contacts. He enjoyed easy access to the government of President Femando Henrique Cardoso, including meetings with the president himself. That influence carried through into the government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Mr. Dantas is alleged to have been one of the funders of a cash-for-votes scheme in Brazil's Congress mounted by leaders of Lula's Workers' Party in 2003-2004. Many of those who have had dealings with Mr. Dantas insist that these have been legitimate and conducted in good faith. They include Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh, a lawyer and PT politician, whom he hired as a consultant. | 881.txt | 2 |
[
"They seized a computer by chance and got some evidence.",
"They directly conducted a probe into him.",
"They found he tempered police officers to delete his name.",
"They questioned him and made sure the process of money-laundering."
] | How did the police convict the charge against Mr. Dantas according to the passage? | Many bankers may be worried about whether some fancy product dreamed up might yet lead to a visit from the police. Daniel Dantas, a financier, who has profited by operating at the middle place where business and government meet in Brazil, has been opening the door to find the police outside for much of the past decade. On December 2nd he was convicted of a less sophisticated crime: trying to bribe police officers. Mr. Dantas, who has acquired great notoriety in Brazil, was fined $ 5 million and sentenced to ten years in prison. He has appealed against his conviction.
The charge stems from a police investigation into money-laundering known as Operation Satiagraha. It grew out of a previous investigation into Mr. Dantas' use of Kroll, a security consultancy, to watch over his business partners. During this investigation the police seized a computer from Opportunity, Mr. Dantas's investment bank, which contained data from the mid-1990s to 2004 and apparently showed suspicious movements of money.
The judge found that Mr. Dantas tried to pay bribes, via two go-betweens, to keep his name out of the Satiagraha investigation. A man fitted with a bugging device was offered $1 million in cash, with another $ 4 million to follow, the police say. They claim that Mr. Dantas's trick involved money travelling to the Cayman Islands, then via the British Virgin Islands to an account in Ireland, on to Delaware, and then re-entering Brazil as foreign investment.
For Mr. Dantas his crime is a steep fall from grace. A man who sleeps little and socializes less, he is a vegetarian and self-made billionaire, a gifted financier who has serially fallen out with his business partners. He once controlled a large telecoms firm, acting for investors who included Citigroup. He says he is the victim of a conspiracy mounted by the government.
It is Mr. Dantas' supposed influence in government circles that has added to his notoriety. During the1990s, when many state-owned businesses were privatized, Mr. Dantas positioned himself as the man with the needed expertise and contacts. He enjoyed easy access to the government of President Femando Henrique Cardoso, including meetings with the president himself. That influence carried through into the government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Mr. Dantas is alleged to have been one of the funders of a cash-for-votes scheme in Brazil's Congress mounted by leaders of Lula's Workers' Party in 2003-2004. Many of those who have had dealings with Mr. Dantas insist that these have been legitimate and conducted in good faith. They include Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh, a lawyer and PT politician, whom he hired as a consultant. | 881.txt | 2 |
[
"he usually gets along well with them",
"he does not have a good relationship with them",
"he totally trusts all of his business partners",
"he believes that they make him a victim"
] | Mr. Dantas' relationship with his business partners is that _ | Many bankers may be worried about whether some fancy product dreamed up might yet lead to a visit from the police. Daniel Dantas, a financier, who has profited by operating at the middle place where business and government meet in Brazil, has been opening the door to find the police outside for much of the past decade. On December 2nd he was convicted of a less sophisticated crime: trying to bribe police officers. Mr. Dantas, who has acquired great notoriety in Brazil, was fined $ 5 million and sentenced to ten years in prison. He has appealed against his conviction.
The charge stems from a police investigation into money-laundering known as Operation Satiagraha. It grew out of a previous investigation into Mr. Dantas' use of Kroll, a security consultancy, to watch over his business partners. During this investigation the police seized a computer from Opportunity, Mr. Dantas's investment bank, which contained data from the mid-1990s to 2004 and apparently showed suspicious movements of money.
The judge found that Mr. Dantas tried to pay bribes, via two go-betweens, to keep his name out of the Satiagraha investigation. A man fitted with a bugging device was offered $1 million in cash, with another $ 4 million to follow, the police say. They claim that Mr. Dantas's trick involved money travelling to the Cayman Islands, then via the British Virgin Islands to an account in Ireland, on to Delaware, and then re-entering Brazil as foreign investment.
For Mr. Dantas his crime is a steep fall from grace. A man who sleeps little and socializes less, he is a vegetarian and self-made billionaire, a gifted financier who has serially fallen out with his business partners. He once controlled a large telecoms firm, acting for investors who included Citigroup. He says he is the victim of a conspiracy mounted by the government.
It is Mr. Dantas' supposed influence in government circles that has added to his notoriety. During the1990s, when many state-owned businesses were privatized, Mr. Dantas positioned himself as the man with the needed expertise and contacts. He enjoyed easy access to the government of President Femando Henrique Cardoso, including meetings with the president himself. That influence carried through into the government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Mr. Dantas is alleged to have been one of the funders of a cash-for-votes scheme in Brazil's Congress mounted by leaders of Lula's Workers' Party in 2003-2004. Many of those who have had dealings with Mr. Dantas insist that these have been legitimate and conducted in good faith. They include Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh, a lawyer and PT politician, whom he hired as a consultant. | 881.txt | 1 |
[
"He is a gifted financier and less socialized person.",
"He always enjoys notorious fame in economic and political field.",
"He is a vegetarian who likes making food by himself.",
"His tragedy was mounted by the government conspiracy."
] | What can we learn about Mr. Dantas according to the passage? | Many bankers may be worried about whether some fancy product dreamed up might yet lead to a visit from the police. Daniel Dantas, a financier, who has profited by operating at the middle place where business and government meet in Brazil, has been opening the door to find the police outside for much of the past decade. On December 2nd he was convicted of a less sophisticated crime: trying to bribe police officers. Mr. Dantas, who has acquired great notoriety in Brazil, was fined $ 5 million and sentenced to ten years in prison. He has appealed against his conviction.
The charge stems from a police investigation into money-laundering known as Operation Satiagraha. It grew out of a previous investigation into Mr. Dantas' use of Kroll, a security consultancy, to watch over his business partners. During this investigation the police seized a computer from Opportunity, Mr. Dantas's investment bank, which contained data from the mid-1990s to 2004 and apparently showed suspicious movements of money.
The judge found that Mr. Dantas tried to pay bribes, via two go-betweens, to keep his name out of the Satiagraha investigation. A man fitted with a bugging device was offered $1 million in cash, with another $ 4 million to follow, the police say. They claim that Mr. Dantas's trick involved money travelling to the Cayman Islands, then via the British Virgin Islands to an account in Ireland, on to Delaware, and then re-entering Brazil as foreign investment.
For Mr. Dantas his crime is a steep fall from grace. A man who sleeps little and socializes less, he is a vegetarian and self-made billionaire, a gifted financier who has serially fallen out with his business partners. He once controlled a large telecoms firm, acting for investors who included Citigroup. He says he is the victim of a conspiracy mounted by the government.
It is Mr. Dantas' supposed influence in government circles that has added to his notoriety. During the1990s, when many state-owned businesses were privatized, Mr. Dantas positioned himself as the man with the needed expertise and contacts. He enjoyed easy access to the government of President Femando Henrique Cardoso, including meetings with the president himself. That influence carried through into the government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Mr. Dantas is alleged to have been one of the funders of a cash-for-votes scheme in Brazil's Congress mounted by leaders of Lula's Workers' Party in 2003-2004. Many of those who have had dealings with Mr. Dantas insist that these have been legitimate and conducted in good faith. They include Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh, a lawyer and PT politician, whom he hired as a consultant. | 881.txt | 0 |
[
"His influence on government may reduce his notoriety and crime.",
"In business privatization, he participated with demanding expertise.",
"He never meets the President himself.",
"People knowing him deem that he was sheer evil."
] | What kind of relationship is reflected between Mr. Dantas and government in the passage? | Many bankers may be worried about whether some fancy product dreamed up might yet lead to a visit from the police. Daniel Dantas, a financier, who has profited by operating at the middle place where business and government meet in Brazil, has been opening the door to find the police outside for much of the past decade. On December 2nd he was convicted of a less sophisticated crime: trying to bribe police officers. Mr. Dantas, who has acquired great notoriety in Brazil, was fined $ 5 million and sentenced to ten years in prison. He has appealed against his conviction.
The charge stems from a police investigation into money-laundering known as Operation Satiagraha. It grew out of a previous investigation into Mr. Dantas' use of Kroll, a security consultancy, to watch over his business partners. During this investigation the police seized a computer from Opportunity, Mr. Dantas's investment bank, which contained data from the mid-1990s to 2004 and apparently showed suspicious movements of money.
The judge found that Mr. Dantas tried to pay bribes, via two go-betweens, to keep his name out of the Satiagraha investigation. A man fitted with a bugging device was offered $1 million in cash, with another $ 4 million to follow, the police say. They claim that Mr. Dantas's trick involved money travelling to the Cayman Islands, then via the British Virgin Islands to an account in Ireland, on to Delaware, and then re-entering Brazil as foreign investment.
For Mr. Dantas his crime is a steep fall from grace. A man who sleeps little and socializes less, he is a vegetarian and self-made billionaire, a gifted financier who has serially fallen out with his business partners. He once controlled a large telecoms firm, acting for investors who included Citigroup. He says he is the victim of a conspiracy mounted by the government.
It is Mr. Dantas' supposed influence in government circles that has added to his notoriety. During the1990s, when many state-owned businesses were privatized, Mr. Dantas positioned himself as the man with the needed expertise and contacts. He enjoyed easy access to the government of President Femando Henrique Cardoso, including meetings with the president himself. That influence carried through into the government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Mr. Dantas is alleged to have been one of the funders of a cash-for-votes scheme in Brazil's Congress mounted by leaders of Lula's Workers' Party in 2003-2004. Many of those who have had dealings with Mr. Dantas insist that these have been legitimate and conducted in good faith. They include Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh, a lawyer and PT politician, whom he hired as a consultant. | 881.txt | 1 |
[
"to warn the reader of the dwindling water supply",
"to explain industrial uses of water",
"to acquaint the reader with water pollution problems",
"to demonstrate various measures to solve the pollution problem"
] | The purpose of this passage is _ . | Water problems in the future will become more intense and more complex. Our increasing population will tremendously increase urban wastes, primarily sewage. On the other hand, increasing demands for water will decrease substantially the amount of water available for diluting wastes. Rapidly expanding industries which involve more and more complex chemical processes will produce large volumes of liquid wastes, and many of these will contain chemicals which are poisonous. To feed our rapidly expanding population, agriculture will have to be intensified. This will involve ever-increasing quantities of agriculture chemicals. From this, it is apparent that drastic steps must be taken immediately to develop corrective measures for the pollution problem.
There are two ways by which this pollution problem can be lessened. The first relates to the treatment of wastes to decrease their pollution hazard. This involves the processing of solid wastes "prior to" disposal and the treatment of liquid wastes, or effluents, to permit the reuse of the water or best reduce pollution upon final disposal.
A second approach is to develop an economic use for all or a part of the wastes. Farm manure is spread in fields as a nutrient or organic supplement. Effluents from sewage disposal plants are used in some areas both for irrigation and for the nutrients contained. Effluents from other processing plants may also be used as a supplemental source of water. Many industries, such as meat and poultry processing plants, are currently converting former waste production into marketable byproducts. Other industries have potential economic uses for their waste products. | 838.txt | 2 |
[
"Industrial development includes the simplification of complex chemical processes.",
"Diluting wastes needs certain amount of water.",
"Demands for water will go up along with the expanding population.",
"Intensive cultivation of land requires more and more chemicals."
] | which of the following points is not included in the passage? | Water problems in the future will become more intense and more complex. Our increasing population will tremendously increase urban wastes, primarily sewage. On the other hand, increasing demands for water will decrease substantially the amount of water available for diluting wastes. Rapidly expanding industries which involve more and more complex chemical processes will produce large volumes of liquid wastes, and many of these will contain chemicals which are poisonous. To feed our rapidly expanding population, agriculture will have to be intensified. This will involve ever-increasing quantities of agriculture chemicals. From this, it is apparent that drastic steps must be taken immediately to develop corrective measures for the pollution problem.
There are two ways by which this pollution problem can be lessened. The first relates to the treatment of wastes to decrease their pollution hazard. This involves the processing of solid wastes "prior to" disposal and the treatment of liquid wastes, or effluents, to permit the reuse of the water or best reduce pollution upon final disposal.
A second approach is to develop an economic use for all or a part of the wastes. Farm manure is spread in fields as a nutrient or organic supplement. Effluents from sewage disposal plants are used in some areas both for irrigation and for the nutrients contained. Effluents from other processing plants may also be used as a supplemental source of water. Many industries, such as meat and poultry processing plants, are currently converting former waste production into marketable byproducts. Other industries have potential economic uses for their waste products. | 838.txt | 0 |
[
"countries of the world will work together on pollution problems",
"byproducts from wastes lead to a more prosperous marketplace",
"science is making great progress on increasing water supplieswww.examw.com",
"some industries are now making economic use of wastes"
] | The reader can conclude that _ . | Water problems in the future will become more intense and more complex. Our increasing population will tremendously increase urban wastes, primarily sewage. On the other hand, increasing demands for water will decrease substantially the amount of water available for diluting wastes. Rapidly expanding industries which involve more and more complex chemical processes will produce large volumes of liquid wastes, and many of these will contain chemicals which are poisonous. To feed our rapidly expanding population, agriculture will have to be intensified. This will involve ever-increasing quantities of agriculture chemicals. From this, it is apparent that drastic steps must be taken immediately to develop corrective measures for the pollution problem.
There are two ways by which this pollution problem can be lessened. The first relates to the treatment of wastes to decrease their pollution hazard. This involves the processing of solid wastes "prior to" disposal and the treatment of liquid wastes, or effluents, to permit the reuse of the water or best reduce pollution upon final disposal.
A second approach is to develop an economic use for all or a part of the wastes. Farm manure is spread in fields as a nutrient or organic supplement. Effluents from sewage disposal plants are used in some areas both for irrigation and for the nutrients contained. Effluents from other processing plants may also be used as a supplemental source of water. Many industries, such as meat and poultry processing plants, are currently converting former waste production into marketable byproducts. Other industries have potential economic uses for their waste products. | 838.txt | 3 |
[
"interviews with authorities in the field of water controls",
"opinion and personal observations",
"definitions which clarify important terms",
"strong argument and persuasions"
] | The author gives substance to the passage through the use of _ . | Water problems in the future will become more intense and more complex. Our increasing population will tremendously increase urban wastes, primarily sewage. On the other hand, increasing demands for water will decrease substantially the amount of water available for diluting wastes. Rapidly expanding industries which involve more and more complex chemical processes will produce large volumes of liquid wastes, and many of these will contain chemicals which are poisonous. To feed our rapidly expanding population, agriculture will have to be intensified. This will involve ever-increasing quantities of agriculture chemicals. From this, it is apparent that drastic steps must be taken immediately to develop corrective measures for the pollution problem.
There are two ways by which this pollution problem can be lessened. The first relates to the treatment of wastes to decrease their pollution hazard. This involves the processing of solid wastes "prior to" disposal and the treatment of liquid wastes, or effluents, to permit the reuse of the water or best reduce pollution upon final disposal.
A second approach is to develop an economic use for all or a part of the wastes. Farm manure is spread in fields as a nutrient or organic supplement. Effluents from sewage disposal plants are used in some areas both for irrigation and for the nutrients contained. Effluents from other processing plants may also be used as a supplemental source of water. Many industries, such as meat and poultry processing plants, are currently converting former waste production into marketable byproducts. Other industries have potential economic uses for their waste products. | 838.txt | 1 |
[
"after",
"during",
"before",
"beyond"
] | The words "prior to" (Para. 2) probably mean _ . | Water problems in the future will become more intense and more complex. Our increasing population will tremendously increase urban wastes, primarily sewage. On the other hand, increasing demands for water will decrease substantially the amount of water available for diluting wastes. Rapidly expanding industries which involve more and more complex chemical processes will produce large volumes of liquid wastes, and many of these will contain chemicals which are poisonous. To feed our rapidly expanding population, agriculture will have to be intensified. This will involve ever-increasing quantities of agriculture chemicals. From this, it is apparent that drastic steps must be taken immediately to develop corrective measures for the pollution problem.
There are two ways by which this pollution problem can be lessened. The first relates to the treatment of wastes to decrease their pollution hazard. This involves the processing of solid wastes "prior to" disposal and the treatment of liquid wastes, or effluents, to permit the reuse of the water or best reduce pollution upon final disposal.
A second approach is to develop an economic use for all or a part of the wastes. Farm manure is spread in fields as a nutrient or organic supplement. Effluents from sewage disposal plants are used in some areas both for irrigation and for the nutrients contained. Effluents from other processing plants may also be used as a supplemental source of water. Many industries, such as meat and poultry processing plants, are currently converting former waste production into marketable byproducts. Other industries have potential economic uses for their waste products. | 838.txt | 3 |
[
"They can attract people's attention to their reports.",
"They can choose from a greater variety of topics.",
"They can make themselves better known.",
"They can give voice to different views."
] | In what way do the media benefit from extreme weather? | Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of "extreme" climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in the New York Times about the "rising incidence of extreme events," He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America's Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel's latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For "North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness" Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year's drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. so, while com futures did set a record of about S8 per bushelin late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol（）,which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn-at the expense of many of the world's poorest people.
Bill Mickbben similarly worries in The Guardian about the Midwest drought and corn prices. He confidently tells us that raging wildfires from New Mexico and Colorado to Siberia are "exactly" what the early stages of global warming look like.
In fact, the latest overview of global wildfire suggests that fire intensity has declined over the past 70 years and is now close to its preindustrial level.
When well-meaning campaigners want us to pay attention to global warming, they often end up pitching beyond the facts. And, while this may seem justified by a noble goal, such "policy by people" tactics rarely work, and often backfire.
Remember how, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore claimed that we were in store for ever more destructive hurricanes? Since then, hurricane incidence has dropped off the charts. Exaggerated claims merely fuel public distrust and disengagement.
That is unfortunate, because global warming is a real problem, and we do need to address it. | 1207.txt | 0 |
[
"A time machine is needed to testify to its truth.",
"It is based on an erroneous climate model.",
"It will eventually get proof in 2048.",
"There is no way to prove its validity."
] | What is the author's comment on Krugman's claim about the current drought in America's Midwest? | Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of "extreme" climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in the New York Times about the "rising incidence of extreme events," He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America's Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel's latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For "North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness" Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year's drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. so, while com futures did set a record of about S8 per bushelin late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol（）,which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn-at the expense of many of the world's poorest people.
Bill Mickbben similarly worries in The Guardian about the Midwest drought and corn prices. He confidently tells us that raging wildfires from New Mexico and Colorado to Siberia are "exactly" what the early stages of global warming look like.
In fact, the latest overview of global wildfire suggests that fire intensity has declined over the past 70 years and is now close to its preindustrial level.
When well-meaning campaigners want us to pay attention to global warming, they often end up pitching beyond the facts. And, while this may seem justified by a noble goal, such "policy by people" tactics rarely work, and often backfire.
Remember how, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore claimed that we were in store for ever more destructive hurricanes? Since then, hurricane incidence has dropped off the charts. Exaggerated claims merely fuel public distrust and disengagement.
That is unfortunate, because global warming is a real problem, and we do need to address it. | 1207.txt | 3 |
[
"Demand for food has been rising in the developing countries.",
"A considerable portion of corn is used to produce green fuel.",
"Climate change has caused corn yields to drop markedly.",
"Inflation rates have been skyrocketing since the 1970s."
] | What is the chief reason for the rise in corn prices according to the author? | Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of "extreme" climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in the New York Times about the "rising incidence of extreme events," He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America's Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel's latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For "North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness" Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year's drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. so, while com futures did set a record of about S8 per bushelin late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol（）,which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn-at the expense of many of the world's poorest people.
Bill Mickbben similarly worries in The Guardian about the Midwest drought and corn prices. He confidently tells us that raging wildfires from New Mexico and Colorado to Siberia are "exactly" what the early stages of global warming look like.
In fact, the latest overview of global wildfire suggests that fire intensity has declined over the past 70 years and is now close to its preindustrial level.
When well-meaning campaigners want us to pay attention to global warming, they often end up pitching beyond the facts. And, while this may seem justified by a noble goal, such "policy by people" tactics rarely work, and often backfire.
Remember how, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore claimed that we were in store for ever more destructive hurricanes? Since then, hurricane incidence has dropped off the charts. Exaggerated claims merely fuel public distrust and disengagement.
That is unfortunate, because global warming is a real problem, and we do need to address it. | 1207.txt | 3 |
[
"It has got worse with the rise in extreme weathers.",
"It signals the early stages of global warming.",
"It has dropped greatly.",
"It is related to drought."
] | What does the author say about global wildfire incidence over the past 70 years? | Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of "extreme" climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in the New York Times about the "rising incidence of extreme events," He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America's Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel's latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For "North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness" Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year's drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. so, while com futures did set a record of about S8 per bushelin late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol（）,which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn-at the expense of many of the world's poorest people.
Bill Mickbben similarly worries in The Guardian about the Midwest drought and corn prices. He confidently tells us that raging wildfires from New Mexico and Colorado to Siberia are "exactly" what the early stages of global warming look like.
In fact, the latest overview of global wildfire suggests that fire intensity has declined over the past 70 years and is now close to its preindustrial level.
When well-meaning campaigners want us to pay attention to global warming, they often end up pitching beyond the facts. And, while this may seem justified by a noble goal, such "policy by people" tactics rarely work, and often backfire.
Remember how, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore claimed that we were in store for ever more destructive hurricanes? Since then, hurricane incidence has dropped off the charts. Exaggerated claims merely fuel public distrust and disengagement.
That is unfortunate, because global warming is a real problem, and we do need to address it. | 1207.txt | 2 |
[
"They are strategies to raise public awareness.",
"They do a disservice to addressing the problem.",
"They aggravate public distrust about science.",
"They create confusion about climate change."
] | What does the author think of the exaggerated claims in the media about global warming? | Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of "extreme" climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in the New York Times about the "rising incidence of extreme events," He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America's Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel's latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For "North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness" Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year's drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. so, while com futures did set a record of about S8 per bushelin late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol（）,which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn-at the expense of many of the world's poorest people.
Bill Mickbben similarly worries in The Guardian about the Midwest drought and corn prices. He confidently tells us that raging wildfires from New Mexico and Colorado to Siberia are "exactly" what the early stages of global warming look like.
In fact, the latest overview of global wildfire suggests that fire intensity has declined over the past 70 years and is now close to its preindustrial level.
When well-meaning campaigners want us to pay attention to global warming, they often end up pitching beyond the facts. And, while this may seem justified by a noble goal, such "policy by people" tactics rarely work, and often backfire.
Remember how, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore claimed that we were in store for ever more destructive hurricanes? Since then, hurricane incidence has dropped off the charts. Exaggerated claims merely fuel public distrust and disengagement.
That is unfortunate, because global warming is a real problem, and we do need to address it. | 1207.txt | 1 |
[
"149.",
"7,646.",
"753.",
"8,399."
] | How many non-apple eaters answered survey questions in the research? | Eating an apple a day doesn' t keep the doctor away, but it does reduce the amount of trips you make to the drug store per year. That ' s according to a new study that investigates whether there' s any truth in the old saying.
A team of researchers led by Dr Matthew Davis, of the University of Michigan School of Nursing,asked 8,399 participants to answer survey questions about diet and health. A total of 753 were apple eaters, consuming at least 149g of raw apple per day. The remaining 7,646 were classed as non-apple eaters. When both groups answered questions on trips to the doctor and trips to the drug store per year,the apple eaters were found to be 27% less likely to visit the druggist for drugs.
Trips to the doctor were not significantly affected by apple consumption, though. "Evidence does not support that an apple a day keeps the doctor away. However, the small number of US adults who eat an apple a day does appear to use fewer prescription medications," the study concludes.
Apple eaters were also found to be less likely to smoke and be more likely to have a higher educational attainment than non-apple eaters. While apples do not compete with oranges, they
docontain some immune system-increasing vitamin C, which may be why apple-eaters
visit the druggist less. With over 8mg of vitamin C per medium-sized fruit, an apple can provide roughly 14% your daily recommended intake.
Previous studies have also linked apple consumption to a lower risk of Type 2 diabetes ,improved lung function and a lower risk of colon cancer. | 4247.txt | 1 |
[
"Apple consumption has greatly reduced US adults' trips to the doctor.",
"An apple a day does keep the doctor away.",
"Apples are far more nutritious than oranges.",
"A small number of US adult apple eaters tend to take less medicine."
] | What is the conclusion of the study? | Eating an apple a day doesn' t keep the doctor away, but it does reduce the amount of trips you make to the drug store per year. That ' s according to a new study that investigates whether there' s any truth in the old saying.
A team of researchers led by Dr Matthew Davis, of the University of Michigan School of Nursing,asked 8,399 participants to answer survey questions about diet and health. A total of 753 were apple eaters, consuming at least 149g of raw apple per day. The remaining 7,646 were classed as non-apple eaters. When both groups answered questions on trips to the doctor and trips to the drug store per year,the apple eaters were found to be 27% less likely to visit the druggist for drugs.
Trips to the doctor were not significantly affected by apple consumption, though. "Evidence does not support that an apple a day keeps the doctor away. However, the small number of US adults who eat an apple a day does appear to use fewer prescription medications," the study concludes.
Apple eaters were also found to be less likely to smoke and be more likely to have a higher educational attainment than non-apple eaters. While apples do not compete with oranges, they
docontain some immune system-increasing vitamin C, which may be why apple-eaters
visit the druggist less. With over 8mg of vitamin C per medium-sized fruit, an apple can provide roughly 14% your daily recommended intake.
Previous studies have also linked apple consumption to a lower risk of Type 2 diabetes ,improved lung function and a lower risk of colon cancer. | 4247.txt | 3 |
[
"Apples are better than oranges.",
"Apples do have some vitamin C to increase the immune system.",
"Apples can help cure certain diseases.",
"Apples can provide people with sufficient daily intake of energy."
] | What can we learn from the passage? | Eating an apple a day doesn' t keep the doctor away, but it does reduce the amount of trips you make to the drug store per year. That ' s according to a new study that investigates whether there' s any truth in the old saying.
A team of researchers led by Dr Matthew Davis, of the University of Michigan School of Nursing,asked 8,399 participants to answer survey questions about diet and health. A total of 753 were apple eaters, consuming at least 149g of raw apple per day. The remaining 7,646 were classed as non-apple eaters. When both groups answered questions on trips to the doctor and trips to the drug store per year,the apple eaters were found to be 27% less likely to visit the druggist for drugs.
Trips to the doctor were not significantly affected by apple consumption, though. "Evidence does not support that an apple a day keeps the doctor away. However, the small number of US adults who eat an apple a day does appear to use fewer prescription medications," the study concludes.
Apple eaters were also found to be less likely to smoke and be more likely to have a higher educational attainment than non-apple eaters. While apples do not compete with oranges, they
docontain some immune system-increasing vitamin C, which may be why apple-eaters
visit the druggist less. With over 8mg of vitamin C per medium-sized fruit, an apple can provide roughly 14% your daily recommended intake.
Previous studies have also linked apple consumption to a lower risk of Type 2 diabetes ,improved lung function and a lower risk of colon cancer. | 4247.txt | 1 |
[
"Objective.",
"Creative.",
"subjective",
"persuasive"
] | What can be described as the writing style of this passage? | Eating an apple a day doesn' t keep the doctor away, but it does reduce the amount of trips you make to the drug store per year. That ' s according to a new study that investigates whether there' s any truth in the old saying.
A team of researchers led by Dr Matthew Davis, of the University of Michigan School of Nursing,asked 8,399 participants to answer survey questions about diet and health. A total of 753 were apple eaters, consuming at least 149g of raw apple per day. The remaining 7,646 were classed as non-apple eaters. When both groups answered questions on trips to the doctor and trips to the drug store per year,the apple eaters were found to be 27% less likely to visit the druggist for drugs.
Trips to the doctor were not significantly affected by apple consumption, though. "Evidence does not support that an apple a day keeps the doctor away. However, the small number of US adults who eat an apple a day does appear to use fewer prescription medications," the study concludes.
Apple eaters were also found to be less likely to smoke and be more likely to have a higher educational attainment than non-apple eaters. While apples do not compete with oranges, they
docontain some immune system-increasing vitamin C, which may be why apple-eaters
visit the druggist less. With over 8mg of vitamin C per medium-sized fruit, an apple can provide roughly 14% your daily recommended intake.
Previous studies have also linked apple consumption to a lower risk of Type 2 diabetes ,improved lung function and a lower risk of colon cancer. | 4247.txt | 0 |
[
"beauty",
"unknown identity",
"seminude body",
"intimate relationship with Raphael"
] | The mystery of the woman lies in her _ . | His bio reads like a rock star's. A precocious talent, he never married because, he said, it would have hurt his career. But he moved his girlfriend in with him while he worked his last gig-then died at the age of 37 from a fever brought on, some said, by carnal excess. The great painter Raphael （1483-1520）was one of the big three of Italy's high Renaissance, along with Leonardo da Vinci （whose work he admired and studied closely）and Michelangelo （with whom he carried on a vigorous, if all too brief, competition to be the Vatican's favorite artist）. He didn't seem, however, to have a superstar's attitude. The pope was his patron, and acquaintances described him as" sensible," " well mannered," " genial " and" sweet." On his deathbed, he bequeathed his mistress enough money to live" honorably" for the rest of her life. And he painted herportrait-one of the great paintings of all time, right up there with the" Mona Lisa" -as a final, loving tribute.
At least that's how the legend goes. That portrait-which is touring the United States for the first time-constitutes a one-picture exhibition at the Frick Collection in New York through Jan. 30 （it will travel to Houston and Indianapolis）. Certainly, " La Fornarina" （" Baker's Daughter" ）comes from the hand of the incomparable Raphael. The gently tilting composition is perfect, the color finely balanced and the lady's skin alabaster and flawless. （Raphael got so good with the then new medium of oil paint that his technique became known as sprezzatura, meaning, roughly, to hide with technical facility exactly how anything is done.） In the classic Venus gesture of simultaneously trying to cover up and to showcase her erotic attributes（including a belly button under gauze）, she glances coyly to the side at, one presumes, a lover." La Fornarina," the renowned art historian and MacArthur fellow Leo Steinberg explains, " is the closest thing to soft porn in the high Renaissance." But whether the seminude lady depicted is actually the baker's daughter who was Raphael's love remains a mystery.
Is Raphael himself the object of her gaze? Most people-including several British critics reviewing the big Raphael exhibition currently at the National Gallery in London-like to think so. Since live women models weren't generally available five centuries ago, the reasoning goes, the lady's posing undressed for Raphael must have been an intimate act. Besides, what else can the artist's proprietary name on her armband mean? But the experts remain divided. With a fine disregard for attendance-boosting hype, Rome museums commissioner Claudio Strinati （" LaFornarina" usually resides at the Palazzo Barberini in Rome）lays out a less titillating hypothesis in a booklet accompanying the Frick display.
A recent cleaning of the painting reveals a wedding ring on the lady's left hand; Raphael's final and most prominent patron, the Sienese banker Agostino Chigi, had just been married to one Francesca Ardeasca. Raphael's name on the armband, Strinati says, is a tribute to Chigi. He concludes that" La Fornarina" is Ardeasca. Unfortunately, no other portraits of Chigi's bride exist to confirm the ID. As Steinberg says, " It's all an attractive myth, and like all myths it depends for interpretation on levels of reliable gossip." Whatever one believes, " La Fornarina" is still a sweetheart of a painting. | 455.txt | 1 |
[
"Raphael behaved like a superstar",
"Raphael died young because of overwork",
"Raphael enjoyed greater popularity than Michelangelo",
"one of Raphael's paintings achieves as great fame as\" Mona Lisa\""
] | It can be inferred from the text that _ . | His bio reads like a rock star's. A precocious talent, he never married because, he said, it would have hurt his career. But he moved his girlfriend in with him while he worked his last gig-then died at the age of 37 from a fever brought on, some said, by carnal excess. The great painter Raphael （1483-1520）was one of the big three of Italy's high Renaissance, along with Leonardo da Vinci （whose work he admired and studied closely）and Michelangelo （with whom he carried on a vigorous, if all too brief, competition to be the Vatican's favorite artist）. He didn't seem, however, to have a superstar's attitude. The pope was his patron, and acquaintances described him as" sensible," " well mannered," " genial " and" sweet." On his deathbed, he bequeathed his mistress enough money to live" honorably" for the rest of her life. And he painted herportrait-one of the great paintings of all time, right up there with the" Mona Lisa" -as a final, loving tribute.
At least that's how the legend goes. That portrait-which is touring the United States for the first time-constitutes a one-picture exhibition at the Frick Collection in New York through Jan. 30 （it will travel to Houston and Indianapolis）. Certainly, " La Fornarina" （" Baker's Daughter" ）comes from the hand of the incomparable Raphael. The gently tilting composition is perfect, the color finely balanced and the lady's skin alabaster and flawless. （Raphael got so good with the then new medium of oil paint that his technique became known as sprezzatura, meaning, roughly, to hide with technical facility exactly how anything is done.） In the classic Venus gesture of simultaneously trying to cover up and to showcase her erotic attributes（including a belly button under gauze）, she glances coyly to the side at, one presumes, a lover." La Fornarina," the renowned art historian and MacArthur fellow Leo Steinberg explains, " is the closest thing to soft porn in the high Renaissance." But whether the seminude lady depicted is actually the baker's daughter who was Raphael's love remains a mystery.
Is Raphael himself the object of her gaze? Most people-including several British critics reviewing the big Raphael exhibition currently at the National Gallery in London-like to think so. Since live women models weren't generally available five centuries ago, the reasoning goes, the lady's posing undressed for Raphael must have been an intimate act. Besides, what else can the artist's proprietary name on her armband mean? But the experts remain divided. With a fine disregard for attendance-boosting hype, Rome museums commissioner Claudio Strinati （" LaFornarina" usually resides at the Palazzo Barberini in Rome）lays out a less titillating hypothesis in a booklet accompanying the Frick display.
A recent cleaning of the painting reveals a wedding ring on the lady's left hand; Raphael's final and most prominent patron, the Sienese banker Agostino Chigi, had just been married to one Francesca Ardeasca. Raphael's name on the armband, Strinati says, is a tribute to Chigi. He concludes that" La Fornarina" is Ardeasca. Unfortunately, no other portraits of Chigi's bride exist to confirm the ID. As Steinberg says, " It's all an attractive myth, and like all myths it depends for interpretation on levels of reliable gossip." Whatever one believes, " La Fornarina" is still a sweetheart of a painting. | 455.txt | 3 |
[
"Raphael is good at soft porn",
"Raphael develops a special feeling towards the baker's daughter",
"oil paint was not popular then",
"Raphael's painting technique has reached maturity"
] | The vivid descriptions of the painting" La Fornarina" show that _ . | His bio reads like a rock star's. A precocious talent, he never married because, he said, it would have hurt his career. But he moved his girlfriend in with him while he worked his last gig-then died at the age of 37 from a fever brought on, some said, by carnal excess. The great painter Raphael （1483-1520）was one of the big three of Italy's high Renaissance, along with Leonardo da Vinci （whose work he admired and studied closely）and Michelangelo （with whom he carried on a vigorous, if all too brief, competition to be the Vatican's favorite artist）. He didn't seem, however, to have a superstar's attitude. The pope was his patron, and acquaintances described him as" sensible," " well mannered," " genial " and" sweet." On his deathbed, he bequeathed his mistress enough money to live" honorably" for the rest of her life. And he painted herportrait-one of the great paintings of all time, right up there with the" Mona Lisa" -as a final, loving tribute.
At least that's how the legend goes. That portrait-which is touring the United States for the first time-constitutes a one-picture exhibition at the Frick Collection in New York through Jan. 30 （it will travel to Houston and Indianapolis）. Certainly, " La Fornarina" （" Baker's Daughter" ）comes from the hand of the incomparable Raphael. The gently tilting composition is perfect, the color finely balanced and the lady's skin alabaster and flawless. （Raphael got so good with the then new medium of oil paint that his technique became known as sprezzatura, meaning, roughly, to hide with technical facility exactly how anything is done.） In the classic Venus gesture of simultaneously trying to cover up and to showcase her erotic attributes（including a belly button under gauze）, she glances coyly to the side at, one presumes, a lover." La Fornarina," the renowned art historian and MacArthur fellow Leo Steinberg explains, " is the closest thing to soft porn in the high Renaissance." But whether the seminude lady depicted is actually the baker's daughter who was Raphael's love remains a mystery.
Is Raphael himself the object of her gaze? Most people-including several British critics reviewing the big Raphael exhibition currently at the National Gallery in London-like to think so. Since live women models weren't generally available five centuries ago, the reasoning goes, the lady's posing undressed for Raphael must have been an intimate act. Besides, what else can the artist's proprietary name on her armband mean? But the experts remain divided. With a fine disregard for attendance-boosting hype, Rome museums commissioner Claudio Strinati （" LaFornarina" usually resides at the Palazzo Barberini in Rome）lays out a less titillating hypothesis in a booklet accompanying the Frick display.
A recent cleaning of the painting reveals a wedding ring on the lady's left hand; Raphael's final and most prominent patron, the Sienese banker Agostino Chigi, had just been married to one Francesca Ardeasca. Raphael's name on the armband, Strinati says, is a tribute to Chigi. He concludes that" La Fornarina" is Ardeasca. Unfortunately, no other portraits of Chigi's bride exist to confirm the ID. As Steinberg says, " It's all an attractive myth, and like all myths it depends for interpretation on levels of reliable gossip." Whatever one believes, " La Fornarina" is still a sweetheart of a painting. | 455.txt | 3 |
[
"there is sound evidence to believe there exists an intimacy between Raphael and the woman in the painting",
"live women models were nowhere to find in Raphael's time",
"nude models were easily available in Italy in Renaissance",
"it is generally agreed among experts that the woman is Raphael's mistress"
] | We can draw a conclusion from the third paragraph that _ . | His bio reads like a rock star's. A precocious talent, he never married because, he said, it would have hurt his career. But he moved his girlfriend in with him while he worked his last gig-then died at the age of 37 from a fever brought on, some said, by carnal excess. The great painter Raphael （1483-1520）was one of the big three of Italy's high Renaissance, along with Leonardo da Vinci （whose work he admired and studied closely）and Michelangelo （with whom he carried on a vigorous, if all too brief, competition to be the Vatican's favorite artist）. He didn't seem, however, to have a superstar's attitude. The pope was his patron, and acquaintances described him as" sensible," " well mannered," " genial " and" sweet." On his deathbed, he bequeathed his mistress enough money to live" honorably" for the rest of her life. And he painted herportrait-one of the great paintings of all time, right up there with the" Mona Lisa" -as a final, loving tribute.
At least that's how the legend goes. That portrait-which is touring the United States for the first time-constitutes a one-picture exhibition at the Frick Collection in New York through Jan. 30 （it will travel to Houston and Indianapolis）. Certainly, " La Fornarina" （" Baker's Daughter" ）comes from the hand of the incomparable Raphael. The gently tilting composition is perfect, the color finely balanced and the lady's skin alabaster and flawless. （Raphael got so good with the then new medium of oil paint that his technique became known as sprezzatura, meaning, roughly, to hide with technical facility exactly how anything is done.） In the classic Venus gesture of simultaneously trying to cover up and to showcase her erotic attributes（including a belly button under gauze）, she glances coyly to the side at, one presumes, a lover." La Fornarina," the renowned art historian and MacArthur fellow Leo Steinberg explains, " is the closest thing to soft porn in the high Renaissance." But whether the seminude lady depicted is actually the baker's daughter who was Raphael's love remains a mystery.
Is Raphael himself the object of her gaze? Most people-including several British critics reviewing the big Raphael exhibition currently at the National Gallery in London-like to think so. Since live women models weren't generally available five centuries ago, the reasoning goes, the lady's posing undressed for Raphael must have been an intimate act. Besides, what else can the artist's proprietary name on her armband mean? But the experts remain divided. With a fine disregard for attendance-boosting hype, Rome museums commissioner Claudio Strinati （" LaFornarina" usually resides at the Palazzo Barberini in Rome）lays out a less titillating hypothesis in a booklet accompanying the Frick display.
A recent cleaning of the painting reveals a wedding ring on the lady's left hand; Raphael's final and most prominent patron, the Sienese banker Agostino Chigi, had just been married to one Francesca Ardeasca. Raphael's name on the armband, Strinati says, is a tribute to Chigi. He concludes that" La Fornarina" is Ardeasca. Unfortunately, no other portraits of Chigi's bride exist to confirm the ID. As Steinberg says, " It's all an attractive myth, and like all myths it depends for interpretation on levels of reliable gossip." Whatever one believes, " La Fornarina" is still a sweetheart of a painting. | 455.txt | 0 |
[
"shows curiosity towards the identity of the woman in the painting",
"is a Renaissance art historian",
"strongly supports the idea that\" La Fornarina\" is one of Raphael's mistress",
"thinks low of Raphael's technique in the painting"
] | From the text, we can see that the writer _ . | His bio reads like a rock star's. A precocious talent, he never married because, he said, it would have hurt his career. But he moved his girlfriend in with him while he worked his last gig-then died at the age of 37 from a fever brought on, some said, by carnal excess. The great painter Raphael （1483-1520）was one of the big three of Italy's high Renaissance, along with Leonardo da Vinci （whose work he admired and studied closely）and Michelangelo （with whom he carried on a vigorous, if all too brief, competition to be the Vatican's favorite artist）. He didn't seem, however, to have a superstar's attitude. The pope was his patron, and acquaintances described him as" sensible," " well mannered," " genial " and" sweet." On his deathbed, he bequeathed his mistress enough money to live" honorably" for the rest of her life. And he painted herportrait-one of the great paintings of all time, right up there with the" Mona Lisa" -as a final, loving tribute.
At least that's how the legend goes. That portrait-which is touring the United States for the first time-constitutes a one-picture exhibition at the Frick Collection in New York through Jan. 30 （it will travel to Houston and Indianapolis）. Certainly, " La Fornarina" （" Baker's Daughter" ）comes from the hand of the incomparable Raphael. The gently tilting composition is perfect, the color finely balanced and the lady's skin alabaster and flawless. （Raphael got so good with the then new medium of oil paint that his technique became known as sprezzatura, meaning, roughly, to hide with technical facility exactly how anything is done.） In the classic Venus gesture of simultaneously trying to cover up and to showcase her erotic attributes（including a belly button under gauze）, she glances coyly to the side at, one presumes, a lover." La Fornarina," the renowned art historian and MacArthur fellow Leo Steinberg explains, " is the closest thing to soft porn in the high Renaissance." But whether the seminude lady depicted is actually the baker's daughter who was Raphael's love remains a mystery.
Is Raphael himself the object of her gaze? Most people-including several British critics reviewing the big Raphael exhibition currently at the National Gallery in London-like to think so. Since live women models weren't generally available five centuries ago, the reasoning goes, the lady's posing undressed for Raphael must have been an intimate act. Besides, what else can the artist's proprietary name on her armband mean? But the experts remain divided. With a fine disregard for attendance-boosting hype, Rome museums commissioner Claudio Strinati （" LaFornarina" usually resides at the Palazzo Barberini in Rome）lays out a less titillating hypothesis in a booklet accompanying the Frick display.
A recent cleaning of the painting reveals a wedding ring on the lady's left hand; Raphael's final and most prominent patron, the Sienese banker Agostino Chigi, had just been married to one Francesca Ardeasca. Raphael's name on the armband, Strinati says, is a tribute to Chigi. He concludes that" La Fornarina" is Ardeasca. Unfortunately, no other portraits of Chigi's bride exist to confirm the ID. As Steinberg says, " It's all an attractive myth, and like all myths it depends for interpretation on levels of reliable gossip." Whatever one believes, " La Fornarina" is still a sweetheart of a painting. | 455.txt | 0 |
[
"conquered first.",
"near population centers.",
"used as military bases.",
"rapidly incorporated into the empire."
] | According to paragraph 1, the Roman army had the most influence on those areas of Britain that were | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 2 |
[
"It encouraged more even distribution of the population and the settlement of previously undeveloped territory.",
"It created discontent and made continuing military occupation necessary.",
"It required local labor to construct forts and feed and exercise the soldiers' animals.",
"It provided local leaders with opportunities to participate in governance."
] | According to paragraph 1, what effect did military occupation have on the local population? | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 1 |
[
"respond to.",
"warn against.",
"avoid the impact of.",
"stop by force."
] | The word "suppress" in the passage (paragraph 1) is closest in meaning to | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 3 |
[
"rebellion.",
"conflict.",
"neglect.",
"crime."
] | The word "friction" in the passage (paragraph 2) is closest in meaning to | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 1 |
[
"describe the kinds of tasks soldiers were required to perform as punishment for disloyalty or misdeeds.",
"illustrate some of the duties assigned to soldiers to keep them busy and well-behaved when not involved in military campaigns.",
"provide evidence that Roman soldiers had a negative effect on the local area by performing jobs that had been performed by native workers.",
"argue that the soldiers would have been better employed in the construction of infrastructure such as roads."
] | The author mentions "343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead"in paragraph 2 in order to | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 1 |
[
"given the right to.",
"able to afford to.",
"encouraged to.",
"required to."
] | The phrase "entitled to" in the passage (paragraph 3) is closest in meaning to | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 0 |
[
"Their needs were met by the army, and all of their economic transactions took place within the fort.",
"Most of their needs were met by traveling tradespeople who visit the forts.",
"During their days off, soldiers traveled to distant towns to make purchases.",
"They bought what they needed from the artisans and traders in nearby towns."
] | According to paragraph 3, how did the soldiers meet their needs for goods and services? | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 3 |
[
"Membership in these regiments reached its highest point during the region of the emperor Hadrian.",
"Most of the units recruited in Britain were sent to Morocco and other stations outside Europe.",
"Soldiers served in the regiments for many years and after retirement generally stayed where they had been stationed.",
"Most of the regiments stationed on the frontier were new units transferred from a neighboring province."
] | According to paragraph 4, which of the following is true of Britain's auxiliary regiments of the Roman army? | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 2 |
[
"Membership in the units passed from father to son.",
"Fewer soldiers were stationed at the forts.",
"Soldiers usually were not transferred to different locations.",
"Frontier units became more effective and proficient."
] | According to paragraph 4, all of the following changes could be seen in the frontier garrisons by the later Roman period EXCEPT: | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 3 |
[
"To emphasize the degree to which the stability of the British northern frontier depended on firm military control.",
"To suggest that the Romans continued to occupy Britain even after they had formally given up the right to do so.",
"To support the claim that forts continued to serve an import economic function even after they ceased to be of any military use.",
"To describe one of the things that resulted from frontier garrisons' becoming part of the local community over a long period."
] | Why does the author mention that "some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain"in paragraph 5 ? | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 3 |
[
"experiences.",
"communities.",
"conditions.",
"laws."
] | The word "circumstances" in the passage (paragraph 5) is closest in meaning to | In the wake of the Roman Empire's conquest of Britain in the first century A.D., a large number of troops stayed in the new province, and these troops had a considerable impact on Britain with their camps, fortifications, and participation in the local economy. Assessing the impact of the army on the civilian population starts from the realization that the soldiers were always unevenly distributed across the country. Areas rapidly incorporated into the empire were not long affected by the military. Where the army remained stationed, its presence was much more influential. The imposition of a military base involved the requisition of native lands for both the fort and the territory needed to feed and exercise the soldiers' animals. The imposition of military rule also robbed local leaders of opportunities to participate in local government, so social development was stunted and the seeds of disaffection sown. This then meant that the military had to remain to suppress rebellion and organize government.
Economic exchange was clearly very important as the Roman army brought with it very substantial spending power. Locally a fort had two kinds of impact. Its large population needed food and other supplies. Some of these were certainly brought from long distances, but demands were inevitably placed on the local area. Although goods could be requisitioned, they were usually paid for, and this probably stimulated changes in the local economy. When not campaigning, soldiers needed to be occupied; otherwise they represented a potentially dangerous source of friction and disloyalty. Hence a writing tablet dated 25 April tells of 343 men at one fort engaged on tasks like shoemaking, building a bathhouse, operating kilns, digging clay, and working lead. Such activities had a major effect on the local area, in particular with the construction of infrastructure such as roads, which improved access to remote areas.
Each soldier received his pay, but in regions without a developed economy there was initially little on which it could be spent. The pool of excess cash rapidly stimulated a thriving economy outside fort gates. Some of the demand for the services and goods was no doubt fulfilled by people drawn from far afield, but some local people certainly became entwined in this new economy. There was informal marriage with soldiers, who until AD 197 were not legally entitled to wed, and whole new communities grew up near the forts. These settlements acted like small towns, becoming centers for the artisan and trading populations.
The army also provided a mean of personal advancement for auxiliary soldiers recruited from the native peoples, as a man obtained hereditary Roman citizenship on retirement after service in an auxiliary regiment. Such units recruited on an ad hoc (as needeD. basis from the area in which they were stationed, and there was evidently large-scale recruitment within Britain. The total numbers were at least 12,500 men up to the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), with a peak around A.D. 80. Although a small proportion of the total population, this perhaps had a massive local impact when a large proportion of the young men were removed from an area. Newly raised regiments were normally transferred to another province from whence it was unlikely that individual recruits would ever return. Most units raised in Britain went elsewhere on the European continent, although one is recorded in Morocco. The reverse process brought young men to Britain, where many continued to live after their 20 to 25 years of service, and this added to the cosmopolitan Roman character of the frontier population. By the later Roman period, frontier garrisons (groups of soldiers) were only rarely transferred, service in units became effectively hereditary, and forts were no longer populated or maintained at full strength.
This process of settling in as a community over several generations, combined with local recruitment, presumably accounts for the apparent stability of the British northern frontier in the later Roman period. It also explains why some of the forts continued in occupation long after Rome ceased to have any formal authority in Britain, at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. The circumstances that had allowed natives to become Romanized also led the self-sustaining military community of the frontier area to become effectively British. | 485.txt | 2 |
[
"STEM-related subjects help students find jobs in the information society.",
"The humanities and STEM subjects should be given equal importance.",
"The liberal arts in higher education help enrich students' spiritual life.",
"Higher education should be adjusted to the practical needs of society."
] | What does the latest congressional report suggest? | The question of whether our government should promote science and technology or the liberal arts in higher education isn't an either/or proposition , although the current emphasis on preparing young Americans for STEM (science, technology, engineering, maths)-related fields can make it seem that way.
The latest congressional report acknowledges the critical importance of technical training, but also asserts that the study of the humanities (）and social sciences must remain central components of America's educational system at all levels. Both areas are critical to producing citizens who can participate effectively in our democratic society, become innovative(）leaders, and benefit from the spiritual enrichment that the reflection on the great ideas of mankind over time provides.
Parents and students who have invested heavily in higher education worry about graduates, job prospects as technological advances and changes in domestic and global markets transform professions in ways that reduce wages and cut jobs. Under these circumstances, it's natural to look for what may appear to be the most "practical" way out of the problem: "Major in a subject designed to get you a job" seems the obvious answer to some, though this ignores the fact that many disciplines in the humanities characterized as "soft" often, in fact, lead to employment and success in the long run. Indeed, according to surveys, employers have expressed a preference for students who have received a broadly-based education that has taught them to write well, think critically, research creatively, and communicate easily.
Moreover, students should be prepared not just for their first job, but for their 4th and 5th jobs, as there's little reason to doubt that people entering the workforce today will be called upon to play many different roles over the course of their careers. The ones who will do the best in this new environment will be those whose educations have prepared them to be flexible. The ability to draw upon every available tool and insight-picked up from science, arts, and technology-to solve the problems of the future, and take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves, will be helpful to them and the United States. | 2160.txt | 1 |
[
"Their interest in relevant subjects.",
"The quality of education to receive.",
"The academic value of the courses.",
"Their chances of getting a good job."
] | What is the main concern of students when they choose a major? | The question of whether our government should promote science and technology or the liberal arts in higher education isn't an either/or proposition , although the current emphasis on preparing young Americans for STEM (science, technology, engineering, maths)-related fields can make it seem that way.
The latest congressional report acknowledges the critical importance of technical training, but also asserts that the study of the humanities (）and social sciences must remain central components of America's educational system at all levels. Both areas are critical to producing citizens who can participate effectively in our democratic society, become innovative(）leaders, and benefit from the spiritual enrichment that the reflection on the great ideas of mankind over time provides.
Parents and students who have invested heavily in higher education worry about graduates, job prospects as technological advances and changes in domestic and global markets transform professions in ways that reduce wages and cut jobs. Under these circumstances, it's natural to look for what may appear to be the most "practical" way out of the problem: "Major in a subject designed to get you a job" seems the obvious answer to some, though this ignores the fact that many disciplines in the humanities characterized as "soft" often, in fact, lead to employment and success in the long run. Indeed, according to surveys, employers have expressed a preference for students who have received a broadly-based education that has taught them to write well, think critically, research creatively, and communicate easily.
Moreover, students should be prepared not just for their first job, but for their 4th and 5th jobs, as there's little reason to doubt that people entering the workforce today will be called upon to play many different roles over the course of their careers. The ones who will do the best in this new environment will be those whose educations have prepared them to be flexible. The ability to draw upon every available tool and insight-picked up from science, arts, and technology-to solve the problems of the future, and take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves, will be helpful to them and the United States. | 2160.txt | 3 |
[
"They benefit students in their future life.",
"They broaden students' range of interests.",
"They improve students' communication skills.",
"They are essential to students' healthy growth."
] | What does the author say about the so-called soft subjects? | The question of whether our government should promote science and technology or the liberal arts in higher education isn't an either/or proposition , although the current emphasis on preparing young Americans for STEM (science, technology, engineering, maths)-related fields can make it seem that way.
The latest congressional report acknowledges the critical importance of technical training, but also asserts that the study of the humanities (）and social sciences must remain central components of America's educational system at all levels. Both areas are critical to producing citizens who can participate effectively in our democratic society, become innovative(）leaders, and benefit from the spiritual enrichment that the reflection on the great ideas of mankind over time provides.
Parents and students who have invested heavily in higher education worry about graduates, job prospects as technological advances and changes in domestic and global markets transform professions in ways that reduce wages and cut jobs. Under these circumstances, it's natural to look for what may appear to be the most "practical" way out of the problem: "Major in a subject designed to get you a job" seems the obvious answer to some, though this ignores the fact that many disciplines in the humanities characterized as "soft" often, in fact, lead to employment and success in the long run. Indeed, according to surveys, employers have expressed a preference for students who have received a broadly-based education that has taught them to write well, think critically, research creatively, and communicate easily.
Moreover, students should be prepared not just for their first job, but for their 4th and 5th jobs, as there's little reason to doubt that people entering the workforce today will be called upon to play many different roles over the course of their careers. The ones who will do the best in this new environment will be those whose educations have prepared them to be flexible. The ability to draw upon every available tool and insight-picked up from science, arts, and technology-to solve the problems of the future, and take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves, will be helpful to them and the United States. | 2160.txt | 0 |
[
"Those who have a strong sense of responsibility.",
"Those who are good at solving practical problems.",
"Those who are likely to become innovative leaders.",
"Those who have received a well-rounded education."
] | What kind of job applicants do employers look for? | The question of whether our government should promote science and technology or the liberal arts in higher education isn't an either/or proposition , although the current emphasis on preparing young Americans for STEM (science, technology, engineering, maths)-related fields can make it seem that way.
The latest congressional report acknowledges the critical importance of technical training, but also asserts that the study of the humanities (）and social sciences must remain central components of America's educational system at all levels. Both areas are critical to producing citizens who can participate effectively in our democratic society, become innovative(）leaders, and benefit from the spiritual enrichment that the reflection on the great ideas of mankind over time provides.
Parents and students who have invested heavily in higher education worry about graduates, job prospects as technological advances and changes in domestic and global markets transform professions in ways that reduce wages and cut jobs. Under these circumstances, it's natural to look for what may appear to be the most "practical" way out of the problem: "Major in a subject designed to get you a job" seems the obvious answer to some, though this ignores the fact that many disciplines in the humanities characterized as "soft" often, in fact, lead to employment and success in the long run. Indeed, according to surveys, employers have expressed a preference for students who have received a broadly-based education that has taught them to write well, think critically, research creatively, and communicate easily.
Moreover, students should be prepared not just for their first job, but for their 4th and 5th jobs, as there's little reason to doubt that people entering the workforce today will be called upon to play many different roles over the course of their careers. The ones who will do the best in this new environment will be those whose educations have prepared them to be flexible. The ability to draw upon every available tool and insight-picked up from science, arts, and technology-to solve the problems of the future, and take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves, will be helpful to them and the United States. | 2160.txt | 3 |
[
"Seize opportunities to tap their potential.",
"Prepare themselves for different job options.",
"Try to take a variety of practical courses.",
"Adopt a flexible approach to solving problems."
] | What advice does the author give to college students? | The question of whether our government should promote science and technology or the liberal arts in higher education isn't an either/or proposition , although the current emphasis on preparing young Americans for STEM (science, technology, engineering, maths)-related fields can make it seem that way.
The latest congressional report acknowledges the critical importance of technical training, but also asserts that the study of the humanities (）and social sciences must remain central components of America's educational system at all levels. Both areas are critical to producing citizens who can participate effectively in our democratic society, become innovative(）leaders, and benefit from the spiritual enrichment that the reflection on the great ideas of mankind over time provides.
Parents and students who have invested heavily in higher education worry about graduates, job prospects as technological advances and changes in domestic and global markets transform professions in ways that reduce wages and cut jobs. Under these circumstances, it's natural to look for what may appear to be the most "practical" way out of the problem: "Major in a subject designed to get you a job" seems the obvious answer to some, though this ignores the fact that many disciplines in the humanities characterized as "soft" often, in fact, lead to employment and success in the long run. Indeed, according to surveys, employers have expressed a preference for students who have received a broadly-based education that has taught them to write well, think critically, research creatively, and communicate easily.
Moreover, students should be prepared not just for their first job, but for their 4th and 5th jobs, as there's little reason to doubt that people entering the workforce today will be called upon to play many different roles over the course of their careers. The ones who will do the best in this new environment will be those whose educations have prepared them to be flexible. The ability to draw upon every available tool and insight-picked up from science, arts, and technology-to solve the problems of the future, and take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves, will be helpful to them and the United States. | 2160.txt | 2 |
[
"attractive",
"essential",
"usual",
"practical"
] | The word "vital" in the passage(Paragraph 1)is closest in meaning to | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 1 |
[
"a realistic sense of human body proportion",
"a focus on distinctive forms of varying sizes",
"the originality of European art",
"the capacity to show the human body in motion"
] | Paragraph 1 suggests that one reason Egyptian art is viewed less favorably than other artists that Egyptian art lacks | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 3 |
[
"the reasons why the art was made",
"the nature of aristocratic Egyptian beliefs",
"the influences of Egyptian art on later art such as classical Greek art",
"how the art was used"
] | In paragraph 1, the author mentions all of the following as necessary in appreciating Egyptian art EXCEPT an understanding of | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 2 |
[
"To create a psychological effect of distance and isolation",
"To allow them to fulfill their important role in ceremonies of Egyptian life",
"To provide a contrast to statues with a decorative function",
"To suggest the rigid, unchanging Egyptian philosophical attitudes"
] | According to paragraph 2, why are Egyptian statues portrayed frontality? | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 1 |
[
"connection",
"influence",
"environment",
"requirement"
] | The word "context"in the passage(Paragraph 2)is closest in meaning to | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 2 |
[
"suggest that architecture was as important as sculpture to Egyptian artists",
"offer a further explanation for the frontal pose of Egyptian statues",
"explain how the display of statues replaced other forms of architectural decoration",
"illustrate the religious function of Egyptian statues"
] | The author mentions "an architectural setting" in the passage(Paragraph 2) in order to | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 1 |
[
"statues",
"gateways",
"temples",
"pillared courts"
] | The word "they"in the passage(Paragraph 2)refers to | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 0 |
[
"To prevent damage by providing physical stability",
"To emphasize that the material was as important as the figure itself",
"To emphasize that the figure was not meant to be a real human being",
"To provide another artist with the chance to finish the carving"
] | According to paragraph 3, why were certain areas of a stone statue left uncarved? | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 0 |
[
"material",
"layer",
"center",
"frame"
] | The word "core" in the passage(Paragraph 3)is closest in meaning to | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 2 |
[
"Wooden statues were usually larger than stone statues.",
"Wooden statues were made from a single piece of wood.",
"Wooden statues contained pieces of metal or stone attached to the front.",
"Wooden statues had a different effect on the viewer than stone statues."
] | According to paragraph 3, which of the following statements about wooden statues is true? | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 3 |
[
"imagines",
"classifies",
"elevates",
"portrays"
] | The word depicts in the passage(Paragraph 4)is closest in meaning to | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 3 |
[
"Statues of the elite are included in tombs, but statues of the nonelite are not.",
"Statues of the elite are in motionless poses, while statues of the nonelite are in active poses.",
"Statues of the elite are shown standing, while statues of the nonelite are shown sitting or kneeling.",
"Statues of the elite serve an important function, while statues of the nonelite are decorative."
] | According to paragraph 4, what is the difference between statues that represent the Egyptian elite and statues that represent the nonelite classes? | In order to understand ancient Egyptian art, it is vital to know as much as possible of the elite Egyptians' view of the world and the functions and contexts of the art produced for them. Without this knowledge we can appreciate only the formal content of Egyptian art, and we will fail to understand why it was produced or the concepts that shaped it and caused it to adopt its distinctive forms. In fact, a lack of understanding concerning the purposes of Egyptian art has often led it to be compared unfavorably with the art of other cultures: Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary? Why do the artists seem to get left and right confused? And why did they not discover the geometric perspective as European artists did in the Renaissance? The answer to such questions has nothing to do with a lack of skill or imagination on the part of Egyptian artists and everything to do with the purposes for which they were producing their art.
The majority of three-dimensional representations, whether standing, seated, or kneeling, exhibit what is called frontality: they face straight ahead, neither twisting nor turning. When such statues are viewed in isolation, out of their original context and without knowledge of their function, it is easy to criticize them for their rigid attitudes that remained unchanged for three thousand years. Frontality is, however, directly related to the functions of Egyptian statuary and the contexts in which the statues were set up. Statues were created not for their decorative effect but to play a primary role in the cults of the gods, the king, and the dead. They were designed to be put in places where these beings could manifest themselves in order to be the recipients of ritual actions. Thus it made sense to show the statue looking ahead at what was happening in front of it, so that the living performer of the ritual could interact with the divine or deceased recipient. Very often such statues were enclosed in rectangular shrines or wall niches whose only opening was at the front, making it natural for the statue to display frontality. Other statues were designed to be placed within an architectural setting, for instance, in front of the monumental entrance gateways to temples known as pylons, or in pillared courts, where they would be placed against or between pillars: their frontality worked perfectly within the architectural context.
Statues were normally made of stone, wood, or metal. Stone statues were worked from single rectangular blocks of material and retained the compactness of the original shape. The stone between the arms and the body and between the legs in standing figures or the legs and the seat in seated ones was not normally cut away. From a practical aspect this protected the figures against breakage and psychologically gives the images a sense of strength and power, usually enhanced by a supporting back pillar. By contrast, wooden statues were carved from several pieces of wood that were pegged together to form the finished work, and metal statues were either made by wrapping sheet metal around a wooden core or cast by the lost wax process. The arms could be held away from the body and carry separate items in their hands; there is no back pillar. The effect is altogether lighter and freer than that achieved in stone, but because both perform the same function, formal wooden and metal statues still display frontality.
Apart from statues representing deities, kings, and named members of the elite that can be called formal, there is another group of three-dimensional representations that depicts generic figures, frequently servants, from the nonelite population. The function of these is quite different. Many are made to be put in the tombs of the elite in order to serve the tomb owners in the afterlife. Unlike formal statues that are limited to static poses of standing, sitting, and kneeling, these figures depict a wide range of actions, such as grinding grain, baking bread, producing pots, and making music, and they are shown in appropriate poses, bending and squatting as they carry out their tasks. | 888.txt | 1 |
[
"the neighbour fixed needles on his own head",
"The neighbour is a kind-hearted person.",
"The man's pain was killed before the doctor arrived",
"Soon after the acupuncture, the man was completely recovered."
] | Which of the following statements is NOT true according to the passage? | Everyone knows what a needle is. Of course there are needles and needles, Needles for sewing machines, needles for injection, you name it. But few people think of the wonder a needle works in the hands of those who practice acupuncture.
During the past ten years of so, I have been suffering from terrible headache. It seems to be getting from bad to worse these days. Last night I got a sudden pain in my head. It was so terrible that I could hardly bearit. Although I swallowed all kinds of pain-killers, I didn't feel any better, It seemed that there was nothing I could do but phone for a doctor.
One of our neighbours happened to be with us. He was not a doctor, but he timidly offered his help, saying "Do you mind if I tried acupuncture on you? These needles may possibly do you some good." I agreed. In a moment, he had taken out a few needles from his purse. Without a moment's delay, he fixed a few needles into the skin on my head here and there, Before long, I felt thoroughly relieved.
Just then, the doctor sped through my house and said, "Where is our patient?"
"Sorry, Doctor, You are too late, It's killed!" I answered in delight.
It's miracle , isn't it? | 1520.txt | 0 |
[
"the pain was killed because the doctor came late",
"the man was killed because the doctor came too late",
"before the doctor came the man's headache was already cured",
"it was too late and the man had gone way"
] | The sentences" You are too late. It's killed." mean that | Everyone knows what a needle is. Of course there are needles and needles, Needles for sewing machines, needles for injection, you name it. But few people think of the wonder a needle works in the hands of those who practice acupuncture.
During the past ten years of so, I have been suffering from terrible headache. It seems to be getting from bad to worse these days. Last night I got a sudden pain in my head. It was so terrible that I could hardly bearit. Although I swallowed all kinds of pain-killers, I didn't feel any better, It seemed that there was nothing I could do but phone for a doctor.
One of our neighbours happened to be with us. He was not a doctor, but he timidly offered his help, saying "Do you mind if I tried acupuncture on you? These needles may possibly do you some good." I agreed. In a moment, he had taken out a few needles from his purse. Without a moment's delay, he fixed a few needles into the skin on my head here and there, Before long, I felt thoroughly relieved.
Just then, the doctor sped through my house and said, "Where is our patient?"
"Sorry, Doctor, You are too late, It's killed!" I answered in delight.
It's miracle , isn't it? | 1520.txt | 2 |
[
"everyone knows that acupuncture is a miracle",
"the neighbour wanted to use acupuncture on every patient",
"the effect of acupuncture on the man was unbelievable",
"the patient did not believe in acupuncture"
] | The passage tells us that. | Everyone knows what a needle is. Of course there are needles and needles, Needles for sewing machines, needles for injection, you name it. But few people think of the wonder a needle works in the hands of those who practice acupuncture.
During the past ten years of so, I have been suffering from terrible headache. It seems to be getting from bad to worse these days. Last night I got a sudden pain in my head. It was so terrible that I could hardly bearit. Although I swallowed all kinds of pain-killers, I didn't feel any better, It seemed that there was nothing I could do but phone for a doctor.
One of our neighbours happened to be with us. He was not a doctor, but he timidly offered his help, saying "Do you mind if I tried acupuncture on you? These needles may possibly do you some good." I agreed. In a moment, he had taken out a few needles from his purse. Without a moment's delay, he fixed a few needles into the skin on my head here and there, Before long, I felt thoroughly relieved.
Just then, the doctor sped through my house and said, "Where is our patient?"
"Sorry, Doctor, You are too late, It's killed!" I answered in delight.
It's miracle , isn't it? | 1520.txt | 2 |
[
"they are likely to be produced by the same plants.",
"they basically consist of the same chemical components.",
"they attract only insects that will defend the plant.",
"they are produced by the same parts of the plant."
] | According to paragraph 1, floral nectar and extrafloral nectar are alike in that | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 1 |
[
"they defend plants against a wide variety of threats.",
"they continue to defend plants for as long as the plants are threatened.",
"they are successful defenders of plants.",
"they are easily observable defenders of plants."
] | To say that ants are "persistent" defenders of plants means that | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 1 |
[
"They do not eat the leaves of the plants that produce extrafloral nectar.",
"They live almost entirely on extrafloral nectar.",
"They spend most of their energy guarding extrafloral nectaries.",
"They frequently fight among themselves over extrafloral nectar."
] | What can be inferred from paragraph 2 about the ants that are attracted to the extrafloral nectaries? | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 0 |
[
"Extrafloral nectar provides plants with a direct defense against attack by insects.",
"Ants substantially benefit plants that secrete extrafloral nectar.",
"The secretion of extrafloral nectar plays a role in the plant's internal functioning.",
"Ants visit plants that secrete extrafloral nectar as often as they visit plants that do not."
] | According to paragraph 3, what was the position of the opponents of the "protectionist" hypothesis? | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 3 |
[
"curious.",
"doubtful.",
"open-minded.",
"practical."
] | The word "skeptical" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 1 |
[
"It leaves the seeds exposed and unprotected.",
"It prevents the stigma from developing.",
"It keeps pollen grains from attaching properly.",
"It prevents the flower from attracting pollinators."
] | According to paragraph 4, what effect does the destruction of the corolla have on plants. | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 3 |
[
"attack.",
"eat.",
"damage.",
"prefer."
] | The word "devour" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 1 |
[
"It offers various kinds of evidence for the protectionist view.",
"It presents the study that first proved that ants benefit plants.",
"It explains how insects find sources of nectar.",
"It presents information that partly contradicts the protectionist view."
] | What role does paragraph 5 play in the passage? | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 0 |
[
"numerous.",
"harmful.",
"open to attack.",
"difficult to locate."
] | The word "vulnerable" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Many plants - one or more species of at least 68 different families - can secrete nectar even when they have no blossoms, because they bear extrafloral nectaries (structures that produce nectar) on stems, leaves, leaf stems, or other structures. These plants usually occur where ants are abundant, most in the tropics but some in temperate areas. Among those of northeastern North America are various plums, cherries, roses, hawthorns, poplars, and oaks. Like floral nectar, extrafloral nectar consists mainly of water with a high content of dissolved sugars and, in some plants, small amounts of amino acids. The extrafloral nectaries of some plants are known to attract ants and other insects, but the evolutionary history of most plants with these nectaries is unknown. Nevertheless, most ecologists believe that all extrafloral nectaries attract insects that will defend the plant.
Ants are portably the most frequent and certainly the most persistent defenders of plants. Since the highly active worker ants require a great deal of energy, plants exploit this need by providing extrafloral nectar that supplies ants with abundant energy. To return this favor, ants guard the nectaries, driving away or killing intruding insects that might compete with ants for nectar. Many of these intruders are herbivorous and would eat the leaves of the plants.
Biologists once thought that secretion of extrafloral nectar has some purely internal physiological function, and that ants provide no benefit whatsoever to the plants that secrete it. This view and the opposing "protectionist" hypothesis that ants defend plants had been disputed for over a hundred years when, in 1910, a skeptical William Morton Wheeler commented on the controversy. He called for proof of the protectionist view: that visitations of the ants confer protection on the plants and that in the absence of the insects a much greater number would perish or fail to produce flowers or seeds than when the insects are present. That we now have an abundance of the proof that was called for was established when Barbara Bentley reviewed the relevant evidence in 1977, and since then many more observations and experiments have provided still further proof that ants benefit plants.
One example shows how ants attracted to extrafloral nectaries protect morning glories against attacking insects. The principal insect enemies of the North American morning glory feed mainly on its flowers or fruits rather than its leaves. Grasshoppers feeding on flowers indirectly block pollination and the production of seeds by destroying the corolla or the stigma, which receives the pollen grains and on which the pollen germinates. Without their colorful corolla, flowers do not attract pollinators and are not fertilized. An adult grasshopper can consume a large corolla, about 2.5 inches long, in an hour. Caterpillars and seed beetles affect seed production directly. Caterpillars devour the ovaries, where the seeds are produced, and seed beetle larvae eat seeds as they burrow in developing fruits.
Extrafloral nectaries at the base of each sepal attract several kinds of insects, but 96 percent of them are ants, several different species of them. When buds are still small, less than a quarter of an inch long, the sepal nectaries are already present and producing nectar. They continue to do so as the flower develops and while the fruit matures. Observations leave little doubt that ants protect morning glory flowers and fruits from the combined enemy force of grasshoppers, caterpillars, and seed beetles. Bentley compares the seed production of six plants that grew where there were no ants with that of seventeen plants that were occupied by ants. Unprotected plants bore only 45 seeds per plant, but plants occupied by ants bore 211 seeds per plant. Although ants are not big enough to kill or seriously injure grasshoppers, they drive them away by nipping at their feet. Seed beetles are more vulnerable because they are much smaller than grasshoppers. The ants prey on the adult beetles, disturb females as they lay their eggs on developing fruits, and eat many of the eggs they do manage to lay. | 3622.txt | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.