Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: "Colour" and "color","favourite" and "favorite"... Have you ever wondered why Americans spell those words without a "u"? Is it because they are lazy? Of course not. In fact,the difference in spelling was created by Noah Webster (1758-1843). He is a teacher who reformed English to make American identity stronger. Linguists celebrated his 250th birthday on October 16. After the Revolutionary War (1775~ 1783),Webster believed that Americans should have their own dictionary,rather than rely on British versions . He dropped the British "u" in some words. And he changed "centre" into "center" for children to learn English by spelling words more like they sounded. Webster wasn't shy about expressing his opinions. In defining preposterous (unreasonable),he wrote: "A republican government in the hands of females is preposterous." Webster spent 28 years on the project before completing the 70,000-word dictionary in 1828 with his American-style spellings. He also added local words. His dictionary was widely used in schools. Linguists believed it helped a new nation achieve unity and cultural independence at a time when most were focused on political freedom. "He was the shaper of our language and the shaper of American identity,"said Joshua Kendall,who is working on a biography about Webster. "He at last bonded us through our language." Options: A The shaper of American English. B American identity. C Webster's dictionary. D Spelling differences between American and British English. Answer: A The shaper of American English. Question:
----
Answer: Which of the following would probably be the best title for the passage?

Q: Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: In times of economic crisis, Americans turn to their families for support. If the Great Depression is any guide, we may see a drop in our sky-high divorce rate. But this won't necessarily represent an increase in happy marriages. In the long run, the Depression weakened American families, and the current crisis will probably do the same. We tend to think of the Depression as a time when families pulled together to survive huge job losses. By 1932, when nearly one-quarter of the work force was unemployed, it had declined by around 25 percent from 1929. But this does not mean that people were suddenly happier with their marriages. Rather, with incomes plummeting and insecure jobs, unhappy couples often couldn't afford to divorce. They feared that neither would be able to manage alone. Today, given the job losses of the past year, fewer unhappy couples will risk starting separate households. Furthermore, the housing market meltdown will make it more difficult for them to finance their separations by selling their homes. After financial disasters family members also tend to do whatever they can to help each other and their communities. A 1940 book, "The Unemployed Man and His Family," described a family in which the husband first reacted to losing his job "with tireless search for work." He was always active, looking for odd jobs to do. The problem is that such an impulse is hard to sustain (continue). For some, the hardships of life without steady work eventually defeated their attempts to keep their families together. The rate rose again during the rest of the decade as the recovery took hold. Millions of American families may now be in the initial (earliest) stage of their responses to the current crisis, working together and supporting one another through the early months of unemployment. Today's economic depression could well generate a similar backlog of couples whose relationships have been irreparably ruined. So it is only when the economy is healthy again that we will begin to see just how many... Options: A Mounting (increasing) family debts. B Falling housing prices. C Difficulty in getting a loan. D A sense of insecurity. Answer: B Falling housing prices. Question:
A: In addition to job losses, what stands in the way of unhappy couples getting a divorce?

Question: Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: For the most part, it seems, workers in rich countries have little to fear from globalization, and a lot to gain. But is the same thing true for workers in poor countries? The answer is that they are even more likely than their rich-country counterparts to benefit, because they have less to lose and more to gain. Traditional economics takes an optimistic line on integration and the developing countries. Openness to foreign trade and investment should encourage capital to flow to poor economies. In the developing world, capital is scarce, so the returns on investment there should be higher than in the industrialized countries, where the best opportunities to make money by adding capital to labour have already been used up. If poor countries lower their barriers to trade and investment, the theory goes, rich foreigners will want to send over some of their capital. If this inflow of resources arrives in the form of loans or portfolio investment , it will top up domestic savings and loosen the financial restriction on additional investment by local companies. If it arrives in the form of new foreign-controlled operations, FDI, so much the better: this kind of capital brings technology and skills from abroad packaged along with it, with less financial risk as well. In either case, the addition to investment ought to push incomes up, partly by raising the demand for labour and partly by making labour more productive. This is why workers in FDI-receiving countries should be in an even better position to profit from integration than workers in FDI-sending countries. Also, with or without inflows of foreign capital, the same gains from trade should apply in developing countries as in rich ones. This gains from trade logic often arouses suspicion, because the benefits seem to come from nowhere. Surely one side or the other must lose. Not so. The benefits that a rich country gets through trade do not come at the expense of its poor country trading partners, or vice versa. Recall that according to the theory,... Options: A They can get more chances to gain a good job. B They can get more financial aid. C They have nothing to lose. D They have less to lose and more to gain. Answer: D They have less to lose and more to gain. Question:
Answer: Why are workers in poor countries more likely to benefit from the process of globalization?

Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: A volcanic eruption in Iceland has sent ash across northern Europe. Airlines have stopped or changed the flights across the Atlantic Ocean, leaving hundreds of passengers stuck in airports. Grimsvotn is one of the largest and most active volcanoes in Europe. What makes Grimsvotn different is that it lies under a huge glacier of ice up to 12 metres thick. The hot volcano heats up the ice above it, which then forms a layer of water between glacier and the volcano, keeping it stable. As the water flows out from under the glacier, the pressure lifts. The lava from the volcano then comes up to the surface. This is exactly what is happening today. Now airlines have to make changes to their flights so as not to fly through the clouds of volcanic ash. According to KLM, one of Europe's biggest airlines, airplanes cannot go under the cloud or over it. Going through the cloud can result in ash getting stuck in the airplane's engines, causing damage to the plane. The eruption has also caused problems for animals in Iceland. The volcano left ash and sharp, glass-like rocks all over the countryside. Farmers are keeping their animals inside to stop them eating ash-covered grass or the sharp objects. Options: A thousands of passengers B hundreds of passengers C ten thousands of passengers D 20000 of passengers Answer: B hundreds of passengers Question:
----
Answer:
how many passengers were forced to stay in the airport?