I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Donald had his own difficulties in sleeping that night. Not just because of the bright lights of the shelter or people's constant voices, it was the happening repeatedly nightmare that caused him to stay awake, to fear sleep. Donald was back in his small house. He did his best to ignore the howling winds outside his window. Yet he could not turn out the fearful whimpers of his little dog, or the uncomfortable sounds of his mother anxious in her room next door, unable to sleep through the storm despite her insistence they would be all right. Donald did not want his mother to be upset, but on some level, he was glad to hear she was awake, It meant he was not alone in the dark. Though he was 12, until recently it was impossible for Donald to fall asleep unless his mother lay down by his side. Suddenly there was a crash. Their living room window is shattered by 125 miles an hour winds. Troy rushed to Donald and sat anxiously on the edge of his bed. He did his best to calm his mother, and she had to comfort him. Soon water was seeping into the single floor house. Quickly it rose from ankle level to leg level. At Donald's insistence, they pushed their way through the water --- now chest high --- toward the front door. When they fought their way into the living room, water rose to their chins. It was a struggle for the boy and mother to stay afloat. In a total panic, desperate to hold on to something, Troy caught a curtain rod. She was breathing hard, shouting that she couldn't swim. Donald cried out, "Mom! Hold on!" Just then Donald also caught a floatable wood board. Question: Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the story? Options: A: The rising water. B: The broken window. C: The lucky dog. D: The noisy environment.
C
(Question)
I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Once my friend Peterson bought a pack of chicken, the brand of which was very famous at that time. But when he got home he found that the chicken had gone bad. He took the chicken back to the shop and he was paid twice of the price. We may say now he should have been satisfied but my friend would not like to stop. He decided to write a letter to Frank, president of the company, who was also the founder of the chicken brand. About a week later he received a letter written by the president himself. In the letter he apologized to my friend for it whole -heartedly .There was also a card in the envelope ,with which my friend could get another pack of chicken in any of the shops. In the end my friend was asked to answer some questions. 1. When and where did you buy the chicken? 2. What was the real problem of the chicken? 3. What did the shop ass istant say when you took the chicken back to the shop? 4. W hat do you think is the reason for the chicken to go bad? 5. What do you suggest we should do to get away from such problems? Two days later, my friend also received a telephone call from the president's office, asking whether he had received the letter as well as the card and then some other questions. Since then, my friend has always bought chicken of this brand whenever he wants to. Question: What can we infer from the passage? Options: A: The company may still be a top brand now. B: The president of the company is a responsible person. C: The company must have closed down. D: The author may also believe in the chicken brand.
(Answer)
B
Ques: I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: For most of the 20th century, Asia asked itself what it could learn from the modern, innovating West. Now the question must be reversed. What can the West's overly indebted and sluggish nations learn from a flourishing Asia? Just a few decades ago, Asia's two giants were stagnating under faulty economic ideologies. However, once China began embracing free-market reforms in the 1980s, followed by India in the 1990s, both countries achieved rapid growth. Crucially, as they opened up their markets, they balanced market economy with sensible government direction. As the Indian economist Amartya Sen has wisely said, "The invisible hand of the market has often relied heavily on the visible hand of government." Contrast this middle path with America and Europe, which have each gone ideologically over-board in their own ways. Since the 1980s, America has been increasingly clinging to the ideology of uncontrolled free markets and dismissing the role of government---following Ronald Regan's idea that "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. "Of course, when the markets came crashing down in 2007, it was decisive government intervention that saved the day. Despite this fact, many Americans are still strongly opposed to "big government." If Americans could only free themselves from their antigovernment doctrine(,), they would begin to see that the America's problems are not insoluble. A few sensible federal measures could put the country back on the right path. A simple consumption tax of, say, 5% would significantly reduce the country's huge government deficit without damaging productivity. A small gasoline tax would help free America from its dependence on oil imports and create motivations for green energy development. In the same way, a significant reduction of wasteful agricultural subsidies could also lower the deficit. But in order to take advantage of these common-sense solutions, Americans will have to put aside their own attachment to the idea of smaller government and less... Question: What is the author's suggestion to the American public in face of the public government deficit? Options: A: They urge the government to revise its existing public policies. B: They develop green energy to avoid dependence on oil import. C: They give up the idea of smaller government and less regulation. D: They put up with the inevitable sharp increase of different taxes.
Ans: C
Ques: I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: New findings suggest that brainy card games such as contract bridge may temporarily raise production of a key blood cell including in fighting off illness. After 90 minutes of play, bridge players had increased level of immune cell, according to research reported last week. A researcher, Diamond, studies bridge players from a woman's bridge club. She chose bridge players because the game includes skills stimulating a part of the brain called the dorsolateral cortex. Earlier animal research suggests that this part of the brain may play a role in the immune system. The findings are based on blood samples drawn from 12 women players. Their blood samples showed a rise in levels of white blood cells called T cells after they played bridge for 90 minutes. T cells are produced by the thymus gland and used by the immune system against diseases. The T cells count jumped significantly in eight of the bridge players, and slightly in the other four. The findings contribute to the field of neuroimmunology , whose name reflects the fact that the nervous system and the immune system are not considered separate and isolated systems. What isn't clear is whether the help to the immune system from an activity like contract bridge is lasting or temporary. It's also not clear whether the increase in T cells could finally be targeted against special illness. Question: Which of the following is TRUE according to this article? Options: A: The immune system and the brain system used to considered separated and isolated system. B: The help to the immune system that is brought about by playing bridge can last for long time. C: Cortex is a kind of blood cell. D: The new findings are impossible.
Ans:
A