Answer the questions at the end based on the text.

Philosophers in antiquity used the concept of force in the study of stationary and moving objects and simple machines, but thinkers such as Aristotle and Archimedes retained fundamental errors in understanding force. In part this was due to an incomplete understanding of the sometimes non-obvious force of friction, and a consequently inadequate view of the nature of natural motion. A fundamental error was the belief that a force is required to maintain motion, even at a constant velocity. Most of the previous misunderstandings about motion and force were eventually corrected by Galileo Galilei and Sir Isaac Newton. With his mathematical insight, Sir Isaac Newton formulated laws of motion that were not improved-on for nearly three hundred years. By the early 20th century, Einstein developed a theory of relativity that correctly predicted the action of forces on objects with increasing momenta near the speed of light, and also provided insight into the forces produced by gravitation and inertia.

1. Who corrected misconceptions about motion and force?
2. Who compiled laws of motion?
3. Were they ever improved?
4. After how long?
5. Who furthered knowledge of gravity and inertia?
6. What did his theory of relativity predict?
7. When was it developed?
8. What misconception did Aristotle have?
9. Did anyone else share this misconception?
10. Who?
11. Is force required to maintain motion?
12. Did Aristotle and Archimedes correctly understand that theory?
13. Who eventually corrected the falsehoods?

Numbered answers:

A: 1. Galileo Galilei and Sir Isaac Newton
2. Sir Isaac Newton
3. yes
4. three hundred years
5. Einstein
6. the action of forces on objects with increasing momenta near the speed of light
7. early 20th century
8. force of friction
9. yes
10. Archimedes
11. no
12. no
13. Galileo Galilei and Sir Isaac Newton

Answer the questions at the end based on the text.

Jamie Oliver has been invited by Gordon Brown to prepare a banquet at No.10 for President Barack Obama and other leaders of the G20, offering a cut-price menu to reflect times when trade and industry are far from prosperous and the rate of employment is decreasing.

Downing Street sources say Oliver, the well-known chef, will cook using "honest high-street products" and avoid expensive or "fancy" ingredients.

The prime minister is trying to avoid a repeat of the embarrassment last year when he sat down to an 18-course banquet at a Japanese summit to discuss world food shortages.

Obama, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and other leaders will be served by apprentices from Fifteen, the London restaurant Oliver founded to help train young people in poverty in order to make a living by mastering a skill.

Brown wants the dinner to reflect the emphasis of the London summit, which he hopes will lead to an agreement to lift the world out of recession."To be invited to cook for such an important group of people, who are trying to solve some of the world's major problems, is really a privilege," said Oliver.

"I'm hoping the menu I'm working on will show British food and produce is some of the best in the world, but also show we have pioneered a high-quality apprentice scheme at Fifteen London that is giving young people a skill to be proud of."

The chef has not yet finalized me menu, but is expected to draw inspiration from his latest book, Jamie's Ministry of Food, which has budget recipes for beef and ale stew and "impressive" chocolate fudge cake. (

)

1. Where is No 10?
2. What has Jamie Oliver been asked to do?
3. Who is one of the leaders of the G20?
4. And another?
5. And still another?
6. Who will they be served by?
7. Who invited Jamie Oliver to make the banquet?
8. What is his title?
9. What does he want the dinner to reflect?
10. Is the rate of employment increasing?
11. What kind of ingredients will be used?
12. What kind will be avoided?
13. What was the purpose of Oliver's restaurant?
14. in order to do what?
15. What does Brown hope the summit will lead to?
16. An agreement to do what?
17. What is Jamie Oliver's latest book?
18. What kind of recipes does it have?
19. Name one?
20. Name another?

Numbered answers:

A: 1. Fifteen, the London restaurant
2. prepare a banquet
3. President Barack Obama
4. President Nicolas Sarkozy
5. Chancellor Angela Merkel
6. apprentices
7. Gordon Brown
8. prime minister
9. times when trade and industry are far from prosperous
10. no
11. honest high-street products
12. expensive or "fancy"
13. to help train young people in poverty
14. make a living
15. an agreement
16. lift the world out of recession
17. Jamie's Ministry of Food
18. budget recipes
19. ale stew
20. chocolate fudge cake

Answer the questions at the end based on the text.

The English word "translation" derives from the Latin translatio (which itself comes from trans- and from fero, the supine form of which is latumtogether meaning "a carrying across" or "a bringing across"). The modern Romance languages use equivalents of the English term "translation" that are derived from that same Latin source or from the alternative Latin traducere ("to lead across" or "to bring across"). The Slavic and Germanic languages (except in the case of the Dutch equivalent, "vertaling"a "re-language-ing") likewise use calques of these Latin sources.

Despite occasional theoretical diversity, the actual practice of translation has hardly changed since antiquity. Except for some extreme metaphrasers in the early Christian period and the Middle Ages, and adapters in various periods (especially pre-Classical Rome, and the 18th century), translators have generally shown prudent flexibility in seeking equivalents "literal" where possible, paraphrastic where necessary for the original meaning and other crucial "values" (e.g., style, verse form, concordance with musical accompaniment or, in films, with speech articulatory movements) as determined from context.

1. Has translating changed a bunch over the years?
2. When did a couple major changes happen?
3. Where there any others?
4. And they were?
5. Are people who translate very stiff?
6. Do they favor authentic or generalized translating?
7. Where does the term come from?
8. What was it called there?
9. How many definitions does that translate into?
10. Do they give any examples of what it translates into?
11. And they are?
12. Does anyone else have alternate examples that translate differently?
13. Who?
14. How do they translate it?
15. What other types of speeches also utilize these origins?
16. Are there any exceptions?
17. Are there very important variables to keep in tact when translating?
18. Like what?
19. Does it matter in movies?
20. In what aspect?

Numbered answers:

A:
1. No
2. early Christian period and the Middle Ages
3. Yes
4. pre-Classical Rome, and the 18th century
5. No
6. Literal/Authentic
7. Latin
8. the Latin translatio (which itself comes from trans- and from fero, the supine form of which is latum
9. unknown
10. Yes
11. "a carrying across" or "a bringing across"
12. Yes
13. The modern Romance languages
14. "to lead across" or "to bring across
15. Slavic and Germanic languages
16. the Dutch equivalent, "vertaling"
17. Yes
18. style, verse form, concordance with musical accompaniment
19. Yes
20. concordance with musical accompaniment or, in films, with speech articulatory movement