option
list | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"Optimistic.",
"Confused.",
"Frightening.",
"Shocking."
] | How does the author feel about the study of MicroRNA? | The basic workings of DNA and RNA are no mystery. It's now well known that DNA consists of four nucleotide "bases" (A， T， C and G)， whose linear sequences (AATAGGCTCC……) encode hereditary information. Genes--discrete segments of long DNA molecules--transcribe their sequences onto single-strand messenger RNA molecules， which then serve as templates for proteins. In short， DNA makes messenger RNA， and messenger RNA makes proteins. The production of a particular protein is the goal of each gene. This 50-year-old insight is the bedrock of modern biology， but science has not fully solved a related mystery. If every cell in an organism contains the same full complement of genes， why are the cells themselves so varied? How do different genes get turned on ("expressed") or off ("silenced") in just the right combinations to produce heart cells， bone cells and brain cells?
That's where microRNA enters the picture. In the early 1990s， researchers studying a species of worm discovered genes for a very short and very unusual piece of RNA. Instead of synthesizing proteins， this tiny RNA molecule latched onto messenger RNAs (chart)， causing their destruction. Without messenger RNA， no protein was produced. In effect， the gene for that protein had been silenced. The discovery was initially dismissed as an oddity in a worm， but scientists have since found genes for hundreds of microRNAs in various plants and animals--200 in humans alone. Many of these genes have survived in identical forms in different species， indicating that they are essential to life. What， exactly， is their role? We now suspect that by silencing particular genes at just the right times--a process called RNA interference--they push genetically identical cells down different paths of development， enabling some to digest food while others perceive light.
RNA interference gives researchers a new tool for understanding how living things grow--how a plant assumes a particular shape， for example， or how a baby's hand forms during gestation. Moreover， because microRNAs are so small and simple in structure， they can be manufactured for use as research tools. If scientists suspect that a particular gene is responsible for a disease， they can design microRNA to silence the gene in affected laboratory animals. If the disease is prevented or cured， the gene becomes a target for treatment.
RNA interference has yet to generate new medicines， but if the technique fulfills its promise， it could help us treat everything from viral infections to cancer. MicroRNAs could be used to seal off human cells from disease-causing viruses， or to disable viruses that gain entry. In a recent test-tube study， researchers showed that RNA interference could make cells impermeable to HIV. Early studies suggest that microRNAs can also boost the production of stem cells in culture. By blocking production of growth-promoting proteins， microRNAs may even help contain cancer cells.
It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube， quite another to treat people. Getting microRNAs safely into the right cells in the body will be complicated. No one has yet attempted a human experiment. Even so， a field that was just a curiosity in 1993 is now poised to change the world--all because we invested in basic research. The scientists who discovered microRNAs were not trying to prevent AIDS， grow stem cells or treat cancer. They just wanted to figure out how something happened in a worm. As Buckminster Fuller observed， "Development is programmable; discovery is not." | 1081.txt | 0 |
[
"the test of cells and the treatment of people are unrelated to each other",
"the treatment of people is more complex than the cells in the laboratory",
"more emphasis should be laid on the human tests",
"human treatment may not be successful"
] | When mentioning "It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube， quite another to treat people."(Line 1， Paragraph 5)， the author implies that _ . | The basic workings of DNA and RNA are no mystery. It's now well known that DNA consists of four nucleotide "bases" (A， T， C and G)， whose linear sequences (AATAGGCTCC……) encode hereditary information. Genes--discrete segments of long DNA molecules--transcribe their sequences onto single-strand messenger RNA molecules， which then serve as templates for proteins. In short， DNA makes messenger RNA， and messenger RNA makes proteins. The production of a particular protein is the goal of each gene. This 50-year-old insight is the bedrock of modern biology， but science has not fully solved a related mystery. If every cell in an organism contains the same full complement of genes， why are the cells themselves so varied? How do different genes get turned on ("expressed") or off ("silenced") in just the right combinations to produce heart cells， bone cells and brain cells?
That's where microRNA enters the picture. In the early 1990s， researchers studying a species of worm discovered genes for a very short and very unusual piece of RNA. Instead of synthesizing proteins， this tiny RNA molecule latched onto messenger RNAs (chart)， causing their destruction. Without messenger RNA， no protein was produced. In effect， the gene for that protein had been silenced. The discovery was initially dismissed as an oddity in a worm， but scientists have since found genes for hundreds of microRNAs in various plants and animals--200 in humans alone. Many of these genes have survived in identical forms in different species， indicating that they are essential to life. What， exactly， is their role? We now suspect that by silencing particular genes at just the right times--a process called RNA interference--they push genetically identical cells down different paths of development， enabling some to digest food while others perceive light.
RNA interference gives researchers a new tool for understanding how living things grow--how a plant assumes a particular shape， for example， or how a baby's hand forms during gestation. Moreover， because microRNAs are so small and simple in structure， they can be manufactured for use as research tools. If scientists suspect that a particular gene is responsible for a disease， they can design microRNA to silence the gene in affected laboratory animals. If the disease is prevented or cured， the gene becomes a target for treatment.
RNA interference has yet to generate new medicines， but if the technique fulfills its promise， it could help us treat everything from viral infections to cancer. MicroRNAs could be used to seal off human cells from disease-causing viruses， or to disable viruses that gain entry. In a recent test-tube study， researchers showed that RNA interference could make cells impermeable to HIV. Early studies suggest that microRNAs can also boost the production of stem cells in culture. By blocking production of growth-promoting proteins， microRNAs may even help contain cancer cells.
It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube， quite another to treat people. Getting microRNAs safely into the right cells in the body will be complicated. No one has yet attempted a human experiment. Even so， a field that was just a curiosity in 1993 is now poised to change the world--all because we invested in basic research. The scientists who discovered microRNAs were not trying to prevent AIDS， grow stem cells or treat cancer. They just wanted to figure out how something happened in a worm. As Buckminster Fuller observed， "Development is programmable; discovery is not." | 1081.txt | 1 |
[
"Discovery is always made beyond one‘s expectation.",
"Development is easier than discovery.",
"Development lacks curiosity while discovery does not.",
"Development is less important than discovery."
] | What does Buckminster Fuller mean by "Development is programmable; discovery is not."(Last Line， Last Paragraph)? | The basic workings of DNA and RNA are no mystery. It's now well known that DNA consists of four nucleotide "bases" (A， T， C and G)， whose linear sequences (AATAGGCTCC……) encode hereditary information. Genes--discrete segments of long DNA molecules--transcribe their sequences onto single-strand messenger RNA molecules， which then serve as templates for proteins. In short， DNA makes messenger RNA， and messenger RNA makes proteins. The production of a particular protein is the goal of each gene. This 50-year-old insight is the bedrock of modern biology， but science has not fully solved a related mystery. If every cell in an organism contains the same full complement of genes， why are the cells themselves so varied? How do different genes get turned on ("expressed") or off ("silenced") in just the right combinations to produce heart cells， bone cells and brain cells?
That's where microRNA enters the picture. In the early 1990s， researchers studying a species of worm discovered genes for a very short and very unusual piece of RNA. Instead of synthesizing proteins， this tiny RNA molecule latched onto messenger RNAs (chart)， causing their destruction. Without messenger RNA， no protein was produced. In effect， the gene for that protein had been silenced. The discovery was initially dismissed as an oddity in a worm， but scientists have since found genes for hundreds of microRNAs in various plants and animals--200 in humans alone. Many of these genes have survived in identical forms in different species， indicating that they are essential to life. What， exactly， is their role? We now suspect that by silencing particular genes at just the right times--a process called RNA interference--they push genetically identical cells down different paths of development， enabling some to digest food while others perceive light.
RNA interference gives researchers a new tool for understanding how living things grow--how a plant assumes a particular shape， for example， or how a baby's hand forms during gestation. Moreover， because microRNAs are so small and simple in structure， they can be manufactured for use as research tools. If scientists suspect that a particular gene is responsible for a disease， they can design microRNA to silence the gene in affected laboratory animals. If the disease is prevented or cured， the gene becomes a target for treatment.
RNA interference has yet to generate new medicines， but if the technique fulfills its promise， it could help us treat everything from viral infections to cancer. MicroRNAs could be used to seal off human cells from disease-causing viruses， or to disable viruses that gain entry. In a recent test-tube study， researchers showed that RNA interference could make cells impermeable to HIV. Early studies suggest that microRNAs can also boost the production of stem cells in culture. By blocking production of growth-promoting proteins， microRNAs may even help contain cancer cells.
It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube， quite another to treat people. Getting microRNAs safely into the right cells in the body will be complicated. No one has yet attempted a human experiment. Even so， a field that was just a curiosity in 1993 is now poised to change the world--all because we invested in basic research. The scientists who discovered microRNAs were not trying to prevent AIDS， grow stem cells or treat cancer. They just wanted to figure out how something happened in a worm. As Buckminster Fuller observed， "Development is programmable; discovery is not." | 1081.txt | 0 |
[
"It prevents disease-causing viruses from entering human body.",
"It improves the production of stem cells.",
"It can cure of all kinds of human diseases.",
"It silences certain protein to prevent tumor."
] | Which of the following is not true about RNA interference? | The basic workings of DNA and RNA are no mystery. It's now well known that DNA consists of four nucleotide "bases" (A， T， C and G)， whose linear sequences (AATAGGCTCC……) encode hereditary information. Genes--discrete segments of long DNA molecules--transcribe their sequences onto single-strand messenger RNA molecules， which then serve as templates for proteins. In short， DNA makes messenger RNA， and messenger RNA makes proteins. The production of a particular protein is the goal of each gene. This 50-year-old insight is the bedrock of modern biology， but science has not fully solved a related mystery. If every cell in an organism contains the same full complement of genes， why are the cells themselves so varied? How do different genes get turned on ("expressed") or off ("silenced") in just the right combinations to produce heart cells， bone cells and brain cells?
That's where microRNA enters the picture. In the early 1990s， researchers studying a species of worm discovered genes for a very short and very unusual piece of RNA. Instead of synthesizing proteins， this tiny RNA molecule latched onto messenger RNAs (chart)， causing their destruction. Without messenger RNA， no protein was produced. In effect， the gene for that protein had been silenced. The discovery was initially dismissed as an oddity in a worm， but scientists have since found genes for hundreds of microRNAs in various plants and animals--200 in humans alone. Many of these genes have survived in identical forms in different species， indicating that they are essential to life. What， exactly， is their role? We now suspect that by silencing particular genes at just the right times--a process called RNA interference--they push genetically identical cells down different paths of development， enabling some to digest food while others perceive light.
RNA interference gives researchers a new tool for understanding how living things grow--how a plant assumes a particular shape， for example， or how a baby's hand forms during gestation. Moreover， because microRNAs are so small and simple in structure， they can be manufactured for use as research tools. If scientists suspect that a particular gene is responsible for a disease， they can design microRNA to silence the gene in affected laboratory animals. If the disease is prevented or cured， the gene becomes a target for treatment.
RNA interference has yet to generate new medicines， but if the technique fulfills its promise， it could help us treat everything from viral infections to cancer. MicroRNAs could be used to seal off human cells from disease-causing viruses， or to disable viruses that gain entry. In a recent test-tube study， researchers showed that RNA interference could make cells impermeable to HIV. Early studies suggest that microRNAs can also boost the production of stem cells in culture. By blocking production of growth-promoting proteins， microRNAs may even help contain cancer cells.
It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube， quite another to treat people. Getting microRNAs safely into the right cells in the body will be complicated. No one has yet attempted a human experiment. Even so， a field that was just a curiosity in 1993 is now poised to change the world--all because we invested in basic research. The scientists who discovered microRNAs were not trying to prevent AIDS， grow stem cells or treat cancer. They just wanted to figure out how something happened in a worm. As Buckminster Fuller observed， "Development is programmable; discovery is not." | 1081.txt | 2 |
[
"one's familiarity with the text",
"one's purpose in reading",
"the length of a group of words",
"lighting and tiredness"
] | The time of the recognition span can be affected by the following facts except _ . | Now let us look at how we read. When we read a printed text, our eyes move across a page in short, jerky movement. We recognize words usually when our eyes are still when they fixate. Each time they fixate, we see a group of words. This is known as the recognition span or the visual span. The length of time ofr which the eyes stop ---the duration of the fixation ----varies considerably from person to person. It also vaies within any one person according to his purpose in reading and his familiarity with the text. Furthermore, it can be affected by such factors as lighting and tiredness.
Unfortunately, in the past, many reading improvement courses have concentrated too much on how our eyes move across the printed page. As a result of this misleading emphasis on the purely visual aspects of reading, numerous exercises have been devised to train the eyes to see more words at one fixation. For instance, in some exercises, words are flashed on to a screen for, say, a tenth or a twentieth of a second. One of the exercises has required students to fix their eyes on some central point, taking in the words on either side. Such word patterns are often constructed in the shape of rather steep pyramids so the reader takes in more and more words at each successive fixation. All these exercises are very clever, but it's one thing to improve a person's ability to see words and quite another thing to improve his ability to read a text efficiently. Reading requires the ability to understand the relationship between words. Consequently, for these reasons, many experts have now begun to question the usefulness of eye training, especially since any approach which trains a person to read isolated words and phrases would seem unlikely to help him in reading a continuous text. | 2108.txt | 2 |
[
"requires a reader to take in more words at each fixation",
"requires a reader to see words more quickly",
"demands an deeply-participating mind",
"demands more mind than eyes"
] | The author may believe that reading _ . | Now let us look at how we read. When we read a printed text, our eyes move across a page in short, jerky movement. We recognize words usually when our eyes are still when they fixate. Each time they fixate, we see a group of words. This is known as the recognition span or the visual span. The length of time ofr which the eyes stop ---the duration of the fixation ----varies considerably from person to person. It also vaies within any one person according to his purpose in reading and his familiarity with the text. Furthermore, it can be affected by such factors as lighting and tiredness.
Unfortunately, in the past, many reading improvement courses have concentrated too much on how our eyes move across the printed page. As a result of this misleading emphasis on the purely visual aspects of reading, numerous exercises have been devised to train the eyes to see more words at one fixation. For instance, in some exercises, words are flashed on to a screen for, say, a tenth or a twentieth of a second. One of the exercises has required students to fix their eyes on some central point, taking in the words on either side. Such word patterns are often constructed in the shape of rather steep pyramids so the reader takes in more and more words at each successive fixation. All these exercises are very clever, but it's one thing to improve a person's ability to see words and quite another thing to improve his ability to read a text efficiently. Reading requires the ability to understand the relationship between words. Consequently, for these reasons, many experts have now begun to question the usefulness of eye training, especially since any approach which trains a person to read isolated words and phrases would seem unlikely to help him in reading a continuous text. | 2108.txt | 2 |
[
"The ability to see words is not needed when an efficient reading is conducted.",
"The reading exercises mentioned can't help to improve both the ability to see and to comprehend words.",
"The reading exercises mentioned can't help to improve an efficient reading.",
"The reading exercises mentioned has done a great job to improve one's ability to see words."
] | What does the author mean by saying "but it's one thing to improve a person's ability to see words and quite another thing to improve his ability to read a text efficiently." in the second parapraph? | Now let us look at how we read. When we read a printed text, our eyes move across a page in short, jerky movement. We recognize words usually when our eyes are still when they fixate. Each time they fixate, we see a group of words. This is known as the recognition span or the visual span. The length of time ofr which the eyes stop ---the duration of the fixation ----varies considerably from person to person. It also vaies within any one person according to his purpose in reading and his familiarity with the text. Furthermore, it can be affected by such factors as lighting and tiredness.
Unfortunately, in the past, many reading improvement courses have concentrated too much on how our eyes move across the printed page. As a result of this misleading emphasis on the purely visual aspects of reading, numerous exercises have been devised to train the eyes to see more words at one fixation. For instance, in some exercises, words are flashed on to a screen for, say, a tenth or a twentieth of a second. One of the exercises has required students to fix their eyes on some central point, taking in the words on either side. Such word patterns are often constructed in the shape of rather steep pyramids so the reader takes in more and more words at each successive fixation. All these exercises are very clever, but it's one thing to improve a person's ability to see words and quite another thing to improve his ability to read a text efficiently. Reading requires the ability to understand the relationship between words. Consequently, for these reasons, many experts have now begun to question the usefulness of eye training, especially since any approach which trains a person to read isolated words and phrases would seem unlikely to help him in reading a continuous text. | 2108.txt | 2 |
[
"The visual span is a word or a group of words we see each time.",
"Many experts began to question the efficiency of eye training.",
"The emphasis on the purely visual aspects is misleading.",
"The eye training will help readers in reading a continuous text."
] | Which of the following is NOT true? | Now let us look at how we read. When we read a printed text, our eyes move across a page in short, jerky movement. We recognize words usually when our eyes are still when they fixate. Each time they fixate, we see a group of words. This is known as the recognition span or the visual span. The length of time ofr which the eyes stop ---the duration of the fixation ----varies considerably from person to person. It also vaies within any one person according to his purpose in reading and his familiarity with the text. Furthermore, it can be affected by such factors as lighting and tiredness.
Unfortunately, in the past, many reading improvement courses have concentrated too much on how our eyes move across the printed page. As a result of this misleading emphasis on the purely visual aspects of reading, numerous exercises have been devised to train the eyes to see more words at one fixation. For instance, in some exercises, words are flashed on to a screen for, say, a tenth or a twentieth of a second. One of the exercises has required students to fix their eyes on some central point, taking in the words on either side. Such word patterns are often constructed in the shape of rather steep pyramids so the reader takes in more and more words at each successive fixation. All these exercises are very clever, but it's one thing to improve a person's ability to see words and quite another thing to improve his ability to read a text efficiently. Reading requires the ability to understand the relationship between words. Consequently, for these reasons, many experts have now begun to question the usefulness of eye training, especially since any approach which trains a person to read isolated words and phrases would seem unlikely to help him in reading a continuous text. | 2108.txt | 3 |
[
"critical",
"neutral",
"prssimistic",
"optimistic"
] | The tune of the author in writing this article is _ | Now let us look at how we read. When we read a printed text, our eyes move across a page in short, jerky movement. We recognize words usually when our eyes are still when they fixate. Each time they fixate, we see a group of words. This is known as the recognition span or the visual span. The length of time ofr which the eyes stop ---the duration of the fixation ----varies considerably from person to person. It also vaies within any one person according to his purpose in reading and his familiarity with the text. Furthermore, it can be affected by such factors as lighting and tiredness.
Unfortunately, in the past, many reading improvement courses have concentrated too much on how our eyes move across the printed page. As a result of this misleading emphasis on the purely visual aspects of reading, numerous exercises have been devised to train the eyes to see more words at one fixation. For instance, in some exercises, words are flashed on to a screen for, say, a tenth or a twentieth of a second. One of the exercises has required students to fix their eyes on some central point, taking in the words on either side. Such word patterns are often constructed in the shape of rather steep pyramids so the reader takes in more and more words at each successive fixation. All these exercises are very clever, but it's one thing to improve a person's ability to see words and quite another thing to improve his ability to read a text efficiently. Reading requires the ability to understand the relationship between words. Consequently, for these reasons, many experts have now begun to question the usefulness of eye training, especially since any approach which trains a person to read isolated words and phrases would seem unlikely to help him in reading a continuous text. | 2108.txt | 0 |
[
"gun murders",
"natural diseases",
"TV violence",
"physical punishment"
] | According to the passage, the American teenage boys, lives are most threatened by _ | Teenage boys, regardless of race,are more likely to die from gunshot wounds than from all natural causes combined.
By the time the average American child leaves primary school, he or she will witness 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 acts of violence on television.
Youth are becoming involved in violence at an alarming rate. In fact, the young arrest rate for murder doubled, from 6 arrests per 100,000 youth aged from 10 to 17 to over 12 per 100,000.
The American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth reported on a study of first and second graders in Washington DC:45% said they had witnessed muggings ,31 % said they had witnessed shootings, and 39% said they had seen dead bodies.
For the many youth who have not been directly exposed to violence in their own communities, the entertainment media (television, movies, music and video games) provides many opportunities for children to see and hear violent exchanges. Research shows that there are about 5-6 violent acts per hour on prime time and 20-25 violent acts on Saturday morning children's programming. In its report, the American Psychological Association (APA. reported that viewing violence on television hurts children in many ways. In particular, the APA concludes that children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others,be more fearful of the world around them,be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others, and gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also cautions that children may imitate the violence they observe on television.
Another form of violence involving youth is physical punishment in the schools. This form of discipline still remains legally supported in 23 nations in America. The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education reported that 555, 000 students were physically punished in the schools during this school year. Although such punishment has been regarded as an effective method of discipline by those who apply it, the findings are obvious that physical punishment does not work and that children who are victims of physical punishment are subject to potential long-term physical and emotional damage. | 823.txt | 0 |
[
"many youth have watched much violence on TV",
"youth violence in Washington D.C.is very serious",
"fights may be the most widely-seen youth violence",
"American youth have been exposed to much violence"
] | The author tends to use the fourth paragraph to support the idea that _ | Teenage boys, regardless of race,are more likely to die from gunshot wounds than from all natural causes combined.
By the time the average American child leaves primary school, he or she will witness 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 acts of violence on television.
Youth are becoming involved in violence at an alarming rate. In fact, the young arrest rate for murder doubled, from 6 arrests per 100,000 youth aged from 10 to 17 to over 12 per 100,000.
The American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth reported on a study of first and second graders in Washington DC:45% said they had witnessed muggings ,31 % said they had witnessed shootings, and 39% said they had seen dead bodies.
For the many youth who have not been directly exposed to violence in their own communities, the entertainment media (television, movies, music and video games) provides many opportunities for children to see and hear violent exchanges. Research shows that there are about 5-6 violent acts per hour on prime time and 20-25 violent acts on Saturday morning children's programming. In its report, the American Psychological Association (APA. reported that viewing violence on television hurts children in many ways. In particular, the APA concludes that children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others,be more fearful of the world around them,be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others, and gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also cautions that children may imitate the violence they observe on television.
Another form of violence involving youth is physical punishment in the schools. This form of discipline still remains legally supported in 23 nations in America. The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education reported that 555, 000 students were physically punished in the schools during this school year. Although such punishment has been regarded as an effective method of discipline by those who apply it, the findings are obvious that physical punishment does not work and that children who are victims of physical punishment are subject to potential long-term physical and emotional damage. | 823.txt | 3 |
[
"to become separated from the world",
"to remain indifferent to others' pain",
"to solve problems only by violence",
"to be fearful of aggressive behaviors"
] | The APA indicates that too much TV violence may change children _ | Teenage boys, regardless of race,are more likely to die from gunshot wounds than from all natural causes combined.
By the time the average American child leaves primary school, he or she will witness 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 acts of violence on television.
Youth are becoming involved in violence at an alarming rate. In fact, the young arrest rate for murder doubled, from 6 arrests per 100,000 youth aged from 10 to 17 to over 12 per 100,000.
The American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth reported on a study of first and second graders in Washington DC:45% said they had witnessed muggings ,31 % said they had witnessed shootings, and 39% said they had seen dead bodies.
For the many youth who have not been directly exposed to violence in their own communities, the entertainment media (television, movies, music and video games) provides many opportunities for children to see and hear violent exchanges. Research shows that there are about 5-6 violent acts per hour on prime time and 20-25 violent acts on Saturday morning children's programming. In its report, the American Psychological Association (APA. reported that viewing violence on television hurts children in many ways. In particular, the APA concludes that children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others,be more fearful of the world around them,be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others, and gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also cautions that children may imitate the violence they observe on television.
Another form of violence involving youth is physical punishment in the schools. This form of discipline still remains legally supported in 23 nations in America. The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education reported that 555, 000 students were physically punished in the schools during this school year. Although such punishment has been regarded as an effective method of discipline by those who apply it, the findings are obvious that physical punishment does not work and that children who are victims of physical punishment are subject to potential long-term physical and emotional damage. | 823.txt | 1 |
[
"murders",
"family violence",
"TV violence",
"school violence"
] | The passage does NOT discus that many youth become victim of _ | Teenage boys, regardless of race,are more likely to die from gunshot wounds than from all natural causes combined.
By the time the average American child leaves primary school, he or she will witness 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 acts of violence on television.
Youth are becoming involved in violence at an alarming rate. In fact, the young arrest rate for murder doubled, from 6 arrests per 100,000 youth aged from 10 to 17 to over 12 per 100,000.
The American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth reported on a study of first and second graders in Washington DC:45% said they had witnessed muggings ,31 % said they had witnessed shootings, and 39% said they had seen dead bodies.
For the many youth who have not been directly exposed to violence in their own communities, the entertainment media (television, movies, music and video games) provides many opportunities for children to see and hear violent exchanges. Research shows that there are about 5-6 violent acts per hour on prime time and 20-25 violent acts on Saturday morning children's programming. In its report, the American Psychological Association (APA. reported that viewing violence on television hurts children in many ways. In particular, the APA concludes that children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others,be more fearful of the world around them,be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others, and gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also cautions that children may imitate the violence they observe on television.
Another form of violence involving youth is physical punishment in the schools. This form of discipline still remains legally supported in 23 nations in America. The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education reported that 555, 000 students were physically punished in the schools during this school year. Although such punishment has been regarded as an effective method of discipline by those who apply it, the findings are obvious that physical punishment does not work and that children who are victims of physical punishment are subject to potential long-term physical and emotional damage. | 823.txt | 1 |
[
"acceptable, though ineffective",
"illegal, though effective",
"harmful, though legal",
"reasonable, though illegal"
] | The author may most probably agree that physical punishment is _ | Teenage boys, regardless of race,are more likely to die from gunshot wounds than from all natural causes combined.
By the time the average American child leaves primary school, he or she will witness 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 acts of violence on television.
Youth are becoming involved in violence at an alarming rate. In fact, the young arrest rate for murder doubled, from 6 arrests per 100,000 youth aged from 10 to 17 to over 12 per 100,000.
The American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth reported on a study of first and second graders in Washington DC:45% said they had witnessed muggings ,31 % said they had witnessed shootings, and 39% said they had seen dead bodies.
For the many youth who have not been directly exposed to violence in their own communities, the entertainment media (television, movies, music and video games) provides many opportunities for children to see and hear violent exchanges. Research shows that there are about 5-6 violent acts per hour on prime time and 20-25 violent acts on Saturday morning children's programming. In its report, the American Psychological Association (APA. reported that viewing violence on television hurts children in many ways. In particular, the APA concludes that children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others,be more fearful of the world around them,be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others, and gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also cautions that children may imitate the violence they observe on television.
Another form of violence involving youth is physical punishment in the schools. This form of discipline still remains legally supported in 23 nations in America. The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education reported that 555, 000 students were physically punished in the schools during this school year. Although such punishment has been regarded as an effective method of discipline by those who apply it, the findings are obvious that physical punishment does not work and that children who are victims of physical punishment are subject to potential long-term physical and emotional damage. | 823.txt | 2 |
[
"adjust his attitude as well as make preparation for a gathering",
"ask the audience to give him confidence",
"try not to be knocked down by stage fright",
"wait offstage"
] | To overcome nervousness, one should _ . | Once you're prepared for a situation, you're 50 percent of the way toward overcoming nervousness. The other 50 percent is the physical and mental control of nervousness; adjusting your attitude so you have confidence, and control of yourself and your audience.
I was in the theater for many years and always went to work with terrible stage fright-until I was in "The King and I". While waiting offstage one night, I saw Yul Brynner, the show's star, pushing in a lunging position against a wall. It looked as though he wanted to knock it down. "This helps me control my nervousness," he explained.
I tried it and, sure enough, freed myself from stage fright. Not only that, but pushing the wall seemed to give me a whole new kind of physical energy. Later I discovered that when you push against a wall you contract the muscles that lie just below where your ribs begin to splay . I call this area the "vital triangle".
To understand how these muscles work, try this: sit in a straight-backed chair and lean slightly forward. Put your palms together in front of you, your elbows pointing out the sides, your fingertips pointing upward, and push so that you feel pressure in the heels of your palms and under your arms.
Say ssssssss, like a hiss. As you're exhaling the s, contract those muscles in the vital triangle as though you were rowing a boat, pulling the oars back and up. The vital triangle should tighten. Relax the muscles at the end of your exhalation, then inhale gently.
You can also adjust your attitude to prevent nervousness. What you say to yourself sends a message to your audience. If you tell yourself you're afraid, that's the message your listener receives. So select the attitude you want to communicate. Attitude adjusting is your mental suit of armor against nervousness. If you entertain only positive thoughts, you will be giving out these words: joy and ease, enthusiasm, sincerity and concern, and authority. | 951.txt | 0 |
[
"a film",
"a novel",
"a play",
"a song"
] | "The King and I" should be _ . | Once you're prepared for a situation, you're 50 percent of the way toward overcoming nervousness. The other 50 percent is the physical and mental control of nervousness; adjusting your attitude so you have confidence, and control of yourself and your audience.
I was in the theater for many years and always went to work with terrible stage fright-until I was in "The King and I". While waiting offstage one night, I saw Yul Brynner, the show's star, pushing in a lunging position against a wall. It looked as though he wanted to knock it down. "This helps me control my nervousness," he explained.
I tried it and, sure enough, freed myself from stage fright. Not only that, but pushing the wall seemed to give me a whole new kind of physical energy. Later I discovered that when you push against a wall you contract the muscles that lie just below where your ribs begin to splay . I call this area the "vital triangle".
To understand how these muscles work, try this: sit in a straight-backed chair and lean slightly forward. Put your palms together in front of you, your elbows pointing out the sides, your fingertips pointing upward, and push so that you feel pressure in the heels of your palms and under your arms.
Say ssssssss, like a hiss. As you're exhaling the s, contract those muscles in the vital triangle as though you were rowing a boat, pulling the oars back and up. The vital triangle should tighten. Relax the muscles at the end of your exhalation, then inhale gently.
You can also adjust your attitude to prevent nervousness. What you say to yourself sends a message to your audience. If you tell yourself you're afraid, that's the message your listener receives. So select the attitude you want to communicate. Attitude adjusting is your mental suit of armor against nervousness. If you entertain only positive thoughts, you will be giving out these words: joy and ease, enthusiasm, sincerity and concern, and authority. | 951.txt | 2 |
[
"you will have a positive effect by putting energy into your voice",
"you're 50 percent of the way towards overcoming nervousness once you are prepared for a situation",
"you will have a whole new kind of physical energy by pushing against a wall",
"if you master the techniques informed by the author your will never be nervous again"
] | The writer cites examples in Paragraphs 4 and 5 to support his statement that _ . | Once you're prepared for a situation, you're 50 percent of the way toward overcoming nervousness. The other 50 percent is the physical and mental control of nervousness; adjusting your attitude so you have confidence, and control of yourself and your audience.
I was in the theater for many years and always went to work with terrible stage fright-until I was in "The King and I". While waiting offstage one night, I saw Yul Brynner, the show's star, pushing in a lunging position against a wall. It looked as though he wanted to knock it down. "This helps me control my nervousness," he explained.
I tried it and, sure enough, freed myself from stage fright. Not only that, but pushing the wall seemed to give me a whole new kind of physical energy. Later I discovered that when you push against a wall you contract the muscles that lie just below where your ribs begin to splay . I call this area the "vital triangle".
To understand how these muscles work, try this: sit in a straight-backed chair and lean slightly forward. Put your palms together in front of you, your elbows pointing out the sides, your fingertips pointing upward, and push so that you feel pressure in the heels of your palms and under your arms.
Say ssssssss, like a hiss. As you're exhaling the s, contract those muscles in the vital triangle as though you were rowing a boat, pulling the oars back and up. The vital triangle should tighten. Relax the muscles at the end of your exhalation, then inhale gently.
You can also adjust your attitude to prevent nervousness. What you say to yourself sends a message to your audience. If you tell yourself you're afraid, that's the message your listener receives. So select the attitude you want to communicate. Attitude adjusting is your mental suit of armor against nervousness. If you entertain only positive thoughts, you will be giving out these words: joy and ease, enthusiasm, sincerity and concern, and authority. | 951.txt | 2 |
[
"show the writer how to overcome nervousness",
"pull down the wall",
"get physical energy",
"overcome his own nervousness"
] | Yul Brynner pushed the wall in order to _ . | Once you're prepared for a situation, you're 50 percent of the way toward overcoming nervousness. The other 50 percent is the physical and mental control of nervousness; adjusting your attitude so you have confidence, and control of yourself and your audience.
I was in the theater for many years and always went to work with terrible stage fright-until I was in "The King and I". While waiting offstage one night, I saw Yul Brynner, the show's star, pushing in a lunging position against a wall. It looked as though he wanted to knock it down. "This helps me control my nervousness," he explained.
I tried it and, sure enough, freed myself from stage fright. Not only that, but pushing the wall seemed to give me a whole new kind of physical energy. Later I discovered that when you push against a wall you contract the muscles that lie just below where your ribs begin to splay . I call this area the "vital triangle".
To understand how these muscles work, try this: sit in a straight-backed chair and lean slightly forward. Put your palms together in front of you, your elbows pointing out the sides, your fingertips pointing upward, and push so that you feel pressure in the heels of your palms and under your arms.
Say ssssssss, like a hiss. As you're exhaling the s, contract those muscles in the vital triangle as though you were rowing a boat, pulling the oars back and up. The vital triangle should tighten. Relax the muscles at the end of your exhalation, then inhale gently.
You can also adjust your attitude to prevent nervousness. What you say to yourself sends a message to your audience. If you tell yourself you're afraid, that's the message your listener receives. So select the attitude you want to communicate. Attitude adjusting is your mental suit of armor against nervousness. If you entertain only positive thoughts, you will be giving out these words: joy and ease, enthusiasm, sincerity and concern, and authority. | 951.txt | 3 |
[
"that you are full of fear and depression",
"that you are tightening your vital triangle",
"that you are joyful and easy-going",
"that you are relaxing your muscles"
] | If you have active thoughts, your audience will detect _ . | Once you're prepared for a situation, you're 50 percent of the way toward overcoming nervousness. The other 50 percent is the physical and mental control of nervousness; adjusting your attitude so you have confidence, and control of yourself and your audience.
I was in the theater for many years and always went to work with terrible stage fright-until I was in "The King and I". While waiting offstage one night, I saw Yul Brynner, the show's star, pushing in a lunging position against a wall. It looked as though he wanted to knock it down. "This helps me control my nervousness," he explained.
I tried it and, sure enough, freed myself from stage fright. Not only that, but pushing the wall seemed to give me a whole new kind of physical energy. Later I discovered that when you push against a wall you contract the muscles that lie just below where your ribs begin to splay . I call this area the "vital triangle".
To understand how these muscles work, try this: sit in a straight-backed chair and lean slightly forward. Put your palms together in front of you, your elbows pointing out the sides, your fingertips pointing upward, and push so that you feel pressure in the heels of your palms and under your arms.
Say ssssssss, like a hiss. As you're exhaling the s, contract those muscles in the vital triangle as though you were rowing a boat, pulling the oars back and up. The vital triangle should tighten. Relax the muscles at the end of your exhalation, then inhale gently.
You can also adjust your attitude to prevent nervousness. What you say to yourself sends a message to your audience. If you tell yourself you're afraid, that's the message your listener receives. So select the attitude you want to communicate. Attitude adjusting is your mental suit of armor against nervousness. If you entertain only positive thoughts, you will be giving out these words: joy and ease, enthusiasm, sincerity and concern, and authority. | 951.txt | 2 |
[
"Extend",
"Transform",
"Activate",
"Waste"
] | The word squander in the passage is closest in meaning to | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 3 |
[
"Food",
"Plant or animal",
"Energy",
"Big body"
] | The word none in the passage refers to | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 2 |
[
"Identifying types of organisms that became extinct",
"Comparing the scientific concept to a familiar human experience",
"Arguing that most organisms conserve rather than expend energy",
"Describing the processes of growth, reproduction, and metabolism"
] | In paragraph 1, the author explains the concept of energy expenditure by | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 1 |
[
"How the genetic information of an organism is stored and maintained",
"The way in which the organism invests its energy resources",
"Whether the climate in which the organism lives is mild or extreme",
"The variety of natural resources the organism consumes in its environment"
] | According to the passage, the classification of organisms as "opportunists" or "competitors" is determined by | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 1 |
[
"Development",
"Growth",
"Distribution",
"Protection"
] | The word dispersal in the passage is closest in meaning to | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 2 |
[
"Huge",
"Ancient",
"Common",
"Successful"
] | The word massive in the passage is closest in meaning to | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 0 |
[
"The capacity to create shade",
"Leaves containing tannin",
"The ability to withstand mild droughts and fire",
"The large number of acorns the tree produces"
] | All of the following are mentioned in paragraph 7 as contributing to the longevity of an oak tree EXCEPT | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 3 |
[
"They grow in areas free of opportunists",
"They spend more energy on their leaves, trunks and roots than on their acorns",
"Their population tends to increase or decrease in irregular cycles",
"Unlike other organisms, they do not need much water or sunlight"
] | According to the passage, oak trees are considered competitors because | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 1 |
[
"Are primarily opportunists",
"Are primarily competitors",
"Begin as opportunists and evolve into competitors",
"Have some characteristics of opportunists and some of competitors"
] | In paragraph 7, the author suggests that most species of organisms | Growth, reproduction, and daily metabolism all require an organism to expend energy. The expenditure of energy is essentially a process of budgeting, just as finances are budgeted. If all of one's money is spent on clothes, there may be none left to buy food or go to the movies. Similarly, a plant or animal cannot squander all its energy on growing a big body if none would be left over for reproduction, for this is the surest way to extinction.
All organisms, therefore, allocate energy to growth, reproduction, maintenance, and storage. No choice is involved; this allocation comes as part of the genetic package from the parents. Maintenance for a given body design of an organism is relatively constant. Storage is important, but ultimately that energy will be used for maintenance, reproduction, or growth. Therefore the principal differences in energy allocation are likely to be between growth and reproduction.
Almost all of an organism's energy can be diverted to reproduction, with very little allocated to building the body. Organisms at this extreme are "opportunists." At the other extreme are "competitors," almost all of whose resources are invested in building a huge body, with a bare minimum allocated to reproduction.
Dandelions are good examples of opportunists. Their seed heads raised just high enough above the ground to catch the wind, the plants are no bigger than they need be, their stems are hollow, and all the rigidity comes from their water content. Thus, a minimum investment has been made in the body that becomes a platform for seed dispersal. These very short-lived plants reproduce prolifically; that is to say they provide a constant rain of seed in the neighborhood of parent plants. A new plant will spring up wherever a seed falls on a suitable soil surface, but because they do not build big bodies, they cannot compete with other plants for space, water, or sunlight. These plants are termed opportunists because they rely on their seeds' falling into settings where competing plants have been removed by natural processes, such as along an eroding riverbank, on landslips, or where a tree falls and creates a gap in the forest canopy.
Opportunists must constantly invade new areas to compensate for being displaced by more competitive species. Human landscapes of lawns, fields, or flowerbeds provide settings with bare soil and a lack of competitors that are perfect habitats for colonization by opportunists. Hence, many of the strongly opportunistic plants are the common weeds of fields and gardens.
Because each individual is short-lived, the population of an opportunist species is likely to be adversely affected by drought, bad winters, or floods. If their population is tracked through time, it will be seen to be particularly unstable-soaring and plummeting in irregular cycles.
The opposite of an opportunist is a competitor. These organisms tend to have big bodies, are long-lived, and spend relatively little effort each year on reproduction. An oak tree is a good example of a competitor. A massive oak claims its ground for 200 years or more, outcompeting all other would-be canopy trees by casting a dense shade and drawing up any free water in the soil. The leaves of an oak tree taste foul because they are rich in tannins, a chemical that renders them distasteful or indigestible to many organisms. The tannins are part of the defense mechanism that is essential to longevity. Although oaks produce thousands of acorns, the investment in a crop of acorns is small compared with the energy spent on building leaves, trunk, and roots. Once an oak tree becomes established, it is likely to survive minor cycles of drought and even fire. A population of oaks is likely to be relatively stable through time, and its survival is likely to depend more on its ability to withstand the pressures of competition or predation than on its ability to take advantage of chance events. It should be noted, however, that the pure opportunist or pure competitor is rare in nature, as most species fall between the extremes of a continuum, exhibiting a blend of some opportunistic and some competitive characteristics. | 1538.txt | 3 |
[
"His family could not afford it.",
"A college education was rather uncommon in his time.",
"He didn't like the young Virginian gentlemen",
"The author doesn't give any reason."
] | Why didn't Washington go to college? | Some of the notebooks George Washington kept as ayoung man are still in existence. They show that hewas learning Latin，was very interested in the basicsof good behavior in society，and was reading Englishliterature.
At school he seems only to have been interested inmathematics.In fact，his formal education was surprisingly brief for a gentleman，andincomplete For unlike other young Virginian of that day，he did not go to the College ofWilliam and Mary in the Virginian capital of Williamsburg.In terms of formal trainingthen，Washington contrasts sharply with some other early American Presidents such as JohnAdams，Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.In later years，Washington probably regrettedhis lack of intellectual training He never felt comfortable in a debate in Congress，or onany Subject that had not to do with everyday，practical matters And because he never learnedFrench and could not speak directly to the French leaders，he did not visit the country headmired SO much.Thus，unlike Jefferson and Adams，he never reached Europe | 2429.txt | 3 |
[
"1acked practice in public speaking",
"felt his education was not good enough",
"didn't like arguing and debating with people",
"felt that debating was like intellectual training"
] | Washington felt uncomfortable in Congress debates because he _ . | Some of the notebooks George Washington kept as ayoung man are still in existence. They show that hewas learning Latin，was very interested in the basicsof good behavior in society，and was reading Englishliterature.
At school he seems only to have been interested inmathematics.In fact，his formal education was surprisingly brief for a gentleman，andincomplete For unlike other young Virginian of that day，he did not go to the College ofWilliam and Mary in the Virginian capital of Williamsburg.In terms of formal trainingthen，Washington contrasts sharply with some other early American Presidents such as JohnAdams，Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.In later years，Washington probably regrettedhis lack of intellectual training He never felt comfortable in a debate in Congress，or onany Subject that had not to do with everyday，practical matters And because he never learnedFrench and could not speak directly to the French leaders，he did not visit the country headmired SO much.Thus，unlike Jefferson and Adams，he never reached Europe | 2429.txt | 1 |
[
"didn't really care about going",
"didn't know French 1eaders",
"couldn't communicate directly with the French leaders",
"was too busy to Navel"
] | The reason why Washington didn't visit France was probably that he _ . | Some of the notebooks George Washington kept as ayoung man are still in existence. They show that hewas learning Latin，was very interested in the basicsof good behavior in society，and was reading Englishliterature.
At school he seems only to have been interested inmathematics.In fact，his formal education was surprisingly brief for a gentleman，andincomplete For unlike other young Virginian of that day，he did not go to the College ofWilliam and Mary in the Virginian capital of Williamsburg.In terms of formal trainingthen，Washington contrasts sharply with some other early American Presidents such as JohnAdams，Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.In later years，Washington probably regrettedhis lack of intellectual training He never felt comfortable in a debate in Congress，or onany Subject that had not to do with everyday，practical matters And because he never learnedFrench and could not speak directly to the French leaders，he did not visit the country headmired SO much.Thus，unlike Jefferson and Adams，he never reached Europe | 2429.txt | 2 |
[
"Washington's lack of formal education placed him at a disadvantage in later life",
"Washington should have gone to France even though he could not speak French",
"Washington was not as good a president as Adams，Jefferson or Madison",
"Washington was a model for all Virginian gentlemen"
] | According to the author _ . | Some of the notebooks George Washington kept as ayoung man are still in existence. They show that hewas learning Latin，was very interested in the basicsof good behavior in society，and was reading Englishliterature.
At school he seems only to have been interested inmathematics.In fact，his formal education was surprisingly brief for a gentleman，andincomplete For unlike other young Virginian of that day，he did not go to the College ofWilliam and Mary in the Virginian capital of Williamsburg.In terms of formal trainingthen，Washington contrasts sharply with some other early American Presidents such as JohnAdams，Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.In later years，Washington probably regrettedhis lack of intellectual training He never felt comfortable in a debate in Congress，or onany Subject that had not to do with everyday，practical matters And because he never learnedFrench and could not speak directly to the French leaders，he did not visit the country headmired SO much.Thus，unlike Jefferson and Adams，he never reached Europe | 2429.txt | 0 |
[
"was of great variety，covering many Subjects",
"was probably equal to those of most young gentlemen of his time",
"may seem poor by modern standards.but was good enough for his time",
"was rather limited for a president"
] | The main idea of the passage is that Washington's education _ . | Some of the notebooks George Washington kept as ayoung man are still in existence. They show that hewas learning Latin，was very interested in the basicsof good behavior in society，and was reading Englishliterature.
At school he seems only to have been interested inmathematics.In fact，his formal education was surprisingly brief for a gentleman，andincomplete For unlike other young Virginian of that day，he did not go to the College ofWilliam and Mary in the Virginian capital of Williamsburg.In terms of formal trainingthen，Washington contrasts sharply with some other early American Presidents such as JohnAdams，Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.In later years，Washington probably regrettedhis lack of intellectual training He never felt comfortable in a debate in Congress，or onany Subject that had not to do with everyday，practical matters And because he never learnedFrench and could not speak directly to the French leaders，he did not visit the country headmired SO much.Thus，unlike Jefferson and Adams，he never reached Europe | 2429.txt | 3 |
[
"hotel",
"library",
"lab",
"shop"
] | Both Jean and Kate probably work in a | "I'm very tired from working here,"said Jean to her friend Kate," I'm on my feet from morning to night. For the first quarter of the day, I clean up the counter and set the tables. For the next quarter, I help in the kitchen. For the second half of my workday, I take orders at the counters."
"Kate, I wish I had your job,"Jean went on. "For four hours you just sit at the cash register taking in money."
"But I spend two more hours in the kitchen than you do,"said Kate. "It's tiring to cook over a hot stove. I don't think you'd really want my job. In fact, I'd like your job." | 1733.txt | 0 |
[
"eight hours",
"twelve hours.",
"Ten hours",
"Nine hours"
] | How long did they work every day? | "I'm very tired from working here,"said Jean to her friend Kate," I'm on my feet from morning to night. For the first quarter of the day, I clean up the counter and set the tables. For the next quarter, I help in the kitchen. For the second half of my workday, I take orders at the counters."
"Kate, I wish I had your job,"Jean went on. "For four hours you just sit at the cash register taking in money."
"But I spend two more hours in the kitchen than you do,"said Kate. "It's tiring to cook over a hot stove. I don't think you'd really want my job. In fact, I'd like your job." | 1733.txt | 0 |
[
"a quarter day.",
"A half day.",
"One-third day.",
"Three-fourths day."
] | How long did Kate spend in the kitchen? | "I'm very tired from working here,"said Jean to her friend Kate," I'm on my feet from morning to night. For the first quarter of the day, I clean up the counter and set the tables. For the next quarter, I help in the kitchen. For the second half of my workday, I take orders at the counters."
"Kate, I wish I had your job,"Jean went on. "For four hours you just sit at the cash register taking in money."
"But I spend two more hours in the kitchen than you do,"said Kate. "It's tiring to cook over a hot stove. I don't think you'd really want my job. In fact, I'd like your job." | 1733.txt | 1 |
[
"they are both interested in their work.",
"their work is neither tiring nor busy.",
"both of them are tired of their work.",
"they've decided to give up their work."
] | From this passage we can see that | "I'm very tired from working here,"said Jean to her friend Kate," I'm on my feet from morning to night. For the first quarter of the day, I clean up the counter and set the tables. For the next quarter, I help in the kitchen. For the second half of my workday, I take orders at the counters."
"Kate, I wish I had your job,"Jean went on. "For four hours you just sit at the cash register taking in money."
"But I spend two more hours in the kitchen than you do,"said Kate. "It's tiring to cook over a hot stove. I don't think you'd really want my job. In fact, I'd like your job." | 1733.txt | 2 |
[
"It's never too late to learn.",
"It's no use crying over spilt milk.",
"The grass is always greener on the other side.",
"One swallow does not make a summer."
] | Give a proper proverb to Jean and Kate. | "I'm very tired from working here,"said Jean to her friend Kate," I'm on my feet from morning to night. For the first quarter of the day, I clean up the counter and set the tables. For the next quarter, I help in the kitchen. For the second half of my workday, I take orders at the counters."
"Kate, I wish I had your job,"Jean went on. "For four hours you just sit at the cash register taking in money."
"But I spend two more hours in the kitchen than you do,"said Kate. "It's tiring to cook over a hot stove. I don't think you'd really want my job. In fact, I'd like your job." | 1733.txt | 2 |
[
"The effects of war on the growth of cities",
"The growth and influence of cities",
"The decline of farming in areas surrounding cities",
"The causes of immigration to cities"
] | Which of the following aspects of North America in the eighteenth century does the passage mainly discuss? | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 1 |
[
"The influence of the cities was mostly negative",
"The populations of the cities were small, but their influence was great.",
"The cities were growing at a great rate.",
"Most people pretended to live in cities"
] | Why does the author say that "the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America" (lines 1-2)? | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 1 |
[
"connected to",
"in addition to",
"because of",
"instead of"
] | The phrase "in place of " in lines 4-5 is closest in meaning to | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 3 |
[
"avoidable",
"accompanying",
"unwelcome",
"unexpected"
] | The word "attendant" in line 6 is closest in meaning to | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 1 |
[
"Open competition",
"Social deference",
"Social hierarchy",
"Independent craftspeople"
] | Which of the following is mentioned as an element of modern capitalism? | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 0 |
[
"large populations",
"little independence",
"frequent social disorder",
"few power sources"
] | It can be inferred that in comparison with North American cities, cities in Europe, the Middle East, and China had | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 0 |
[
"long wars",
"new laws",
"rapid increases",
"exciting changes"
] | The phrase "exponential leaps" in line 12 is closest in meaning to | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 2 |
[
"population",
"size",
"Boston",
"Year"
] | The word "it" in line 15 refers to | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 0 |
[
"About 16,000",
"About 25,000",
"About 30,000",
"More than 200,000"
] | How many immigrants arrived in North America between 1760 and 1775? | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 3 |
[
"spoiled",
"reduced",
"determined",
"divided"
] | The word "dictated" in line 18 is closest in meaning to | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 2 |
[
"usually",
"hardly",
"very quickly",
"almost completely"
] | The word "virtually" in line 20 is closest in meaning to | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 3 |
[
"quality of farmland",
"origin of immigrants",
"opportunities for fishing",
"type of grain grown"
] | The region surrounding New York and Philadelphia is contrasted with the region surrounding Boston in terms of | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 0 |
[
"They produced grain especially for making bread.",
"They stored large quantities of grain during periods of drought",
"They supplied grain to other parts of North America and other countries.",
"They consumed more grain than all the other regions of North America."
] | Why does the author describe the regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia as "breadbaskets"? | Although only 1 person in 20 in the Colonial period lived in a city, the cities had a disproportionate influence on the development of North America. They were at the cutting edge of social change. It was in the cities that the elements that can be associated with modern capitalism first appeared - the use of money and commercial paper in place of barter, open competition in place of social deference and hierarchy, with an attendant rise in social disorder, and the appearance of factories using coat or water power in place of independent craftspeople working with hand tools. "The cities predicted the future," wrote historian Gary. B. Nash, "even though they were but overgrown villages compared to the great urban centers of Europe, the Middle East and China."
Except for Boston, whose population stabilized at about 16,000 in 1760, cities grew by exponential leaps through the eighteenth century. In the fifteen years prior to the outbreak of the War for independence in 1775, more than 200,000 immigrants arrived on North American shores. This meant that a population the size of Boston was arriving every year, and most of it flowed into the port cities in the Northeast. Philadelphia's population nearly doubted in those years, reaching about 30,000 in 1774, New York grew at almost the same rate, reaching about 25,000 by 1775.
The quality of the hinterland dictated the pace of growth of the cities. The land surrounding Boston had always been poor farm country, and by the mid-eighteenth century it was virtually stripped of its timber. The available farmland was occupied, there was little in the region beyond the city to attract immigrants. New York and Philadelphia, by contrast, served a rich and fertile hinterland laced with navigable watercourses. Scots, Irish, and Germans landed in these cities and followed the rivers inland. The regions around the cities of New York and Philadelphia became the breadbaskets of North America, sending grain not only to other colonies but also to England and southern Europe, where crippling droughts in the late 1760's created a whole new market. | 2026.txt | 2 |
[
"exists merely in urban and industrial areas",
"may have an effect on the entire earth",
"causes widespread damage in the countryside",
"is not so serious as it used to be"
] | According to the passage，people today think that air pollution _ . | It was once thought that air pollution affected only the area immediately around large cities with factories and heavy automobile traffic.Today, we know that although these are the areas with the worst air pollution，the problem is literally worldwide.On several occasions over the past decade，a heavy cloud of air pollution has covered the entire eastern half of the United States and led to health warnings even in rural areas away from any major concentration of manufacturing and automobile traffic.In fact， the very climate of the entire earth may be affected by air pollution.
Some scientists feel that the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the air resulting from the burning of fossil fuels(coal and oil)is creating a"greenhouse effect"-holding in heat reflected from the earth and raising the world's average temperature.If this view is correct and the world's temperature is raised only a few degrees。much of the polar ice cap will melt and cities such as New Y0rk，Boston，Miami，and New Orleans will be under water.
Another view, less widely held，is that increasing particulate matter in the atmosphere is blocking sunlight and lowering the earth's temperature-a result that would be equally disastrous.A drop of just a few degrees could create something close to new ice age and would make agriculture difficult or impossible in many of our top farming areas.
At present we do not know for sure that either of these conditions will happen，though one recent government report prepared by experts in the field concluded that the greenhouse effect is very likely.Perhaps，if we are very lucky, the two tendencies will offset each other and the world's temperature will stay about the same as it is now. | 1464.txt | 1 |
[
"the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air",
"the increasing particulate matter in the atmosphere",
"the burning of firewood",
"the blocking of sunlight"
] | The"greenhouse effect" results from _ . | It was once thought that air pollution affected only the area immediately around large cities with factories and heavy automobile traffic.Today, we know that although these are the areas with the worst air pollution，the problem is literally worldwide.On several occasions over the past decade，a heavy cloud of air pollution has covered the entire eastern half of the United States and led to health warnings even in rural areas away from any major concentration of manufacturing and automobile traffic.In fact， the very climate of the entire earth may be affected by air pollution.
Some scientists feel that the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the air resulting from the burning of fossil fuels(coal and oil)is creating a"greenhouse effect"-holding in heat reflected from the earth and raising the world's average temperature.If this view is correct and the world's temperature is raised only a few degrees。much of the polar ice cap will melt and cities such as New Y0rk，Boston，Miami，and New Orleans will be under water.
Another view, less widely held，is that increasing particulate matter in the atmosphere is blocking sunlight and lowering the earth's temperature-a result that would be equally disastrous.A drop of just a few degrees could create something close to new ice age and would make agriculture difficult or impossible in many of our top farming areas.
At present we do not know for sure that either of these conditions will happen，though one recent government report prepared by experts in the field concluded that the greenhouse effect is very likely.Perhaps，if we are very lucky, the two tendencies will offset each other and the world's temperature will stay about the same as it is now. | 1464.txt | 0 |
[
"He rejects it as being ungrounded.",
"He holds the same view.",
"He is uncertain of its occurrence.",
"He thinks that would happen soon."
] | What does the author think of the possibility of a new ice age? | It was once thought that air pollution affected only the area immediately around large cities with factories and heavy automobile traffic.Today, we know that although these are the areas with the worst air pollution，the problem is literally worldwide.On several occasions over the past decade，a heavy cloud of air pollution has covered the entire eastern half of the United States and led to health warnings even in rural areas away from any major concentration of manufacturing and automobile traffic.In fact， the very climate of the entire earth may be affected by air pollution.
Some scientists feel that the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the air resulting from the burning of fossil fuels(coal and oil)is creating a"greenhouse effect"-holding in heat reflected from the earth and raising the world's average temperature.If this view is correct and the world's temperature is raised only a few degrees。much of the polar ice cap will melt and cities such as New Y0rk，Boston，Miami，and New Orleans will be under water.
Another view, less widely held，is that increasing particulate matter in the atmosphere is blocking sunlight and lowering the earth's temperature-a result that would be equally disastrous.A drop of just a few degrees could create something close to new ice age and would make agriculture difficult or impossible in many of our top farming areas.
At present we do not know for sure that either of these conditions will happen，though one recent government report prepared by experts in the field concluded that the greenhouse effect is very likely.Perhaps，if we are very lucky, the two tendencies will offset each other and the world's temperature will stay about the same as it is now. | 1464.txt | 2 |
[
"slip into",
"catch up with",
"set up",
"make up for"
] | The word"offset"(Line 3，Para.4)means _ . | It was once thought that air pollution affected only the area immediately around large cities with factories and heavy automobile traffic.Today, we know that although these are the areas with the worst air pollution，the problem is literally worldwide.On several occasions over the past decade，a heavy cloud of air pollution has covered the entire eastern half of the United States and led to health warnings even in rural areas away from any major concentration of manufacturing and automobile traffic.In fact， the very climate of the entire earth may be affected by air pollution.
Some scientists feel that the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the air resulting from the burning of fossil fuels(coal and oil)is creating a"greenhouse effect"-holding in heat reflected from the earth and raising the world's average temperature.If this view is correct and the world's temperature is raised only a few degrees。much of the polar ice cap will melt and cities such as New Y0rk，Boston，Miami，and New Orleans will be under water.
Another view, less widely held，is that increasing particulate matter in the atmosphere is blocking sunlight and lowering the earth's temperature-a result that would be equally disastrous.A drop of just a few degrees could create something close to new ice age and would make agriculture difficult or impossible in many of our top farming areas.
At present we do not know for sure that either of these conditions will happen，though one recent government report prepared by experts in the field concluded that the greenhouse effect is very likely.Perhaps，if we are very lucky, the two tendencies will offset each other and the world's temperature will stay about the same as it is now. | 1464.txt | 3 |
[
"the potential effect of air pollution",
"the possibility of a new ice age",
"the effects of global warming",
"the causes of climate change"
] | The passage is mainly about _ . | It was once thought that air pollution affected only the area immediately around large cities with factories and heavy automobile traffic.Today, we know that although these are the areas with the worst air pollution，the problem is literally worldwide.On several occasions over the past decade，a heavy cloud of air pollution has covered the entire eastern half of the United States and led to health warnings even in rural areas away from any major concentration of manufacturing and automobile traffic.In fact， the very climate of the entire earth may be affected by air pollution.
Some scientists feel that the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the air resulting from the burning of fossil fuels(coal and oil)is creating a"greenhouse effect"-holding in heat reflected from the earth and raising the world's average temperature.If this view is correct and the world's temperature is raised only a few degrees。much of the polar ice cap will melt and cities such as New Y0rk，Boston，Miami，and New Orleans will be under water.
Another view, less widely held，is that increasing particulate matter in the atmosphere is blocking sunlight and lowering the earth's temperature-a result that would be equally disastrous.A drop of just a few degrees could create something close to new ice age and would make agriculture difficult or impossible in many of our top farming areas.
At present we do not know for sure that either of these conditions will happen，though one recent government report prepared by experts in the field concluded that the greenhouse effect is very likely.Perhaps，if we are very lucky, the two tendencies will offset each other and the world's temperature will stay about the same as it is now. | 1464.txt | 0 |
[
"Younger people are replacing the elderly.",
"Well-educated people tend to work longer.",
"Unemployment rates are rising year after year.",
"People with no college degree do not easily find work."
] | What is happening in the workforce in rich countries? | Across the rich world, well-educated people increasingly work longer than the less-skilled.Some65% of American men aged 62 -74 with a professional degree are in theworkforce, compared with32% of men with only a high-school certificate.This gap is part of adeepening divide between the well-educated well-off and the unskilled poor.Rapidtechnological advance has raised the incomes of the highly skilled while squeezing those of theunskilled.The consequences, for individuals and society, are profound.
The world is facing an astonishing rise in the number of old people, and they will livelonger than ever before.Over the next 20 years the global population of those aged 65 ormore will almost double, from 600 million to 1.1 billion.The experience of the 20th century,when greater longevity translated into more years in retirement rather than more yearsat work, has persuaded many observers that this shift will lead to slower economic growth,while the swelling ranks of pensioners will create government budget problems.
But the notion of a sharp division between the working young and the idle old misses a newtrend, the growing gap between the skilled and the unskilled.Employment rates are fallingamong younger unskilled people, whereas older skilled folk are working longer.The divide ismost extreme in America, where well-educated baby-boomers areputting off retirement while many less-skilled younger people have dropped out of theworkforce.
Policy is partly responsible.Many European governments have abandoned policies that usedto encourage people to retire early.Rising life expectancy , combined with thereplacement of generous defmed-benefit pension plans with less generous defined-contribution ones, means that even the better-off must work longer to have a comfortableretirement.But the changing nature of work also plays a big role.Pay has risen sharply for thehighly educated, and those people continue to reap rich rewards into old age because thesedays the educated elderly are more productive than the preceding generation.Technologicalchange may well reinforce that shift: the skills that complement computers, frommanagement knowhow to creativity, do not necessarily decline with age. | 2188.txt | 1 |
[
"Longer life expectancies.",
"A rapid technological advance.",
"Profound changes in the workforce.",
"A growing number of the well-educated."
] | What has helped deepen the divide between the well-off and the poor? | Across the rich world, well-educated people increasingly work longer than the less-skilled.Some65% of American men aged 62 -74 with a professional degree are in theworkforce, compared with32% of men with only a high-school certificate.This gap is part of adeepening divide between the well-educated well-off and the unskilled poor.Rapidtechnological advance has raised the incomes of the highly skilled while squeezing those of theunskilled.The consequences, for individuals and society, are profound.
The world is facing an astonishing rise in the number of old people, and they will livelonger than ever before.Over the next 20 years the global population of those aged 65 ormore will almost double, from 600 million to 1.1 billion.The experience of the 20th century,when greater longevity translated into more years in retirement rather than more yearsat work, has persuaded many observers that this shift will lead to slower economic growth,while the swelling ranks of pensioners will create government budget problems.
But the notion of a sharp division between the working young and the idle old misses a newtrend, the growing gap between the skilled and the unskilled.Employment rates are fallingamong younger unskilled people, whereas older skilled folk are working longer.The divide ismost extreme in America, where well-educated baby-boomers areputting off retirement while many less-skilled younger people have dropped out of theworkforce.
Policy is partly responsible.Many European governments have abandoned policies that usedto encourage people to retire early.Rising life expectancy , combined with thereplacement of generous defmed-benefit pension plans with less generous defined-contribution ones, means that even the better-off must work longer to have a comfortableretirement.But the changing nature of work also plays a big role.Pay has risen sharply for thehighly educated, and those people continue to reap rich rewards into old age because thesedays the educated elderly are more productive than the preceding generation.Technologicalchange may well reinforce that shift: the skills that complement computers, frommanagement knowhow to creativity, do not necessarily decline with age. | 2188.txt | 1 |
[
"Economic growth will slow down.",
"Government budgets will increase.",
"More people will try to pursue higher education.",
"There will be more competition in the job market."
] | What do many observers predict in view of the experience of the 20th century? | Across the rich world, well-educated people increasingly work longer than the less-skilled.Some65% of American men aged 62 -74 with a professional degree are in theworkforce, compared with32% of men with only a high-school certificate.This gap is part of adeepening divide between the well-educated well-off and the unskilled poor.Rapidtechnological advance has raised the incomes of the highly skilled while squeezing those of theunskilled.The consequences, for individuals and society, are profound.
The world is facing an astonishing rise in the number of old people, and they will livelonger than ever before.Over the next 20 years the global population of those aged 65 ormore will almost double, from 600 million to 1.1 billion.The experience of the 20th century,when greater longevity translated into more years in retirement rather than more yearsat work, has persuaded many observers that this shift will lead to slower economic growth,while the swelling ranks of pensioners will create government budget problems.
But the notion of a sharp division between the working young and the idle old misses a newtrend, the growing gap between the skilled and the unskilled.Employment rates are fallingamong younger unskilled people, whereas older skilled folk are working longer.The divide ismost extreme in America, where well-educated baby-boomers areputting off retirement while many less-skilled younger people have dropped out of theworkforce.
Policy is partly responsible.Many European governments have abandoned policies that usedto encourage people to retire early.Rising life expectancy , combined with thereplacement of generous defmed-benefit pension plans with less generous defined-contribution ones, means that even the better-off must work longer to have a comfortableretirement.But the changing nature of work also plays a big role.Pay has risen sharply for thehighly educated, and those people continue to reap rich rewards into old age because thesedays the educated elderly are more productive than the preceding generation.Technologicalchange may well reinforce that shift: the skills that complement computers, frommanagement knowhow to creativity, do not necessarily decline with age. | 2188.txt | 0 |
[
"Unskilled workers may choose to retire early.",
"More people have to receive in-service training.",
"Even wealthy people must work longer to live comfortably in retirement.",
"People may be able to enjoy generous defined-benefits from pension plans."
] | What is the result of policy changes in European countries? | Across the rich world, well-educated people increasingly work longer than the less-skilled.Some65% of American men aged 62 -74 with a professional degree are in theworkforce, compared with32% of men with only a high-school certificate.This gap is part of adeepening divide between the well-educated well-off and the unskilled poor.Rapidtechnological advance has raised the incomes of the highly skilled while squeezing those of theunskilled.The consequences, for individuals and society, are profound.
The world is facing an astonishing rise in the number of old people, and they will livelonger than ever before.Over the next 20 years the global population of those aged 65 ormore will almost double, from 600 million to 1.1 billion.The experience of the 20th century,when greater longevity translated into more years in retirement rather than more yearsat work, has persuaded many observers that this shift will lead to slower economic growth,while the swelling ranks of pensioners will create government budget problems.
But the notion of a sharp division between the working young and the idle old misses a newtrend, the growing gap between the skilled and the unskilled.Employment rates are fallingamong younger unskilled people, whereas older skilled folk are working longer.The divide ismost extreme in America, where well-educated baby-boomers areputting off retirement while many less-skilled younger people have dropped out of theworkforce.
Policy is partly responsible.Many European governments have abandoned policies that usedto encourage people to retire early.Rising life expectancy , combined with thereplacement of generous defmed-benefit pension plans with less generous defined-contribution ones, means that even the better-off must work longer to have a comfortableretirement.But the changing nature of work also plays a big role.Pay has risen sharply for thehighly educated, and those people continue to reap rich rewards into old age because thesedays the educated elderly are more productive than the preceding generation.Technologicalchange may well reinforce that shift: the skills that complement computers, frommanagement knowhow to creativity, do not necessarily decline with age. | 2188.txt | 2 |
[
"Computers will do more complicated work.",
"More will be taken by the educated young.",
"Most jobs to be done will be the creative ones.",
"Skills are highly valued regardless of age."
] | What is characteristic of work in the 21st century? | Across the rich world, well-educated people increasingly work longer than the less-skilled.Some65% of American men aged 62 -74 with a professional degree are in theworkforce, compared with32% of men with only a high-school certificate.This gap is part of adeepening divide between the well-educated well-off and the unskilled poor.Rapidtechnological advance has raised the incomes of the highly skilled while squeezing those of theunskilled.The consequences, for individuals and society, are profound.
The world is facing an astonishing rise in the number of old people, and they will livelonger than ever before.Over the next 20 years the global population of those aged 65 ormore will almost double, from 600 million to 1.1 billion.The experience of the 20th century,when greater longevity translated into more years in retirement rather than more yearsat work, has persuaded many observers that this shift will lead to slower economic growth,while the swelling ranks of pensioners will create government budget problems.
But the notion of a sharp division between the working young and the idle old misses a newtrend, the growing gap between the skilled and the unskilled.Employment rates are fallingamong younger unskilled people, whereas older skilled folk are working longer.The divide ismost extreme in America, where well-educated baby-boomers areputting off retirement while many less-skilled younger people have dropped out of theworkforce.
Policy is partly responsible.Many European governments have abandoned policies that usedto encourage people to retire early.Rising life expectancy , combined with thereplacement of generous defmed-benefit pension plans with less generous defined-contribution ones, means that even the better-off must work longer to have a comfortableretirement.But the changing nature of work also plays a big role.Pay has risen sharply for thehighly educated, and those people continue to reap rich rewards into old age because thesedays the educated elderly are more productive than the preceding generation.Technologicalchange may well reinforce that shift: the skills that complement computers, frommanagement knowhow to creativity, do not necessarily decline with age. | 2188.txt | 3 |
[
"They are passionate about making a fortune.",
"They have no choice but to continue working.",
"They love what they do and choose not to retire.",
"They will not retire unless they are compelled to."
] | What do we learn about the so-called "nevertirees"? | A recent global survey of 2,000 high-net-worth individuals found about 60% were not planning on a traditional retirement. Among U.S. participants, 75% expected to continue working in some capacity even after stepping away from full-time jobs. "Many of these people made their wealth by doing something they're passionate about," says Daniel Egan, head of behavioral finance for Barclays Wealth Americas. "Given the choice, they prefer to continue working." Barclays calls these people "nevertirees".
Unlike many Americans compelled into early retirement by company restrictions, the average nevertiree often has no one forcing his hand. If 106-year-old investor Irving Kahn, head of his own family firm, wants to keep coming to work every day, who's going to stop him? Seventy-eight-year-old Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's job security is guaranteed in the Constitution.
It may seem that these elderly people are trying to cheat death. In fact, they are. And it's working. Howard Friedman, a professor at UC Riverside, found in his research that those who work hardest and are successful in their careers often live the longest lives. "People are generally being given bad advice to slow down, take it easy, stop worrying, and retire to Florida," he says. He described one study participant, still working at the age of 100, who was recently disappointed to see his son retire.
"We're beginning to see a change in how people view retirement," says George Leeson, co-director of the Institute of Population Ageing at Oxford. Where once retirement was seen as a brief reward after a long struggle through some miserable job, it is now akin to being cast aside. What Leeson terms "the Warren Buffett effect" is becoming more broadly appealing as individuals come to "view retirement as not simply being linked to economic productivity but also about contribution."
Observers are split on whether this is a wholly good thing. On the one hand, companies and financial firms can benefit from the wisdom of a resilient chief. On the other, the new generation can find it more difficult to advance - an argument that typically holds little sway to a nevertiree. | 2144.txt | 2 |
[
"Neither of them is subject to forced retirement.",
"Neither of them desires reward for their work.",
"Both cling to their positions despite opposition.",
"Both are capable of coping with heavy workloads."
] | What do Irving Kahn and Ruth Bader Ginsburg have in common? | A recent global survey of 2,000 high-net-worth individuals found about 60% were not planning on a traditional retirement. Among U.S. participants, 75% expected to continue working in some capacity even after stepping away from full-time jobs. "Many of these people made their wealth by doing something they're passionate about," says Daniel Egan, head of behavioral finance for Barclays Wealth Americas. "Given the choice, they prefer to continue working." Barclays calls these people "nevertirees".
Unlike many Americans compelled into early retirement by company restrictions, the average nevertiree often has no one forcing his hand. If 106-year-old investor Irving Kahn, head of his own family firm, wants to keep coming to work every day, who's going to stop him? Seventy-eight-year-old Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's job security is guaranteed in the Constitution.
It may seem that these elderly people are trying to cheat death. In fact, they are. And it's working. Howard Friedman, a professor at UC Riverside, found in his research that those who work hardest and are successful in their careers often live the longest lives. "People are generally being given bad advice to slow down, take it easy, stop worrying, and retire to Florida," he says. He described one study participant, still working at the age of 100, who was recently disappointed to see his son retire.
"We're beginning to see a change in how people view retirement," says George Leeson, co-director of the Institute of Population Ageing at Oxford. Where once retirement was seen as a brief reward after a long struggle through some miserable job, it is now akin to being cast aside. What Leeson terms "the Warren Buffett effect" is becoming more broadly appealing as individuals come to "view retirement as not simply being linked to economic productivity but also about contribution."
Observers are split on whether this is a wholly good thing. On the one hand, companies and financial firms can benefit from the wisdom of a resilient chief. On the other, the new generation can find it more difficult to advance - an argument that typically holds little sway to a nevertiree. | 2144.txt | 0 |
[
"The harder you work, the bigger your fortune will be.",
"The earlier you retire, the healthier you will be.",
"Elderly people have to slow down to live longer.",
"Working at an advanced age lengthens people's life."
] | What is the finding of Howard Friedman's research? | A recent global survey of 2,000 high-net-worth individuals found about 60% were not planning on a traditional retirement. Among U.S. participants, 75% expected to continue working in some capacity even after stepping away from full-time jobs. "Many of these people made their wealth by doing something they're passionate about," says Daniel Egan, head of behavioral finance for Barclays Wealth Americas. "Given the choice, they prefer to continue working." Barclays calls these people "nevertirees".
Unlike many Americans compelled into early retirement by company restrictions, the average nevertiree often has no one forcing his hand. If 106-year-old investor Irving Kahn, head of his own family firm, wants to keep coming to work every day, who's going to stop him? Seventy-eight-year-old Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's job security is guaranteed in the Constitution.
It may seem that these elderly people are trying to cheat death. In fact, they are. And it's working. Howard Friedman, a professor at UC Riverside, found in his research that those who work hardest and are successful in their careers often live the longest lives. "People are generally being given bad advice to slow down, take it easy, stop worrying, and retire to Florida," he says. He described one study participant, still working at the age of 100, who was recently disappointed to see his son retire.
"We're beginning to see a change in how people view retirement," says George Leeson, co-director of the Institute of Population Ageing at Oxford. Where once retirement was seen as a brief reward after a long struggle through some miserable job, it is now akin to being cast aside. What Leeson terms "the Warren Buffett effect" is becoming more broadly appealing as individuals come to "view retirement as not simply being linked to economic productivity but also about contribution."
Observers are split on whether this is a wholly good thing. On the one hand, companies and financial firms can benefit from the wisdom of a resilient chief. On the other, the new generation can find it more difficult to advance - an argument that typically holds little sway to a nevertiree. | 2144.txt | 3 |
[
"It means a burden to the younger generation.",
"It is a symbol of a mature and civilized society.",
"It is a compensation for one's life-long hard work.",
"It helps increase a nation's economic productivity."
] | What is the traditional view of retirement according to the passage? | A recent global survey of 2,000 high-net-worth individuals found about 60% were not planning on a traditional retirement. Among U.S. participants, 75% expected to continue working in some capacity even after stepping away from full-time jobs. "Many of these people made their wealth by doing something they're passionate about," says Daniel Egan, head of behavioral finance for Barclays Wealth Americas. "Given the choice, they prefer to continue working." Barclays calls these people "nevertirees".
Unlike many Americans compelled into early retirement by company restrictions, the average nevertiree often has no one forcing his hand. If 106-year-old investor Irving Kahn, head of his own family firm, wants to keep coming to work every day, who's going to stop him? Seventy-eight-year-old Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's job security is guaranteed in the Constitution.
It may seem that these elderly people are trying to cheat death. In fact, they are. And it's working. Howard Friedman, a professor at UC Riverside, found in his research that those who work hardest and are successful in their careers often live the longest lives. "People are generally being given bad advice to slow down, take it easy, stop worrying, and retire to Florida," he says. He described one study participant, still working at the age of 100, who was recently disappointed to see his son retire.
"We're beginning to see a change in how people view retirement," says George Leeson, co-director of the Institute of Population Ageing at Oxford. Where once retirement was seen as a brief reward after a long struggle through some miserable job, it is now akin to being cast aside. What Leeson terms "the Warren Buffett effect" is becoming more broadly appealing as individuals come to "view retirement as not simply being linked to economic productivity but also about contribution."
Observers are split on whether this is a wholly good thing. On the one hand, companies and financial firms can benefit from the wisdom of a resilient chief. On the other, the new generation can find it more difficult to advance - an argument that typically holds little sway to a nevertiree. | 2144.txt | 2 |
[
"They are an obstacle to a company's development.",
"They lack the creativity of the younger generation.",
"They cannot work as efficiently as they used to.",
"They prevent young people from getting ahead."
] | What do critics say about "nevertirees"? | A recent global survey of 2,000 high-net-worth individuals found about 60% were not planning on a traditional retirement. Among U.S. participants, 75% expected to continue working in some capacity even after stepping away from full-time jobs. "Many of these people made their wealth by doing something they're passionate about," says Daniel Egan, head of behavioral finance for Barclays Wealth Americas. "Given the choice, they prefer to continue working." Barclays calls these people "nevertirees".
Unlike many Americans compelled into early retirement by company restrictions, the average nevertiree often has no one forcing his hand. If 106-year-old investor Irving Kahn, head of his own family firm, wants to keep coming to work every day, who's going to stop him? Seventy-eight-year-old Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's job security is guaranteed in the Constitution.
It may seem that these elderly people are trying to cheat death. In fact, they are. And it's working. Howard Friedman, a professor at UC Riverside, found in his research that those who work hardest and are successful in their careers often live the longest lives. "People are generally being given bad advice to slow down, take it easy, stop worrying, and retire to Florida," he says. He described one study participant, still working at the age of 100, who was recently disappointed to see his son retire.
"We're beginning to see a change in how people view retirement," says George Leeson, co-director of the Institute of Population Ageing at Oxford. Where once retirement was seen as a brief reward after a long struggle through some miserable job, it is now akin to being cast aside. What Leeson terms "the Warren Buffett effect" is becoming more broadly appealing as individuals come to "view retirement as not simply being linked to economic productivity but also about contribution."
Observers are split on whether this is a wholly good thing. On the one hand, companies and financial firms can benefit from the wisdom of a resilient chief. On the other, the new generation can find it more difficult to advance - an argument that typically holds little sway to a nevertiree. | 2144.txt | 3 |
[
"the fierce business competition.",
"the feeble boss-board relations.",
"the threat from news reports.",
"the severity of data leakage."
] | The statement "It never rains but it pours" is used to introduce | It never rains but it pours. Just as bosses and boards have finally sorted out their worst accounting and compliance troubles, and improved their feeble corporation governance, a new problem threatens to earn them - especially in America - the sort of nasty headlines that inevitably lead to heads rolling in the executive suite: data insecurity. Left, until now, to odd, low-level IT staff to put right, and seen as a concern only of data-rich industries such as banking, telecoms and air travel, information protection is now high on the boss's agenda in businesses of every variety.
Several massive leakages of customer and employee data this year - from organizations as diverse as Time Warner, the American defense contractor Science Applications International Corp and even the University of California, Berkeley - have left managers hurriedly peering into their intricate IT systems and business processes in search of potential vulnerabilities.
"Data is becoming an asset which needs to be guarded as much as any other asset," says Haim Mendelson of Stanford University's business school. "The ability to guard customer data is the key to market value, which the board is responsible for on behalf of shareholders." Indeed, just as there is the concept of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), perhaps it is time for GASP, Generally Accepted Security Practices, suggested Eli Noam of New York's Columbia Business School. "Setting the proper investment level for security, redundancy, and recovery is a management issue, not a technical one," he says.
The mystery is that this should come as a surprise to any boss. Surely it should be obvious to the dimmest executive that trust, that most valuable of economic assets, is easily destroyed and hugely expensive to restore - and that few things are more likely to destroy trust than a company letting sensitive personal data get into the wrong hands.
The current state of affairs may have been encouraged - though not justified - by the lack of legal penalty (in America, but not Europe) for data leakage. Until California recently passed a law, American firms did not have to tell anyone, even the victim, when data went astray. That may change fast: lots of proposed data-security legislation is now doing the rounds in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, the theft of information about some 40 million credit-card accounts in America, disclosed on June 17th, overshadowed a hugely important decision a day earlier by America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that puts corporate America on notice that regulators will act if firms fail to provide adequate data security. | 2832.txt | 3 |
[
"whether there is any weak point.",
"what sort of data has been stolen.",
"who is responsible for the leakage.",
"how the potential spies can be located."
] | According to Paragraph 2, some organizations check their systems to find out | It never rains but it pours. Just as bosses and boards have finally sorted out their worst accounting and compliance troubles, and improved their feeble corporation governance, a new problem threatens to earn them - especially in America - the sort of nasty headlines that inevitably lead to heads rolling in the executive suite: data insecurity. Left, until now, to odd, low-level IT staff to put right, and seen as a concern only of data-rich industries such as banking, telecoms and air travel, information protection is now high on the boss's agenda in businesses of every variety.
Several massive leakages of customer and employee data this year - from organizations as diverse as Time Warner, the American defense contractor Science Applications International Corp and even the University of California, Berkeley - have left managers hurriedly peering into their intricate IT systems and business processes in search of potential vulnerabilities.
"Data is becoming an asset which needs to be guarded as much as any other asset," says Haim Mendelson of Stanford University's business school. "The ability to guard customer data is the key to market value, which the board is responsible for on behalf of shareholders." Indeed, just as there is the concept of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), perhaps it is time for GASP, Generally Accepted Security Practices, suggested Eli Noam of New York's Columbia Business School. "Setting the proper investment level for security, redundancy, and recovery is a management issue, not a technical one," he says.
The mystery is that this should come as a surprise to any boss. Surely it should be obvious to the dimmest executive that trust, that most valuable of economic assets, is easily destroyed and hugely expensive to restore - and that few things are more likely to destroy trust than a company letting sensitive personal data get into the wrong hands.
The current state of affairs may have been encouraged - though not justified - by the lack of legal penalty (in America, but not Europe) for data leakage. Until California recently passed a law, American firms did not have to tell anyone, even the victim, when data went astray. That may change fast: lots of proposed data-security legislation is now doing the rounds in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, the theft of information about some 40 million credit-card accounts in America, disclosed on June 17th, overshadowed a hugely important decision a day earlier by America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that puts corporate America on notice that regulators will act if firms fail to provide adequate data security. | 2832.txt | 0 |
[
"shareholders' interests should be properly attended to.",
"information protection should be given due attention.",
"businesses should enhance their level of accounting security.",
"the market value of customer data should be emphasized."
] | In bringing up the concept of GASP the author is making the point that | It never rains but it pours. Just as bosses and boards have finally sorted out their worst accounting and compliance troubles, and improved their feeble corporation governance, a new problem threatens to earn them - especially in America - the sort of nasty headlines that inevitably lead to heads rolling in the executive suite: data insecurity. Left, until now, to odd, low-level IT staff to put right, and seen as a concern only of data-rich industries such as banking, telecoms and air travel, information protection is now high on the boss's agenda in businesses of every variety.
Several massive leakages of customer and employee data this year - from organizations as diverse as Time Warner, the American defense contractor Science Applications International Corp and even the University of California, Berkeley - have left managers hurriedly peering into their intricate IT systems and business processes in search of potential vulnerabilities.
"Data is becoming an asset which needs to be guarded as much as any other asset," says Haim Mendelson of Stanford University's business school. "The ability to guard customer data is the key to market value, which the board is responsible for on behalf of shareholders." Indeed, just as there is the concept of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), perhaps it is time for GASP, Generally Accepted Security Practices, suggested Eli Noam of New York's Columbia Business School. "Setting the proper investment level for security, redundancy, and recovery is a management issue, not a technical one," he says.
The mystery is that this should come as a surprise to any boss. Surely it should be obvious to the dimmest executive that trust, that most valuable of economic assets, is easily destroyed and hugely expensive to restore - and that few things are more likely to destroy trust than a company letting sensitive personal data get into the wrong hands.
The current state of affairs may have been encouraged - though not justified - by the lack of legal penalty (in America, but not Europe) for data leakage. Until California recently passed a law, American firms did not have to tell anyone, even the victim, when data went astray. That may change fast: lots of proposed data-security legislation is now doing the rounds in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, the theft of information about some 40 million credit-card accounts in America, disclosed on June 17th, overshadowed a hugely important decision a day earlier by America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that puts corporate America on notice that regulators will act if firms fail to provide adequate data security. | 2832.txt | 1 |
[
"see the link between trust and data protection.",
"perceive the sensitivity of personal data.",
"realize the high cost of data restoration.",
"appreciate the economic value of trust."
] | According to Paragraph 4, what puzzles the author is that some bosses fail to | It never rains but it pours. Just as bosses and boards have finally sorted out their worst accounting and compliance troubles, and improved their feeble corporation governance, a new problem threatens to earn them - especially in America - the sort of nasty headlines that inevitably lead to heads rolling in the executive suite: data insecurity. Left, until now, to odd, low-level IT staff to put right, and seen as a concern only of data-rich industries such as banking, telecoms and air travel, information protection is now high on the boss's agenda in businesses of every variety.
Several massive leakages of customer and employee data this year - from organizations as diverse as Time Warner, the American defense contractor Science Applications International Corp and even the University of California, Berkeley - have left managers hurriedly peering into their intricate IT systems and business processes in search of potential vulnerabilities.
"Data is becoming an asset which needs to be guarded as much as any other asset," says Haim Mendelson of Stanford University's business school. "The ability to guard customer data is the key to market value, which the board is responsible for on behalf of shareholders." Indeed, just as there is the concept of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), perhaps it is time for GASP, Generally Accepted Security Practices, suggested Eli Noam of New York's Columbia Business School. "Setting the proper investment level for security, redundancy, and recovery is a management issue, not a technical one," he says.
The mystery is that this should come as a surprise to any boss. Surely it should be obvious to the dimmest executive that trust, that most valuable of economic assets, is easily destroyed and hugely expensive to restore - and that few things are more likely to destroy trust than a company letting sensitive personal data get into the wrong hands.
The current state of affairs may have been encouraged - though not justified - by the lack of legal penalty (in America, but not Europe) for data leakage. Until California recently passed a law, American firms did not have to tell anyone, even the victim, when data went astray. That may change fast: lots of proposed data-security legislation is now doing the rounds in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, the theft of information about some 40 million credit-card accounts in America, disclosed on June 17th, overshadowed a hugely important decision a day earlier by America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that puts corporate America on notice that regulators will act if firms fail to provide adequate data security. | 2832.txt | 0 |
[
"data leakage is more severe in Europe.",
"FTC's decision is essential to data security.",
"California takes the lead in security legislation.",
"legal penalty is a major solution to data leakage."
] | It can be inferred from Paragraph 5 that | It never rains but it pours. Just as bosses and boards have finally sorted out their worst accounting and compliance troubles, and improved their feeble corporation governance, a new problem threatens to earn them - especially in America - the sort of nasty headlines that inevitably lead to heads rolling in the executive suite: data insecurity. Left, until now, to odd, low-level IT staff to put right, and seen as a concern only of data-rich industries such as banking, telecoms and air travel, information protection is now high on the boss's agenda in businesses of every variety.
Several massive leakages of customer and employee data this year - from organizations as diverse as Time Warner, the American defense contractor Science Applications International Corp and even the University of California, Berkeley - have left managers hurriedly peering into their intricate IT systems and business processes in search of potential vulnerabilities.
"Data is becoming an asset which needs to be guarded as much as any other asset," says Haim Mendelson of Stanford University's business school. "The ability to guard customer data is the key to market value, which the board is responsible for on behalf of shareholders." Indeed, just as there is the concept of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), perhaps it is time for GASP, Generally Accepted Security Practices, suggested Eli Noam of New York's Columbia Business School. "Setting the proper investment level for security, redundancy, and recovery is a management issue, not a technical one," he says.
The mystery is that this should come as a surprise to any boss. Surely it should be obvious to the dimmest executive that trust, that most valuable of economic assets, is easily destroyed and hugely expensive to restore - and that few things are more likely to destroy trust than a company letting sensitive personal data get into the wrong hands.
The current state of affairs may have been encouraged - though not justified - by the lack of legal penalty (in America, but not Europe) for data leakage. Until California recently passed a law, American firms did not have to tell anyone, even the victim, when data went astray. That may change fast: lots of proposed data-security legislation is now doing the rounds in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, the theft of information about some 40 million credit-card accounts in America, disclosed on June 17th, overshadowed a hugely important decision a day earlier by America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that puts corporate America on notice that regulators will act if firms fail to provide adequate data security. | 2832.txt | 3 |
[
"the relation between insurance and society",
"accidents and losses",
"business failures",
"the importance of insurance to business"
] | This selection deals mainly with _ . | In today's world, insurance plays a vital role in the economic and social welfare of the entire population. The wish to guard against dangers to life and property is basic to human nature. By using various kinds of insurance, society has been able to reduce the effects of such hazards.
Nowhere is insurance more important than in the management of a business. In many instances, losses in a small firm can mean the difference between growth and failure, vitality and stagnation.Very few small businesses have even a portion of the financial resources available to larger enterprises. Frequently, they must operate on a very slight margin if they hope to stay in business. And thus, they are particularly sensitive to unexpected losses.
Without enough insurance, what happens to such a firm when the owner dies or is suddenly disabled? When a fire breaks out and destroys the firm's building or stock? When an employee is found to have stolen company funds? When a customer is awarded a liability judgment for an accident? Too often, the business is forced to the wall, its future operations drastically curbed; sometimes, it is damaged beyond repair, its ability to continue completely crushed.
Almost always, a small businessman would find it impossible to handle the full burden of his potential risk. The amount of money he would have to set aside to cover possible losses would leave him nothing, or almost nothing, to run his business with. If loss were to occur which he could repair by using his reserve fund, what assurance would he have that another loss-the same kind or different-might not occur next week, next month? But then he would have no reserve fund and little likelihood of staying in business at all. | 945.txt | 3 |
[
"driven to despair",
"staying in a strong position",
"doing well",
"climbing up"
] | In Paragraph 3, "forced to the wall" means " _ ". | In today's world, insurance plays a vital role in the economic and social welfare of the entire population. The wish to guard against dangers to life and property is basic to human nature. By using various kinds of insurance, society has been able to reduce the effects of such hazards.
Nowhere is insurance more important than in the management of a business. In many instances, losses in a small firm can mean the difference between growth and failure, vitality and stagnation.Very few small businesses have even a portion of the financial resources available to larger enterprises. Frequently, they must operate on a very slight margin if they hope to stay in business. And thus, they are particularly sensitive to unexpected losses.
Without enough insurance, what happens to such a firm when the owner dies or is suddenly disabled? When a fire breaks out and destroys the firm's building or stock? When an employee is found to have stolen company funds? When a customer is awarded a liability judgment for an accident? Too often, the business is forced to the wall, its future operations drastically curbed; sometimes, it is damaged beyond repair, its ability to continue completely crushed.
Almost always, a small businessman would find it impossible to handle the full burden of his potential risk. The amount of money he would have to set aside to cover possible losses would leave him nothing, or almost nothing, to run his business with. If loss were to occur which he could repair by using his reserve fund, what assurance would he have that another loss-the same kind or different-might not occur next week, next month? But then he would have no reserve fund and little likelihood of staying in business at all. | 945.txt | 0 |
[
"accidents always happen",
"a businessman should take risks",
"businesses should have adequate insurance",
"insurance is a social welfare project"
] | The author thinks that _ . | In today's world, insurance plays a vital role in the economic and social welfare of the entire population. The wish to guard against dangers to life and property is basic to human nature. By using various kinds of insurance, society has been able to reduce the effects of such hazards.
Nowhere is insurance more important than in the management of a business. In many instances, losses in a small firm can mean the difference between growth and failure, vitality and stagnation.Very few small businesses have even a portion of the financial resources available to larger enterprises. Frequently, they must operate on a very slight margin if they hope to stay in business. And thus, they are particularly sensitive to unexpected losses.
Without enough insurance, what happens to such a firm when the owner dies or is suddenly disabled? When a fire breaks out and destroys the firm's building or stock? When an employee is found to have stolen company funds? When a customer is awarded a liability judgment for an accident? Too often, the business is forced to the wall, its future operations drastically curbed; sometimes, it is damaged beyond repair, its ability to continue completely crushed.
Almost always, a small businessman would find it impossible to handle the full burden of his potential risk. The amount of money he would have to set aside to cover possible losses would leave him nothing, or almost nothing, to run his business with. If loss were to occur which he could repair by using his reserve fund, what assurance would he have that another loss-the same kind or different-might not occur next week, next month? But then he would have no reserve fund and little likelihood of staying in business at all. | 945.txt | 2 |
[
"free some business funds",
"add to benefits for employees",
"relieve some management problems",
"provide for unexpected incidents"
] | Adequate insurance will do all of the following EXCEPT that it will _ . | In today's world, insurance plays a vital role in the economic and social welfare of the entire population. The wish to guard against dangers to life and property is basic to human nature. By using various kinds of insurance, society has been able to reduce the effects of such hazards.
Nowhere is insurance more important than in the management of a business. In many instances, losses in a small firm can mean the difference between growth and failure, vitality and stagnation.Very few small businesses have even a portion of the financial resources available to larger enterprises. Frequently, they must operate on a very slight margin if they hope to stay in business. And thus, they are particularly sensitive to unexpected losses.
Without enough insurance, what happens to such a firm when the owner dies or is suddenly disabled? When a fire breaks out and destroys the firm's building or stock? When an employee is found to have stolen company funds? When a customer is awarded a liability judgment for an accident? Too often, the business is forced to the wall, its future operations drastically curbed; sometimes, it is damaged beyond repair, its ability to continue completely crushed.
Almost always, a small businessman would find it impossible to handle the full burden of his potential risk. The amount of money he would have to set aside to cover possible losses would leave him nothing, or almost nothing, to run his business with. If loss were to occur which he could repair by using his reserve fund, what assurance would he have that another loss-the same kind or different-might not occur next week, next month? But then he would have no reserve fund and little likelihood of staying in business at all. | 945.txt | 1 |
[
"checked",
"advanced",
"expanded",
"disturbed"
] | The word "curbed" in Paragraph 3 is nearest in meaning to _ . | In today's world, insurance plays a vital role in the economic and social welfare of the entire population. The wish to guard against dangers to life and property is basic to human nature. By using various kinds of insurance, society has been able to reduce the effects of such hazards.
Nowhere is insurance more important than in the management of a business. In many instances, losses in a small firm can mean the difference between growth and failure, vitality and stagnation.Very few small businesses have even a portion of the financial resources available to larger enterprises. Frequently, they must operate on a very slight margin if they hope to stay in business. And thus, they are particularly sensitive to unexpected losses.
Without enough insurance, what happens to such a firm when the owner dies or is suddenly disabled? When a fire breaks out and destroys the firm's building or stock? When an employee is found to have stolen company funds? When a customer is awarded a liability judgment for an accident? Too often, the business is forced to the wall, its future operations drastically curbed; sometimes, it is damaged beyond repair, its ability to continue completely crushed.
Almost always, a small businessman would find it impossible to handle the full burden of his potential risk. The amount of money he would have to set aside to cover possible losses would leave him nothing, or almost nothing, to run his business with. If loss were to occur which he could repair by using his reserve fund, what assurance would he have that another loss-the same kind or different-might not occur next week, next month? But then he would have no reserve fund and little likelihood of staying in business at all. | 945.txt | 0 |
[
"The amount of asphalt that was mined there",
"The chemical and biological interactions between asphalt and animals",
"The fossil remains that have been found there",
"Scientific methods of determining the age of tar pits"
] | What aspect of the La Brea tar pits does the passage mainly discuss? | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 2 |
[
"beautiful design",
"central area",
"basic needs",
"supplies of natural asphalt"
] | In using the phrase "the heart of Los Angeles" in line 2, the author is talking about the city's | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 1 |
[
"predicted",
"announced",
"corrected",
"observed"
] | The word "noticed" in line 5 closest in meaning to | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 3 |
[
"buried beneath",
"twisted together",
"quickly formed",
"easily dated"
] | The word "tangled" in line 10 is closest in meaning to | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 1 |
[
"insects",
"birds",
"cloths",
"proboscideans"
] | The word "them" in line 13 refers to | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 3 |
[
"9",
"17",
"1.5 million",
"2.5 million"
] | How many proboscideans have been found at the La Brea tar pits? | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 1 |
[
"highlighted",
"covered",
"transformed",
"contaminated"
] | The word "concealed" in line 17 is closest in meaning to | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 1 |
[
"To give examples of animals that are classified as carnivores",
"To specify the animals found least commonly at La Brea",
"To argue that these animals were especially likely to avoid extinction.",
"To define the term \"scavengers\""
] | Why does the author mention animals such as coyotes and wolves in paragraph 4? | Prehistoric mammoths have been preserved in the famous tar pits of Rancho La Brea (Brea is the Spanish word for tar) in what is now the heart of Los Angeles, California. These tar pits have been known for centuries and were formerly mined for their natural asphalt, a black or brown petroleum-like substance. Thousands of tons were extracted before 1875, when it was first noticed that the tar contained fossil remains. Major excavations were undertaken that established the significance of this remarkable site. The tar pits were found to contain the remains of scores of species of animals from the last 30,000 years of the Ice Age.
Since then, over 100 tons of fossils, 1.5 million from vertebrates, 2.5 million from invertebrates, have been recovered, often in densely concentrated and tangled masses. The creatures found range from insects and birds to giant ground sloth's, but a total of 17 proboscides (animals with a proboscis or long nose) - including mastodons and Columbian mammoths - have been recovered, most of them from Pit 9, the deepest bone-bearing deposit, which was excavated in 1914. Most of the fossils date to between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The asphalt at La Brea seeps to the surface, especially in the summer, and forms shallow puddles that would often have been concealed by leaves and dust. Unwary animals would become trapped on these thin sheets of liquid asphalt, which are extremely sticky in warm weather. Stuck, the unfortunate beasts would die of exhaustion and hunger or fall prey to predators that often also became stuck.
As the animals decayed, more scavengers would be attracted and caught in their turn. Carnivores greatly outnumber herbivores in the collection: for every large herbivore, there is one saber-tooth cat, a coyote, and four wolves. The fact that some bones are heavily weathered shows that some bodies remained above the surface for weeks or months. Bacteria in the asphalt would have consumed some of the tissues other than bones, and the asphalt itself would dissolve what was left, at the same time impregnating and beautifully preserving the saturated bones, rendering them dark brown and shiny. | 2102.txt | 0 |
[
"evolution in its true sense as to the origin of the universe",
"a notion of the creation of religion",
"the scientific explanation of the earth formation",
"the deceptive theory about the origin of the universe"
] | "Creationism" in the passage refers to . | Rumor has it that more than 20 books on creationism/evolution are in the publisher's pipelines. A few have already appeared. The goal of all will be to try to explain to a confused and often unenlightened citizenry that there are not two equally valid scientific theories for the origin and evolution of universe and life. Cosmology, geology, and biology have provided a consistent, unified, and constantly improving account of what happened. "Scientific" creationism, which is being pushed by some for "equal time" in the classrooms whenever the scientific accounts of evolution are given, is based on religion, not science. Virtually all scientists and the majority of non-fundamentalist religious leaders have come to regard "scientific" creationism as bad science and bad religion.
The first four chapters of Kitcher's book give a very brief introduction to evolution. At appropriate places, he introduces the criticisms of the creationists and provides answers. In the last three chapters, he takes off his gloves and gives the creationists a good beating. He describes their programmes and tactics, and, for those unfamiliar with the ways of creationists, the extent of their deception and distortion may come as an unpleasant surprise. When their basic motivation is religious, one might have expected more Christian behavior.
Kitcher is a philosopher, and this may account, in part, for the clarity and effectiveness of his arguments. The non-specialist will be able to obtain at least a notion of the sorts of data and argument that support evolutionary theory. The final chapter on the creationists will be extremely clear to all. On the dust jacket of this fine book, Stephen Jay Gould says: "This book stands for reason itself." And so it does -- and all would be well were reason the only judge in the creationism/evolution debate. | 1288.txt | 3 |
[
"recommend the views of the evolutionists",
"expose the true features of creationists",
"curse bitterly at this opponents",
"launch a surprise attack on creationists"
] | Kitcher's book is intended to . | Rumor has it that more than 20 books on creationism/evolution are in the publisher's pipelines. A few have already appeared. The goal of all will be to try to explain to a confused and often unenlightened citizenry that there are not two equally valid scientific theories for the origin and evolution of universe and life. Cosmology, geology, and biology have provided a consistent, unified, and constantly improving account of what happened. "Scientific" creationism, which is being pushed by some for "equal time" in the classrooms whenever the scientific accounts of evolution are given, is based on religion, not science. Virtually all scientists and the majority of non-fundamentalist religious leaders have come to regard "scientific" creationism as bad science and bad religion.
The first four chapters of Kitcher's book give a very brief introduction to evolution. At appropriate places, he introduces the criticisms of the creationists and provides answers. In the last three chapters, he takes off his gloves and gives the creationists a good beating. He describes their programmes and tactics, and, for those unfamiliar with the ways of creationists, the extent of their deception and distortion may come as an unpleasant surprise. When their basic motivation is religious, one might have expected more Christian behavior.
Kitcher is a philosopher, and this may account, in part, for the clarity and effectiveness of his arguments. The non-specialist will be able to obtain at least a notion of the sorts of data and argument that support evolutionary theory. The final chapter on the creationists will be extremely clear to all. On the dust jacket of this fine book, Stephen Jay Gould says: "This book stands for reason itself." And so it does -- and all would be well were reason the only judge in the creationism/evolution debate. | 1288.txt | 1 |
[
"reasoning has played a decisive role in the debate",
"creationists do not base their argument on reasoning",
"evolutionary theory is too difficult for non-specialists",
"creationism is supported by scientific findings"
] | From the passage we can infer that . | Rumor has it that more than 20 books on creationism/evolution are in the publisher's pipelines. A few have already appeared. The goal of all will be to try to explain to a confused and often unenlightened citizenry that there are not two equally valid scientific theories for the origin and evolution of universe and life. Cosmology, geology, and biology have provided a consistent, unified, and constantly improving account of what happened. "Scientific" creationism, which is being pushed by some for "equal time" in the classrooms whenever the scientific accounts of evolution are given, is based on religion, not science. Virtually all scientists and the majority of non-fundamentalist religious leaders have come to regard "scientific" creationism as bad science and bad religion.
The first four chapters of Kitcher's book give a very brief introduction to evolution. At appropriate places, he introduces the criticisms of the creationists and provides answers. In the last three chapters, he takes off his gloves and gives the creationists a good beating. He describes their programmes and tactics, and, for those unfamiliar with the ways of creationists, the extent of their deception and distortion may come as an unpleasant surprise. When their basic motivation is religious, one might have expected more Christian behavior.
Kitcher is a philosopher, and this may account, in part, for the clarity and effectiveness of his arguments. The non-specialist will be able to obtain at least a notion of the sorts of data and argument that support evolutionary theory. The final chapter on the creationists will be extremely clear to all. On the dust jacket of this fine book, Stephen Jay Gould says: "This book stands for reason itself." And so it does -- and all would be well were reason the only judge in the creationism/evolution debate. | 1288.txt | 1 |
[
"a book review",
"a scientific paper",
"a magazine feature",
"a newspaper editorial"
] | This passage appears to be a digest of . | Rumor has it that more than 20 books on creationism/evolution are in the publisher's pipelines. A few have already appeared. The goal of all will be to try to explain to a confused and often unenlightened citizenry that there are not two equally valid scientific theories for the origin and evolution of universe and life. Cosmology, geology, and biology have provided a consistent, unified, and constantly improving account of what happened. "Scientific" creationism, which is being pushed by some for "equal time" in the classrooms whenever the scientific accounts of evolution are given, is based on religion, not science. Virtually all scientists and the majority of non-fundamentalist religious leaders have come to regard "scientific" creationism as bad science and bad religion.
The first four chapters of Kitcher's book give a very brief introduction to evolution. At appropriate places, he introduces the criticisms of the creationists and provides answers. In the last three chapters, he takes off his gloves and gives the creationists a good beating. He describes their programmes and tactics, and, for those unfamiliar with the ways of creationists, the extent of their deception and distortion may come as an unpleasant surprise. When their basic motivation is religious, one might have expected more Christian behavior.
Kitcher is a philosopher, and this may account, in part, for the clarity and effectiveness of his arguments. The non-specialist will be able to obtain at least a notion of the sorts of data and argument that support evolutionary theory. The final chapter on the creationists will be extremely clear to all. On the dust jacket of this fine book, Stephen Jay Gould says: "This book stands for reason itself." And so it does -- and all would be well were reason the only judge in the creationism/evolution debate. | 1288.txt | 0 |
[
"began much later",
"has developed more slowly",
"is less useful",
"was less controversial"
] | Compared with genetic engineering of food crops, genetic engineering of trees _ . | If you go down to the woods today, you may meet high-tech trees genetically modified to speed their growthor improve the quality of their wood. Genetically-engineered food crops have become increasingly common, albeit controversial. over the past ten years. But genetic engineering of trees has lagged behind.
Part of the reason is technical. Understandng. and then altering, the genes of a big pine tree are more complex than creating a better tomato. While tomatoes sprout happily, and rapidly, in the laboratory, growing a whole tree from a single, genetically altered cell in a test tube is a tricky process that takes years, not months. Moreover. little is known about tree genes. Some trees, such as pine trees. have a lot of DNA-roughly ten times as much as human. And, whereas the Human Genome Project is more than half-way throughits task of isolating and sequencing the estimated 100,00 genes in human cells. similar efforts to analyzetree genes are still just saplings .
Given the large number of tree genes and the little that is known about them, tree engineers are starting with a search for genetic "markers". The first step is to isolate DNA from trees with desirable propertiessuch as insect resistance. The next step is to find stretches of DNA that show the presence of a particular gene. Then, when you mate two trees with different desirable properties, it is simple to check which offspring contain them all by looking for the genetic markers. Henry Amerson, at North Carolina State University, is using genetic markers to breed fungal resistance into southern pines. Billions of these are grown across America for pulp and paper, and outbreaks of disease are expensive. But not all individual trees are susceptible. Dr. Amerson's group has found markers that distinguish fungus-resistant stock from disease-prone trees.Using traditional breeding techniques, they are introducing the resistance genes into pines on test sites in America.
Using generic markers speeds up old-fashioned breeding methods becauseyou no longer have to wait for the tree to grow up to see if it has the desiredtraits. But it is more a sophisticated form of selective breeding. Now. however.interest in genetic tinkering is also gaining ground. To this end, Dr.Amerson and his colleagues are taking part in the Pine Gene Discovery Project. an initiative to identify and sequence the 50,000-odd genes in the pine tree's genome. Knowing which gene does what should make it easier to know what to alter. | 184.txt | 1 |
[
"Time-consuming.",
"Worthwhile.",
"Significant.",
"Technically impossible."
] | What does the author think about the genetic engineering of pine trees? | If you go down to the woods today, you may meet high-tech trees genetically modified to speed their growthor improve the quality of their wood. Genetically-engineered food crops have become increasingly common, albeit controversial. over the past ten years. But genetic engineering of trees has lagged behind.
Part of the reason is technical. Understandng. and then altering, the genes of a big pine tree are more complex than creating a better tomato. While tomatoes sprout happily, and rapidly, in the laboratory, growing a whole tree from a single, genetically altered cell in a test tube is a tricky process that takes years, not months. Moreover. little is known about tree genes. Some trees, such as pine trees. have a lot of DNA-roughly ten times as much as human. And, whereas the Human Genome Project is more than half-way throughits task of isolating and sequencing the estimated 100,00 genes in human cells. similar efforts to analyzetree genes are still just saplings .
Given the large number of tree genes and the little that is known about them, tree engineers are starting with a search for genetic "markers". The first step is to isolate DNA from trees with desirable propertiessuch as insect resistance. The next step is to find stretches of DNA that show the presence of a particular gene. Then, when you mate two trees with different desirable properties, it is simple to check which offspring contain them all by looking for the genetic markers. Henry Amerson, at North Carolina State University, is using genetic markers to breed fungal resistance into southern pines. Billions of these are grown across America for pulp and paper, and outbreaks of disease are expensive. But not all individual trees are susceptible. Dr. Amerson's group has found markers that distinguish fungus-resistant stock from disease-prone trees.Using traditional breeding techniques, they are introducing the resistance genes into pines on test sites in America.
Using generic markers speeds up old-fashioned breeding methods becauseyou no longer have to wait for the tree to grow up to see if it has the desiredtraits. But it is more a sophisticated form of selective breeding. Now. however.interest in genetic tinkering is also gaining ground. To this end, Dr.Amerson and his colleagues are taking part in the Pine Gene Discovery Project. an initiative to identify and sequence the 50,000-odd genes in the pine tree's genome. Knowing which gene does what should make it easier to know what to alter. | 184.txt | 1 |
[
"The research methods are the same as the analysis of human genes.",
"The findings are expected to be as fruitful as the analysis of human genes.",
"It will take as much time and effort as the analyst, of human genes.",
"The research has been mainly concentrated on the genes of young trees."
] | What can we learn about the research on tree genes? | If you go down to the woods today, you may meet high-tech trees genetically modified to speed their growthor improve the quality of their wood. Genetically-engineered food crops have become increasingly common, albeit controversial. over the past ten years. But genetic engineering of trees has lagged behind.
Part of the reason is technical. Understandng. and then altering, the genes of a big pine tree are more complex than creating a better tomato. While tomatoes sprout happily, and rapidly, in the laboratory, growing a whole tree from a single, genetically altered cell in a test tube is a tricky process that takes years, not months. Moreover. little is known about tree genes. Some trees, such as pine trees. have a lot of DNA-roughly ten times as much as human. And, whereas the Human Genome Project is more than half-way throughits task of isolating and sequencing the estimated 100,00 genes in human cells. similar efforts to analyzetree genes are still just saplings .
Given the large number of tree genes and the little that is known about them, tree engineers are starting with a search for genetic "markers". The first step is to isolate DNA from trees with desirable propertiessuch as insect resistance. The next step is to find stretches of DNA that show the presence of a particular gene. Then, when you mate two trees with different desirable properties, it is simple to check which offspring contain them all by looking for the genetic markers. Henry Amerson, at North Carolina State University, is using genetic markers to breed fungal resistance into southern pines. Billions of these are grown across America for pulp and paper, and outbreaks of disease are expensive. But not all individual trees are susceptible. Dr. Amerson's group has found markers that distinguish fungus-resistant stock from disease-prone trees.Using traditional breeding techniques, they are introducing the resistance genes into pines on test sites in America.
Using generic markers speeds up old-fashioned breeding methods becauseyou no longer have to wait for the tree to grow up to see if it has the desiredtraits. But it is more a sophisticated form of selective breeding. Now. however.interest in genetic tinkering is also gaining ground. To this end, Dr.Amerson and his colleagues are taking part in the Pine Gene Discovery Project. an initiative to identify and sequence the 50,000-odd genes in the pine tree's genome. Knowing which gene does what should make it easier to know what to alter. | 184.txt | 0 |
[
"southern pines cannot resist fungus",
"all southern pines are not susceptible",
"the genetic marker in southern pines was the easiest to identify",
"fungus-resistant genes came originally from outside the U.S.A."
] | It is discovered by Henry Amerson's team that _ . | If you go down to the woods today, you may meet high-tech trees genetically modified to speed their growthor improve the quality of their wood. Genetically-engineered food crops have become increasingly common, albeit controversial. over the past ten years. But genetic engineering of trees has lagged behind.
Part of the reason is technical. Understandng. and then altering, the genes of a big pine tree are more complex than creating a better tomato. While tomatoes sprout happily, and rapidly, in the laboratory, growing a whole tree from a single, genetically altered cell in a test tube is a tricky process that takes years, not months. Moreover. little is known about tree genes. Some trees, such as pine trees. have a lot of DNA-roughly ten times as much as human. And, whereas the Human Genome Project is more than half-way throughits task of isolating and sequencing the estimated 100,00 genes in human cells. similar efforts to analyzetree genes are still just saplings .
Given the large number of tree genes and the little that is known about them, tree engineers are starting with a search for genetic "markers". The first step is to isolate DNA from trees with desirable propertiessuch as insect resistance. The next step is to find stretches of DNA that show the presence of a particular gene. Then, when you mate two trees with different desirable properties, it is simple to check which offspring contain them all by looking for the genetic markers. Henry Amerson, at North Carolina State University, is using genetic markers to breed fungal resistance into southern pines. Billions of these are grown across America for pulp and paper, and outbreaks of disease are expensive. But not all individual trees are susceptible. Dr. Amerson's group has found markers that distinguish fungus-resistant stock from disease-prone trees.Using traditional breeding techniques, they are introducing the resistance genes into pines on test sites in America.
Using generic markers speeds up old-fashioned breeding methods becauseyou no longer have to wait for the tree to grow up to see if it has the desiredtraits. But it is more a sophisticated form of selective breeding. Now. however.interest in genetic tinkering is also gaining ground. To this end, Dr.Amerson and his colleagues are taking part in the Pine Gene Discovery Project. an initiative to identify and sequence the 50,000-odd genes in the pine tree's genome. Knowing which gene does what should make it easier to know what to alter. | 184.txt | 1 |
[
"To speed up old-Fashioned breeding methods.",
"To identify all the genes in the pine tree's genome.",
"To find out what desired traits the pine trees have.",
"To make it easier to know which gene needs altering."
] | What is the primary objective of carrying out the Pine Gene Discovery Project? | If you go down to the woods today, you may meet high-tech trees genetically modified to speed their growthor improve the quality of their wood. Genetically-engineered food crops have become increasingly common, albeit controversial. over the past ten years. But genetic engineering of trees has lagged behind.
Part of the reason is technical. Understandng. and then altering, the genes of a big pine tree are more complex than creating a better tomato. While tomatoes sprout happily, and rapidly, in the laboratory, growing a whole tree from a single, genetically altered cell in a test tube is a tricky process that takes years, not months. Moreover. little is known about tree genes. Some trees, such as pine trees. have a lot of DNA-roughly ten times as much as human. And, whereas the Human Genome Project is more than half-way throughits task of isolating and sequencing the estimated 100,00 genes in human cells. similar efforts to analyzetree genes are still just saplings .
Given the large number of tree genes and the little that is known about them, tree engineers are starting with a search for genetic "markers". The first step is to isolate DNA from trees with desirable propertiessuch as insect resistance. The next step is to find stretches of DNA that show the presence of a particular gene. Then, when you mate two trees with different desirable properties, it is simple to check which offspring contain them all by looking for the genetic markers. Henry Amerson, at North Carolina State University, is using genetic markers to breed fungal resistance into southern pines. Billions of these are grown across America for pulp and paper, and outbreaks of disease are expensive. But not all individual trees are susceptible. Dr. Amerson's group has found markers that distinguish fungus-resistant stock from disease-prone trees.Using traditional breeding techniques, they are introducing the resistance genes into pines on test sites in America.
Using generic markers speeds up old-fashioned breeding methods becauseyou no longer have to wait for the tree to grow up to see if it has the desiredtraits. But it is more a sophisticated form of selective breeding. Now. however.interest in genetic tinkering is also gaining ground. To this end, Dr.Amerson and his colleagues are taking part in the Pine Gene Discovery Project. an initiative to identify and sequence the 50,000-odd genes in the pine tree's genome. Knowing which gene does what should make it easier to know what to alter. | 184.txt | 1 |
[
"cheaper than the new oil",
"more quickly",
"more expensive",
"as good as the new oil"
] | The manager thought of adding chemicals to the fish oil to make it _ . | When Johnson called again, the manager received him very politely. "That is a most remarkable oil you brought us, Mr Johnson," he said. Johnson nodded his smooth, dark head. That was something he knew very well. "I've never seen anything like it," the manager admitted. Johnson nodded again. "No?" he said politely. Then he added, "But I think you will, sir. A very great deal of it." He appeared to think for a moment. "I think you will find it will be on sale seven, perhaps, eight years from now." He smiled.
The manager thought that was uncertain. He said, "It is better than our fish oils. I admit that." "So I am told, sir," agreed Johnson.
"Have you any plans to produce it yourself, Mr Johnson?"
Johnson smiled again. "Would I be showing it to you if I had?"
"We might add some chemicals to one of our own fish oils," said the manager.
"It would be expensive to do that, even if you could." Johnson said gently. "Besides," he added, "I am told that this oil will be much cheaper than your best fish oils. Cheaper than any vegetable oil, in fact."
"Perhaps," said the manager. "Well, I suppose you want to make an arrangement, Mr Johnson, Shall we discuss it?"
"Of course," said Johnson. "There are two ways of dealing with a situation of this sort. The usual one is to prevent it altogether or at least to delay it as long as possible. That is, of course, the best way," The manager nodded. He knew plenty about all that.
"But I am so sorry for you, because, you see, that is not possible this time." The manager had his doubts, but all he said was an inquiring(asking), "Oh?"
"The other way," continued Johnson, "is to produce yourself before the trouble starts." | 987.txt | 3 |
[
"more expensive than fish oil, but better",
"less expensive, and better",
"less expensive, but not good",
"more expensive, and not so good"
] | Johnson's new oil would be _ . | When Johnson called again, the manager received him very politely. "That is a most remarkable oil you brought us, Mr Johnson," he said. Johnson nodded his smooth, dark head. That was something he knew very well. "I've never seen anything like it," the manager admitted. Johnson nodded again. "No?" he said politely. Then he added, "But I think you will, sir. A very great deal of it." He appeared to think for a moment. "I think you will find it will be on sale seven, perhaps, eight years from now." He smiled.
The manager thought that was uncertain. He said, "It is better than our fish oils. I admit that." "So I am told, sir," agreed Johnson.
"Have you any plans to produce it yourself, Mr Johnson?"
Johnson smiled again. "Would I be showing it to you if I had?"
"We might add some chemicals to one of our own fish oils," said the manager.
"It would be expensive to do that, even if you could." Johnson said gently. "Besides," he added, "I am told that this oil will be much cheaper than your best fish oils. Cheaper than any vegetable oil, in fact."
"Perhaps," said the manager. "Well, I suppose you want to make an arrangement, Mr Johnson, Shall we discuss it?"
"Of course," said Johnson. "There are two ways of dealing with a situation of this sort. The usual one is to prevent it altogether or at least to delay it as long as possible. That is, of course, the best way," The manager nodded. He knew plenty about all that.
"But I am so sorry for you, because, you see, that is not possible this time." The manager had his doubts, but all he said was an inquiring(asking), "Oh?"
"The other way," continued Johnson, "is to produce yourself before the trouble starts." | 987.txt | 1 |
[
"could not stop the new oil being made",
"would never know how to make it",
"had spent a lot of money on it",
"didn't know enough about it"
] | Johnson expressed his regret that the manager _ . | When Johnson called again, the manager received him very politely. "That is a most remarkable oil you brought us, Mr Johnson," he said. Johnson nodded his smooth, dark head. That was something he knew very well. "I've never seen anything like it," the manager admitted. Johnson nodded again. "No?" he said politely. Then he added, "But I think you will, sir. A very great deal of it." He appeared to think for a moment. "I think you will find it will be on sale seven, perhaps, eight years from now." He smiled.
The manager thought that was uncertain. He said, "It is better than our fish oils. I admit that." "So I am told, sir," agreed Johnson.
"Have you any plans to produce it yourself, Mr Johnson?"
Johnson smiled again. "Would I be showing it to you if I had?"
"We might add some chemicals to one of our own fish oils," said the manager.
"It would be expensive to do that, even if you could." Johnson said gently. "Besides," he added, "I am told that this oil will be much cheaper than your best fish oils. Cheaper than any vegetable oil, in fact."
"Perhaps," said the manager. "Well, I suppose you want to make an arrangement, Mr Johnson, Shall we discuss it?"
"Of course," said Johnson. "There are two ways of dealing with a situation of this sort. The usual one is to prevent it altogether or at least to delay it as long as possible. That is, of course, the best way," The manager nodded. He knew plenty about all that.
"But I am so sorry for you, because, you see, that is not possible this time." The manager had his doubts, but all he said was an inquiring(asking), "Oh?"
"The other way," continued Johnson, "is to produce yourself before the trouble starts." | 987.txt | 0 |
[
"to produce it himself",
"to prevent it being produced",
"to be paid not to produce it",
"the manager to produce it"
] | Johnson showed his new oil to the manager because he wanted _ . | When Johnson called again, the manager received him very politely. "That is a most remarkable oil you brought us, Mr Johnson," he said. Johnson nodded his smooth, dark head. That was something he knew very well. "I've never seen anything like it," the manager admitted. Johnson nodded again. "No?" he said politely. Then he added, "But I think you will, sir. A very great deal of it." He appeared to think for a moment. "I think you will find it will be on sale seven, perhaps, eight years from now." He smiled.
The manager thought that was uncertain. He said, "It is better than our fish oils. I admit that." "So I am told, sir," agreed Johnson.
"Have you any plans to produce it yourself, Mr Johnson?"
Johnson smiled again. "Would I be showing it to you if I had?"
"We might add some chemicals to one of our own fish oils," said the manager.
"It would be expensive to do that, even if you could." Johnson said gently. "Besides," he added, "I am told that this oil will be much cheaper than your best fish oils. Cheaper than any vegetable oil, in fact."
"Perhaps," said the manager. "Well, I suppose you want to make an arrangement, Mr Johnson, Shall we discuss it?"
"Of course," said Johnson. "There are two ways of dealing with a situation of this sort. The usual one is to prevent it altogether or at least to delay it as long as possible. That is, of course, the best way," The manager nodded. He knew plenty about all that.
"But I am so sorry for you, because, you see, that is not possible this time." The manager had his doubts, but all he said was an inquiring(asking), "Oh?"
"The other way," continued Johnson, "is to produce yourself before the trouble starts." | 987.txt | 3 |
[
"Bodily Communication",
"Spoken Language",
"Bodily Actions",
"Conversation"
] | The best title for the passage would be _ . | What do we think with? Only the brain? Hardly. The brain is like a telephone exchange. It is the switchboard, but not the whole system. Its function is to receive incoming signals, make proper connection, and send the messages through to their destination. For efficient service, the body must function as a whole.
But where is the "mind"? Is it in the brain? Or perhaps in the nervous system? After all, can we say that the mind is in any particular place? It is not a thing, like a leg, or even the brain. It is a function, an activity. Aristotle, twenty-three hundred years ago, observed that the mind was to the body what cutting was to the ax. When the ax is not in use, there is no cutting. So with the mind. "Mind," said Charles H. Woolbert, "is what the body is doing. "
If this activity is necessary for thinking, it is also necessary for carrying thought from one person to another. Observe how people go about the business of ordinary conversation. If you have never done this painstakingly, you have a surprise in store, for good conversationalists are almost constantly in motion. Their heads are continually nodding and shaking sometimes so vigorously that you wonder how their necks can stand the strain.
Even the legs and feet are active. As for the hands and arms, they are seldom still for more than a few seconds at a time.
These people, remember, are not making speeches. They are merely common folk trying to make others understand what they have in mind. They are not conscious of movement. Their speech is not studied. They are just human creatures in a human environment, trying to adapt themselves to a social situation. Yet they converse, not only with oral language, but with visible actions that involve practically every muscle in the body.
In short, because people really think all over, a speaker must talk all over if he succeeds in making people think. | 955.txt | 0 |
[
"Thinking is a social phenomenon.",
"Thinking is solely a brain function.",
"Thinking is a function of the nervous system.",
"Thinking is the sum total of bodily activity."
] | Which of the following statements would the author agree with? | What do we think with? Only the brain? Hardly. The brain is like a telephone exchange. It is the switchboard, but not the whole system. Its function is to receive incoming signals, make proper connection, and send the messages through to their destination. For efficient service, the body must function as a whole.
But where is the "mind"? Is it in the brain? Or perhaps in the nervous system? After all, can we say that the mind is in any particular place? It is not a thing, like a leg, or even the brain. It is a function, an activity. Aristotle, twenty-three hundred years ago, observed that the mind was to the body what cutting was to the ax. When the ax is not in use, there is no cutting. So with the mind. "Mind," said Charles H. Woolbert, "is what the body is doing. "
If this activity is necessary for thinking, it is also necessary for carrying thought from one person to another. Observe how people go about the business of ordinary conversation. If you have never done this painstakingly, you have a surprise in store, for good conversationalists are almost constantly in motion. Their heads are continually nodding and shaking sometimes so vigorously that you wonder how their necks can stand the strain.
Even the legs and feet are active. As for the hands and arms, they are seldom still for more than a few seconds at a time.
These people, remember, are not making speeches. They are merely common folk trying to make others understand what they have in mind. They are not conscious of movement. Their speech is not studied. They are just human creatures in a human environment, trying to adapt themselves to a social situation. Yet they converse, not only with oral language, but with visible actions that involve practically every muscle in the body.
In short, because people really think all over, a speaker must talk all over if he succeeds in making people think. | 955.txt | 3 |
[
"to speak directly to the other person",
"to employ a variety of bodily movements",
"to be certain that the other person is listening",
"to pay great attention to the other person's behavior"
] | In communication, it is essential not only to employ speech, but also _ . | What do we think with? Only the brain? Hardly. The brain is like a telephone exchange. It is the switchboard, but not the whole system. Its function is to receive incoming signals, make proper connection, and send the messages through to their destination. For efficient service, the body must function as a whole.
But where is the "mind"? Is it in the brain? Or perhaps in the nervous system? After all, can we say that the mind is in any particular place? It is not a thing, like a leg, or even the brain. It is a function, an activity. Aristotle, twenty-three hundred years ago, observed that the mind was to the body what cutting was to the ax. When the ax is not in use, there is no cutting. So with the mind. "Mind," said Charles H. Woolbert, "is what the body is doing. "
If this activity is necessary for thinking, it is also necessary for carrying thought from one person to another. Observe how people go about the business of ordinary conversation. If you have never done this painstakingly, you have a surprise in store, for good conversationalists are almost constantly in motion. Their heads are continually nodding and shaking sometimes so vigorously that you wonder how their necks can stand the strain.
Even the legs and feet are active. As for the hands and arms, they are seldom still for more than a few seconds at a time.
These people, remember, are not making speeches. They are merely common folk trying to make others understand what they have in mind. They are not conscious of movement. Their speech is not studied. They are just human creatures in a human environment, trying to adapt themselves to a social situation. Yet they converse, not only with oral language, but with visible actions that involve practically every muscle in the body.
In short, because people really think all over, a speaker must talk all over if he succeeds in making people think. | 955.txt | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.