sileod/deberta-v3-small-tasksource-nli
Zero-Shot Classification
•
Updated
•
93.1k
•
15
Datasets:
option
sequence | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"They are more likely to survive serious diseases today.",
"Their average life span has been considerably extended.",
"They have lived long enough to read this article.",
"They are sure to enjoy a longer and happier live."
] | Why does the author congratulate his male readers at the beginning of the passage? | If you are a male and you are reading this ,congratulations: you are a survivor .According to statistics .you are more than twice as likely to die of skin cancer than a woman ,and nine times more likely to die of AIDS. Assuming you make it to the end of your natural term, about 78 years for men in Australia, you will die on average five years before a woman.
There are many reasons for this-typically, men take more risks than woman and are more likely to drink and smoke but perhaps more importantly, men don't go to the doctor.
"Men aren't seeing doctors as often as they should, " says Dr. Gullotta, "This is particularly so for the over-40s,when diseases tend to strike."
Gullotta says a healthy man should visit the doctor every year or two. For those over 45,it should be at least once a year.
Two months ago Gullotta saw a 50-year-old ma who had delayed doing anything about his smoker's cough for a year.
"When I finally saw him it had already spread and he has since died from lung cancer" he says, "Earlier detection and treatment may not have cured him, but it would have prolonged this life"
According to a recent survey, 95%of women aged between 15 and early 40s see a doctor once a year, compared to 70% of men in the same age group.
"A lot of men think they are invincible" Gullotta says "They only come in when a friend drops dead on the golf course and they think" Geez, if it could happen to him.
Then there is the ostrich approach," some men are scared of what might be there and would rather not know, " says Dr. Ross Cartmill.
"Most men get their cars serviced more regularly than they service their bodies," Cartmill says .He believes most diseases that commonly affect men could be addressed by preventive check-ups
Regular check-ups for men would inevitably place strain on the public purse, Cartmill says." But prevention is cheaper in the long run than having to treat the diseases. Besides, the ultimate cost is far greater: it is called premature death." | 2843.txt | 2 |
[
"Men drink and smoke much more than women.",
"Men don't seek medical care as often as women.",
"Men are more likely to suffer from deadly diseases.",
"Men aren't as cautious as women in face of danger."
] | Which of the author's statements is the most important reason that men die five years earlier on average than women according to the passage? | If you are a male and you are reading this ,congratulations: you are a survivor .According to statistics .you are more than twice as likely to die of skin cancer than a woman ,and nine times more likely to die of AIDS. Assuming you make it to the end of your natural term, about 78 years for men in Australia, you will die on average five years before a woman.
There are many reasons for this-typically, men take more risks than woman and are more likely to drink and smoke but perhaps more importantly, men don't go to the doctor.
"Men aren't seeing doctors as often as they should, " says Dr. Gullotta, "This is particularly so for the over-40s,when diseases tend to strike."
Gullotta says a healthy man should visit the doctor every year or two. For those over 45,it should be at least once a year.
Two months ago Gullotta saw a 50-year-old ma who had delayed doing anything about his smoker's cough for a year.
"When I finally saw him it had already spread and he has since died from lung cancer" he says, "Earlier detection and treatment may not have cured him, but it would have prolonged this life"
According to a recent survey, 95%of women aged between 15 and early 40s see a doctor once a year, compared to 70% of men in the same age group.
"A lot of men think they are invincible" Gullotta says "They only come in when a friend drops dead on the golf course and they think" Geez, if it could happen to him.
Then there is the ostrich approach," some men are scared of what might be there and would rather not know, " says Dr. Ross Cartmill.
"Most men get their cars serviced more regularly than they service their bodies," Cartmill says .He believes most diseases that commonly affect men could be addressed by preventive check-ups
Regular check-ups for men would inevitably place strain on the public purse, Cartmill says." But prevention is cheaper in the long run than having to treat the diseases. Besides, the ultimate cost is far greater: it is called premature death." | 2843.txt | 1 |
[
"it could happen to me, too",
"I should avoid playing golf",
"I should consider myself lucky",
"it would be a big misfortune"
] | Which of the following best completes the sentence "Geez, if it could happen to him,...'(line2,para,8)? | If you are a male and you are reading this ,congratulations: you are a survivor .According to statistics .you are more than twice as likely to die of skin cancer than a woman ,and nine times more likely to die of AIDS. Assuming you make it to the end of your natural term, about 78 years for men in Australia, you will die on average five years before a woman.
There are many reasons for this-typically, men take more risks than woman and are more likely to drink and smoke but perhaps more importantly, men don't go to the doctor.
"Men aren't seeing doctors as often as they should, " says Dr. Gullotta, "This is particularly so for the over-40s,when diseases tend to strike."
Gullotta says a healthy man should visit the doctor every year or two. For those over 45,it should be at least once a year.
Two months ago Gullotta saw a 50-year-old ma who had delayed doing anything about his smoker's cough for a year.
"When I finally saw him it had already spread and he has since died from lung cancer" he says, "Earlier detection and treatment may not have cured him, but it would have prolonged this life"
According to a recent survey, 95%of women aged between 15 and early 40s see a doctor once a year, compared to 70% of men in the same age group.
"A lot of men think they are invincible" Gullotta says "They only come in when a friend drops dead on the golf course and they think" Geez, if it could happen to him.
Then there is the ostrich approach," some men are scared of what might be there and would rather not know, " says Dr. Ross Cartmill.
"Most men get their cars serviced more regularly than they service their bodies," Cartmill says .He believes most diseases that commonly affect men could be addressed by preventive check-ups
Regular check-ups for men would inevitably place strain on the public purse, Cartmill says." But prevention is cheaper in the long run than having to treat the diseases. Besides, the ultimate cost is far greater: it is called premature death." | 2843.txt | 0 |
[
"a casual attitude towards one's health conditions",
"a new therapy for certain psychological problems",
"refusal to get medical treatment for fear of the pain involved",
"unwillingness to find out about one's disease because of fear"
] | what does Dr. Ross Cartmill mean by "the ostrich approach"(line q para.9) | If you are a male and you are reading this ,congratulations: you are a survivor .According to statistics .you are more than twice as likely to die of skin cancer than a woman ,and nine times more likely to die of AIDS. Assuming you make it to the end of your natural term, about 78 years for men in Australia, you will die on average five years before a woman.
There are many reasons for this-typically, men take more risks than woman and are more likely to drink and smoke but perhaps more importantly, men don't go to the doctor.
"Men aren't seeing doctors as often as they should, " says Dr. Gullotta, "This is particularly so for the over-40s,when diseases tend to strike."
Gullotta says a healthy man should visit the doctor every year or two. For those over 45,it should be at least once a year.
Two months ago Gullotta saw a 50-year-old ma who had delayed doing anything about his smoker's cough for a year.
"When I finally saw him it had already spread and he has since died from lung cancer" he says, "Earlier detection and treatment may not have cured him, but it would have prolonged this life"
According to a recent survey, 95%of women aged between 15 and early 40s see a doctor once a year, compared to 70% of men in the same age group.
"A lot of men think they are invincible" Gullotta says "They only come in when a friend drops dead on the golf course and they think" Geez, if it could happen to him.
Then there is the ostrich approach," some men are scared of what might be there and would rather not know, " says Dr. Ross Cartmill.
"Most men get their cars serviced more regularly than they service their bodies," Cartmill says .He believes most diseases that commonly affect men could be addressed by preventive check-ups
Regular check-ups for men would inevitably place strain on the public purse, Cartmill says." But prevention is cheaper in the long run than having to treat the diseases. Besides, the ultimate cost is far greater: it is called premature death." | 2843.txt | 3 |
[
"The school is afraid that children might be injured.",
"The school is not sensible and confident.",
"The children don't have enough time to do homework.",
"The children may fail to fulfill their academic potential."
] | Why are the children not allowed to play football in the playground? | ASK LASKAS
YOU'VE GOT QUESTIONS,SHE'S GOT ANSWERS
Q My children go to a primary school where they are not allowed to play football in the playground for fear that a child might be hurt.Besides,now the school says there must be no homework because the local secondary school can't keep up with the amount of homework given in the primary school.Can the school do this?Puzzled Dad
A It can't if enough parents do something about it.It is not just schools.We live in a society which wishes to get rid of risk.However,schools should have a little common sense and courage.Children need risk if they are to grow up self-sufficient and confident.They need homework,too,if they are to fulfill their academic poten-
tial.Complain,loudly.
Q I have a beautiful teenage daughter who spends an hour making up her face in front of the mirror every day.I tell her to go easy.She just gets mad or bursts into tears.How can I make her understand she's beautiful the way she is.Plain Mom
A You can't.Your daughter is at the age when she's trying to look beauty-
ful,trying on new masks.And if her friends all dress up as she does,you're in for an extra hard time.Support her and tell her she's beautiful-even if she looks ridiculous for now.Then invite her to join you for a day at a spa.Let her try various looks until she's comfortable in her own skin. | 3432.txt | 0 |
[
"becomes mad",
"cries a lot",
"spends much time before the mirror",
"is not beautiful enough"
] | What disturbs Plain Mom is that her daughter. | ASK LASKAS
YOU'VE GOT QUESTIONS,SHE'S GOT ANSWERS
Q My children go to a primary school where they are not allowed to play football in the playground for fear that a child might be hurt.Besides,now the school says there must be no homework because the local secondary school can't keep up with the amount of homework given in the primary school.Can the school do this?Puzzled Dad
A It can't if enough parents do something about it.It is not just schools.We live in a society which wishes to get rid of risk.However,schools should have a little common sense and courage.Children need risk if they are to grow up self-sufficient and confident.They need homework,too,if they are to fulfill their academic poten-
tial.Complain,loudly.
Q I have a beautiful teenage daughter who spends an hour making up her face in front of the mirror every day.I tell her to go easy.She just gets mad or bursts into tears.How can I make her understand she's beautiful the way she is.Plain Mom
A You can't.Your daughter is at the age when she's trying to look beauty-
ful,trying on new masks.And if her friends all dress up as she does,you're in for an extra hard time.Support her and tell her she's beautiful-even if she looks ridiculous for now.Then invite her to join you for a day at a spa.Let her try various looks until she's comfortable in her own skin. | 3432.txt | 2 |
[
"make her daughter look less ridiculous",
"let her daughter dress up like her friends",
"make her daughter go to a spa every week",
"let her daughter feel herself what beauty is"
] | The solution to Plain Mom's problem is to. | ASK LASKAS
YOU'VE GOT QUESTIONS,SHE'S GOT ANSWERS
Q My children go to a primary school where they are not allowed to play football in the playground for fear that a child might be hurt.Besides,now the school says there must be no homework because the local secondary school can't keep up with the amount of homework given in the primary school.Can the school do this?Puzzled Dad
A It can't if enough parents do something about it.It is not just schools.We live in a society which wishes to get rid of risk.However,schools should have a little common sense and courage.Children need risk if they are to grow up self-sufficient and confident.They need homework,too,if they are to fulfill their academic poten-
tial.Complain,loudly.
Q I have a beautiful teenage daughter who spends an hour making up her face in front of the mirror every day.I tell her to go easy.She just gets mad or bursts into tears.How can I make her understand she's beautiful the way she is.Plain Mom
A You can't.Your daughter is at the age when she's trying to look beauty-
ful,trying on new masks.And if her friends all dress up as she does,you're in for an extra hard time.Support her and tell her she's beautiful-even if she looks ridiculous for now.Then invite her to join you for a day at a spa.Let her try various looks until she's comfortable in her own skin. | 3432.txt | 3 |
[
"the coming of ice age",
"more Katrina-like or worse hurricanes",
"less intense hurricanes",
"more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere"
] | According to the team of international researchers based at Beijing Normal University, the rise of the Earth's temperature is likely to cause | Small increases in temperature found to add power to storms in the Atlantic.
Hurricanes that form in the Atlantic Ocean are expected to gain considerable strength as the global temperature continues to rise, a new study has found.
Using modeling data focused on the conditions in which hurricanes form, a group of international researchers based at Beijing Normal University found that for every 1.8°F ( 1℃ )rise of the Earth's temperature, the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic that are as strong or stronger than Hurricane Katrina will increase twofold to sevenfold.
Hurricane strength is directly related to the heat of the water where the storm forms. More water vapor in the air from evaporating ocean water adds fuel to hurricanes that build strength and head toward land.
Hurricane Katrina is widely considered the measure for a destructive storm, holding the maximum Category 5 designation for a full 24 hours in late August 2005. It lost strength as it passed over the Florida peninsula, but gained destructive power fight before colliding with New Orleans, killing more than 200 people and causing $ 80 billion in damage.
The study points to a gradual increase of Katrina-like events. The warming experienced over the 20th century doubled the number of such debilitating storms. But the ongoing warming of the planet into the 21st century could increase the frequency of the worst kinds of storms by 700 percent, threatening coastlines along the Atlantic Ocean with muitiple Category 5 storms every year.
"Our results support the idea that changes in regional sea surface temperatures is the primary cause of hurricane variability," said Aslak Girnstead, a researcher with the Center for Ice and Climate at the University of Copenhagen. The large impact of small sea-surface temperature increases was more than Girustead and his colleagues had anticipated. The entire study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Global temperatures have steadily increased, making the past decade the warmest on record. Earlier this year, climate researchers reported that the Earth's temperatures have risen faster in the last century than at any point since the last ice age, 11,300 years ago. The primary cause, a couseusus of scientists has said, is the rising emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane.
Past hurricanes have supported the study's finding that global temperature rise is linked to more destructive storms. According to the National Center for Atmospheric Research, while the frequency of storms doesn't appear to have increased, the percentage of strong ones has risen sharply over the past few decades. The trend may be similar further back in time, but comprehensive hurricane data doesn't exist. | 889.txt | 1 |
[
"is heating the hurricanes",
"evaporates and becomes fuel",
"heads toward land",
"turns into water vapor that makes hurricanes stronger"
] | The ocean water in the region where the storm forms | Small increases in temperature found to add power to storms in the Atlantic.
Hurricanes that form in the Atlantic Ocean are expected to gain considerable strength as the global temperature continues to rise, a new study has found.
Using modeling data focused on the conditions in which hurricanes form, a group of international researchers based at Beijing Normal University found that for every 1.8°F ( 1℃ )rise of the Earth's temperature, the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic that are as strong or stronger than Hurricane Katrina will increase twofold to sevenfold.
Hurricane strength is directly related to the heat of the water where the storm forms. More water vapor in the air from evaporating ocean water adds fuel to hurricanes that build strength and head toward land.
Hurricane Katrina is widely considered the measure for a destructive storm, holding the maximum Category 5 designation for a full 24 hours in late August 2005. It lost strength as it passed over the Florida peninsula, but gained destructive power fight before colliding with New Orleans, killing more than 200 people and causing $ 80 billion in damage.
The study points to a gradual increase of Katrina-like events. The warming experienced over the 20th century doubled the number of such debilitating storms. But the ongoing warming of the planet into the 21st century could increase the frequency of the worst kinds of storms by 700 percent, threatening coastlines along the Atlantic Ocean with muitiple Category 5 storms every year.
"Our results support the idea that changes in regional sea surface temperatures is the primary cause of hurricane variability," said Aslak Girnstead, a researcher with the Center for Ice and Climate at the University of Copenhagen. The large impact of small sea-surface temperature increases was more than Girustead and his colleagues had anticipated. The entire study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Global temperatures have steadily increased, making the past decade the warmest on record. Earlier this year, climate researchers reported that the Earth's temperatures have risen faster in the last century than at any point since the last ice age, 11,300 years ago. The primary cause, a couseusus of scientists has said, is the rising emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane.
Past hurricanes have supported the study's finding that global temperature rise is linked to more destructive storms. According to the National Center for Atmospheric Research, while the frequency of storms doesn't appear to have increased, the percentage of strong ones has risen sharply over the past few decades. The trend may be similar further back in time, but comprehensive hurricane data doesn't exist. | 889.txt | 3 |
[
"It did not lose its strength as it moved.",
"It claimed over 200 people's lives.",
"It caused 80 billion dollars loss for Florida peninsula.",
"It lasted for full 24 hours."
] | Which of the following statement is TRUE about Hurricane Katrina? | Small increases in temperature found to add power to storms in the Atlantic.
Hurricanes that form in the Atlantic Ocean are expected to gain considerable strength as the global temperature continues to rise, a new study has found.
Using modeling data focused on the conditions in which hurricanes form, a group of international researchers based at Beijing Normal University found that for every 1.8°F ( 1℃ )rise of the Earth's temperature, the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic that are as strong or stronger than Hurricane Katrina will increase twofold to sevenfold.
Hurricane strength is directly related to the heat of the water where the storm forms. More water vapor in the air from evaporating ocean water adds fuel to hurricanes that build strength and head toward land.
Hurricane Katrina is widely considered the measure for a destructive storm, holding the maximum Category 5 designation for a full 24 hours in late August 2005. It lost strength as it passed over the Florida peninsula, but gained destructive power fight before colliding with New Orleans, killing more than 200 people and causing $ 80 billion in damage.
The study points to a gradual increase of Katrina-like events. The warming experienced over the 20th century doubled the number of such debilitating storms. But the ongoing warming of the planet into the 21st century could increase the frequency of the worst kinds of storms by 700 percent, threatening coastlines along the Atlantic Ocean with muitiple Category 5 storms every year.
"Our results support the idea that changes in regional sea surface temperatures is the primary cause of hurricane variability," said Aslak Girnstead, a researcher with the Center for Ice and Climate at the University of Copenhagen. The large impact of small sea-surface temperature increases was more than Girustead and his colleagues had anticipated. The entire study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Global temperatures have steadily increased, making the past decade the warmest on record. Earlier this year, climate researchers reported that the Earth's temperatures have risen faster in the last century than at any point since the last ice age, 11,300 years ago. The primary cause, a couseusus of scientists has said, is the rising emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane.
Past hurricanes have supported the study's finding that global temperature rise is linked to more destructive storms. According to the National Center for Atmospheric Research, while the frequency of storms doesn't appear to have increased, the percentage of strong ones has risen sharply over the past few decades. The trend may be similar further back in time, but comprehensive hurricane data doesn't exist. | 889.txt | 1 |
[
"Hurricane changes.",
"Global warming.",
"Increasing greenhouse gas emissions.",
"Destructive hurricanes."
] | What result can regional sea surface temperature changes produce? | Small increases in temperature found to add power to storms in the Atlantic.
Hurricanes that form in the Atlantic Ocean are expected to gain considerable strength as the global temperature continues to rise, a new study has found.
Using modeling data focused on the conditions in which hurricanes form, a group of international researchers based at Beijing Normal University found that for every 1.8°F ( 1℃ )rise of the Earth's temperature, the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic that are as strong or stronger than Hurricane Katrina will increase twofold to sevenfold.
Hurricane strength is directly related to the heat of the water where the storm forms. More water vapor in the air from evaporating ocean water adds fuel to hurricanes that build strength and head toward land.
Hurricane Katrina is widely considered the measure for a destructive storm, holding the maximum Category 5 designation for a full 24 hours in late August 2005. It lost strength as it passed over the Florida peninsula, but gained destructive power fight before colliding with New Orleans, killing more than 200 people and causing $ 80 billion in damage.
The study points to a gradual increase of Katrina-like events. The warming experienced over the 20th century doubled the number of such debilitating storms. But the ongoing warming of the planet into the 21st century could increase the frequency of the worst kinds of storms by 700 percent, threatening coastlines along the Atlantic Ocean with muitiple Category 5 storms every year.
"Our results support the idea that changes in regional sea surface temperatures is the primary cause of hurricane variability," said Aslak Girnstead, a researcher with the Center for Ice and Climate at the University of Copenhagen. The large impact of small sea-surface temperature increases was more than Girustead and his colleagues had anticipated. The entire study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Global temperatures have steadily increased, making the past decade the warmest on record. Earlier this year, climate researchers reported that the Earth's temperatures have risen faster in the last century than at any point since the last ice age, 11,300 years ago. The primary cause, a couseusus of scientists has said, is the rising emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane.
Past hurricanes have supported the study's finding that global temperature rise is linked to more destructive storms. According to the National Center for Atmospheric Research, while the frequency of storms doesn't appear to have increased, the percentage of strong ones has risen sharply over the past few decades. The trend may be similar further back in time, but comprehensive hurricane data doesn't exist. | 889.txt | 0 |
[
"there is no link between greenhouse gas emissions and destructive storms",
"reduction of greenhouse gas emissions may reduce destructive storms",
"the higher percentage of strong ones rose as more hurricanes appeared",
"past records on hurricanes included everything needed"
] | It can be inferred from the passage that | Small increases in temperature found to add power to storms in the Atlantic.
Hurricanes that form in the Atlantic Ocean are expected to gain considerable strength as the global temperature continues to rise, a new study has found.
Using modeling data focused on the conditions in which hurricanes form, a group of international researchers based at Beijing Normal University found that for every 1.8°F ( 1℃ )rise of the Earth's temperature, the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic that are as strong or stronger than Hurricane Katrina will increase twofold to sevenfold.
Hurricane strength is directly related to the heat of the water where the storm forms. More water vapor in the air from evaporating ocean water adds fuel to hurricanes that build strength and head toward land.
Hurricane Katrina is widely considered the measure for a destructive storm, holding the maximum Category 5 designation for a full 24 hours in late August 2005. It lost strength as it passed over the Florida peninsula, but gained destructive power fight before colliding with New Orleans, killing more than 200 people and causing $ 80 billion in damage.
The study points to a gradual increase of Katrina-like events. The warming experienced over the 20th century doubled the number of such debilitating storms. But the ongoing warming of the planet into the 21st century could increase the frequency of the worst kinds of storms by 700 percent, threatening coastlines along the Atlantic Ocean with muitiple Category 5 storms every year.
"Our results support the idea that changes in regional sea surface temperatures is the primary cause of hurricane variability," said Aslak Girnstead, a researcher with the Center for Ice and Climate at the University of Copenhagen. The large impact of small sea-surface temperature increases was more than Girustead and his colleagues had anticipated. The entire study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Global temperatures have steadily increased, making the past decade the warmest on record. Earlier this year, climate researchers reported that the Earth's temperatures have risen faster in the last century than at any point since the last ice age, 11,300 years ago. The primary cause, a couseusus of scientists has said, is the rising emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane.
Past hurricanes have supported the study's finding that global temperature rise is linked to more destructive storms. According to the National Center for Atmospheric Research, while the frequency of storms doesn't appear to have increased, the percentage of strong ones has risen sharply over the past few decades. The trend may be similar further back in time, but comprehensive hurricane data doesn't exist. | 889.txt | 1 |
[
"analyzed",
"considered",
"altered",
"criticized"
] | The word "regarded" in the passage(Paragraph 1)is closest in meaning to | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 1 |
[
"The technological innovation of sound film during the 1920s",
"The development of a technology for translating films into other languages",
"The invention of a method for delivering movies to people's homes",
"The technological improvements allowing clearer images in films"
] | According to paragraph 1, which of the following is the most significant development in the history of film? | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 0 |
[
"difficulties",
"accomplishments",
"parallels",
"contradictions"
] | The word "paradoxes" in the passage(Paragraph 2)is closest in meaning to | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 3 |
[
"To suggest that audiences preferred other forms of entertainment to film before the transition to sound inthe1920's",
"To provide examples of some of the first sounds that were recorded for film",
"To indicate some ways in which sound accompanied film before the innovation of sound films in the late 1920s",
"To show how the use of sound in films changed during different historical periods"
] | Why does the author mention "Japanese benshi" and "original musical compositions"(Paragraph 2)? | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 2 |
[
"The film was not accompanied by sound before its Berlin screening.",
"The film was unpopular in the Soviet Union before it was screened in Berlin.",
"Eisenstein's film was the first instance of collaboration between a director and a composer.",
"Eisenstein believed that the musical score in a film was as important as dialogue."
] | Paragraph 2 suggests which of the following about Eisenstein's film The Battleship Potemkirf? | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 0 |
[
"distracted from",
"explained",
"conducted",
"coordinated with"
] | The word "overshadowed"(Paragraph 3)in the passage is closest in meaning to | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 0 |
[
"Because the costs of introducing recorded sound were low, it was the only innovation that was put to use in the 1920's.",
"The introduction of recorded sound prevented the development of other technological innovations in the 1920's.",
"The new technological and aesthetic developments of the 1920s included the use of color, new screen formats, and television.",
"Many of the innovations developed in the 1920s were not widely introduced until as late as the 1950's."
] | According to paragraph 3, which of the following is NOT true of the technological and aesthetic experiments of the 1920's? | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 0 |
[
"failed",
"needed",
"started",
"expected"
] | The word "neglected" in the passage(Paragraph 4)is closest in meaning to | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 0 |
[
"Linking images with recorded sound was a larger obstacle than weak sound amplification or fragile sound recordings.",
"Sound films in the 1920s were unable to solve the technical flaws found in sound films before the First World War.",
"Technical inadequacies occurred less frequently in early sound films than critics suggested.",
"Critics assumed that it would be impossible to overcome the technical difficulties experienced with earlier sound films."
] | According to paragraph 4, which of the following is true about the technical problems of early soundfilms? | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 3 |
[
"a financially successful development that enabled large telecommunications firms to weaken their competition.",
"the desire of electronics and telecommunications companies to make sound technology profitable",
"a major development in the broadcasting industry that occurred before the 1920s",
"the cooperation between telecommunications companies and the motion picture industry"
] | In paragraph 5,commercial radio programming is best described as the result of | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 1 |
[
"European producers often lacked knowledge about the necessary equipment for the transition to sound films.",
"Smaller European producers were often unable to afford to add sound to their films.",
"It was often difficult to wire older cinemas in the major cities to play sound films.",
"Smaller European producers believed that silent films with music accompaniment were aesthetically superior to sound films."
] | According to paragraph 6, which of the following accounts for the delay in the conversion to sound films in Europe? | The shift from silent to sound film at the end of the 1920s marks, so far, the most important transformation in motion picture history. Despite all the highly visible technological developments in theatrical and home delivery of the moving image that have occurred over the decades since then, no single innovation has come close to being regarded as a similar kind of watershed. In nearly every language, however the words are phrased, the most basic division in cinema history lies between films that are mute and films that speak.
Yet this most fundamental standard of historical periodization conceals a host of paradoxes. Nearly every movie theater, however modest, had a piano or organ to provide musical accompaniment to silent pictures. In many instances, spectators in the era before recorded sound experienced elaborate aural presentations alongside movies' visual images, from the Japanese benshi (narrators) crafting multivoiced dialogue narratives to original musical compositions performed by symphony-size orchestras in Europe and the United States. In Berlin, for the premiere performance outside the Soviet Union of The Battleship Potemkin, film director Sergei Eisenstein worked with Austrian composer Edmund Meisel (1874-1930) on a musical score matching sound to image; the Berlin screenings with live music helped to bring the film its wide international fame.
Beyond that, the triumph of recorded sound has overshadowed the rich diversity of technological and aesthetic experiments with the visual image that were going forward simultaneously in the 1920s. New color processes, larger or differently shaped screen sizes, multiple-screen projections, even television, were among the developments invented or tried out during the period, sometimes with startling success. The high costs of converting to sound and the early limitations of sound technology were among the factors that suppressed innovations or retarded advancement in these other areas. The introduction of new screen formats was put off for a quarter century, and color, though utilized over the next two decades for special productions, also did not become a norm until the 1950s.
Though it may be difficult to imagine from a later perspective, a strain of critical opinion in the 1920s predicted that sound film would be a technical novelty that would soon fade from sight, just as had many previous attempts, dating well back before the First World War, to link images with recorded sound. These critics were making a common assumption-that the technological inadequacies of earlier efforts (poor synchronization, weak sound amplification, fragile sound recordings) would invariably occur again. To be sure, their evaluation of the technical flaws in 1920s sound experiments was not so far off the mark, yet they neglected to take into account important new forces in the motion picture field that, in a sense, would not take no for an answer.
These forces were the rapidly expanding electronics and telecommunications companies that were developing and linking telephone and wireless technologies in the 1920s. In the United States, they included such firms as American Telephone and Telegraph, General Electric, and Westinghouse. They were interested in all forms of sound technology and all potential avenues for commercial exploitation. Their competition and collaboration were creating the broadcasting industry in the United States, beginning with the introduction of commercial radio programming in the early 1920s. With financial assets considerably greater than those in the motion picture industry, and perhaps a wider vision of the relationships among entertainment and communications media, they revitalized research into recording sound for motion pictures.
In 1929 the United States motion picture industry released more than 300 sound films-a rough figure, since a number were silent films with music tracks, or films prepared in dual versions, to take account of the many cinemas not yet wired for sound. At the production level, in the United States the conversion was virtually complete by 1930. In Europe it took a little longer, mainly because there were more small producers for whom the costs of sound were prohibitive, and in other parts of the world problems with rights or access to equipment delayed the shift to sound production for a few more years (though cinemas in major cities may have been wired in order to play foreign sound films). The triumph of sound cinema was swift, complete, and enormously popular. | 856.txt | 1 |
[
"they are more powerful than other European airlines.",
"their total loss won't go beyond a drop of 5% passengers.",
"their traffic levels will return in 2-3 years.",
"traveling by rail can never catch up with traveling by air."
] | British airlines confide in the fact that _ . | If the old maxim that the customer is always right still has meaning, then the airlines that ply the world's busiest air route between London and Paris have a flight on their hands.
The Eurostar train service linking the UK and French capitals via the Channel Tunnel is winning customers in increasing numbers. In late May, it carried its one millionth passenger, having run only a limited service between London, Paris and Brussels since November 1994, starting with two trains a day in each direction to Paris and Brussels. By 1997, the company believes that it will be carrying ten million passengers a year, and continue to grow from there.
From July, Eurostar steps its service to nine trains each way between London and Paris, and five between London and Brussels. Each train carries almost 800 passengers, 210 of them in first class.
The airlines estimate that they will initially lose around 15%-20% of their London-Paris traffic to the railways once Eurostar starts a full service later this year (1995), with 15 trains a day each way. A similar service will start to Brussels. The damage will be limited, however, the airlines believe, with passenger numbers returning to previous levels within two to three years.
In the short term, the damage caused by the 1 million people-levels traveling between London and Paris and Brussels on Eurostar trains means that some air services are already suffering. Some of the major carriers say that their passenger numbers are down by less than 5% and point to their rivals-Particularly Air France-as having suffered the problems. On the Brussels route, the railway company had less success, and the airlines report anything from around a 5% drop to no visible decline in traffic.
The airlines' optimism on returning traffic levels is based on historical precedent. British Midland, for example, points to its experience on Heathrow Leeds Bradford service which saw passenger numbers fold by 15% when British Rail electrified and modernized the railway line between London and Yorkshire. Two years later, travel had risen between the two destinations to the point where the airline was carrying record numbers of passengers. | 81.txt | 2 |
[
"worried.",
"delighted",
"puzzled.",
"unrivaled."
] | The author's attitude towards the drop of passengers may be described as _ . | If the old maxim that the customer is always right still has meaning, then the airlines that ply the world's busiest air route between London and Paris have a flight on their hands.
The Eurostar train service linking the UK and French capitals via the Channel Tunnel is winning customers in increasing numbers. In late May, it carried its one millionth passenger, having run only a limited service between London, Paris and Brussels since November 1994, starting with two trains a day in each direction to Paris and Brussels. By 1997, the company believes that it will be carrying ten million passengers a year, and continue to grow from there.
From July, Eurostar steps its service to nine trains each way between London and Paris, and five between London and Brussels. Each train carries almost 800 passengers, 210 of them in first class.
The airlines estimate that they will initially lose around 15%-20% of their London-Paris traffic to the railways once Eurostar starts a full service later this year (1995), with 15 trains a day each way. A similar service will start to Brussels. The damage will be limited, however, the airlines believe, with passenger numbers returning to previous levels within two to three years.
In the short term, the damage caused by the 1 million people-levels traveling between London and Paris and Brussels on Eurostar trains means that some air services are already suffering. Some of the major carriers say that their passenger numbers are down by less than 5% and point to their rivals-Particularly Air France-as having suffered the problems. On the Brussels route, the railway company had less success, and the airlines report anything from around a 5% drop to no visible decline in traffic.
The airlines' optimism on returning traffic levels is based on historical precedent. British Midland, for example, points to its experience on Heathrow Leeds Bradford service which saw passenger numbers fold by 15% when British Rail electrified and modernized the railway line between London and Yorkshire. Two years later, travel had risen between the two destinations to the point where the airline was carrying record numbers of passengers. | 81.txt | 0 |
[
"provide a comparison with Eurostar.",
"support the airlines' optimism.",
"prove the inevitable drop of air passengers.",
"call for electrification and modernization of the railway."
] | In the passage, British Rail (Para 6) is mentioned to _ . | If the old maxim that the customer is always right still has meaning, then the airlines that ply the world's busiest air route between London and Paris have a flight on their hands.
The Eurostar train service linking the UK and French capitals via the Channel Tunnel is winning customers in increasing numbers. In late May, it carried its one millionth passenger, having run only a limited service between London, Paris and Brussels since November 1994, starting with two trains a day in each direction to Paris and Brussels. By 1997, the company believes that it will be carrying ten million passengers a year, and continue to grow from there.
From July, Eurostar steps its service to nine trains each way between London and Paris, and five between London and Brussels. Each train carries almost 800 passengers, 210 of them in first class.
The airlines estimate that they will initially lose around 15%-20% of their London-Paris traffic to the railways once Eurostar starts a full service later this year (1995), with 15 trains a day each way. A similar service will start to Brussels. The damage will be limited, however, the airlines believe, with passenger numbers returning to previous levels within two to three years.
In the short term, the damage caused by the 1 million people-levels traveling between London and Paris and Brussels on Eurostar trains means that some air services are already suffering. Some of the major carriers say that their passenger numbers are down by less than 5% and point to their rivals-Particularly Air France-as having suffered the problems. On the Brussels route, the railway company had less success, and the airlines report anything from around a 5% drop to no visible decline in traffic.
The airlines' optimism on returning traffic levels is based on historical precedent. British Midland, for example, points to its experience on Heathrow Leeds Bradford service which saw passenger numbers fold by 15% when British Rail electrified and modernized the railway line between London and Yorkshire. Two years later, travel had risen between the two destinations to the point where the airline was carrying record numbers of passengers. | 81.txt | 1 |
[
"the Eurostar train service is not doing good business.",
"the airlines can well compete with the railway.",
"the Eurostar train service only caused little damage.",
"only some airlines, such as Air France, are suffering."
] | The railway's Brussels route is brought forth to show that _ . | If the old maxim that the customer is always right still has meaning, then the airlines that ply the world's busiest air route between London and Paris have a flight on their hands.
The Eurostar train service linking the UK and French capitals via the Channel Tunnel is winning customers in increasing numbers. In late May, it carried its one millionth passenger, having run only a limited service between London, Paris and Brussels since November 1994, starting with two trains a day in each direction to Paris and Brussels. By 1997, the company believes that it will be carrying ten million passengers a year, and continue to grow from there.
From July, Eurostar steps its service to nine trains each way between London and Paris, and five between London and Brussels. Each train carries almost 800 passengers, 210 of them in first class.
The airlines estimate that they will initially lose around 15%-20% of their London-Paris traffic to the railways once Eurostar starts a full service later this year (1995), with 15 trains a day each way. A similar service will start to Brussels. The damage will be limited, however, the airlines believe, with passenger numbers returning to previous levels within two to three years.
In the short term, the damage caused by the 1 million people-levels traveling between London and Paris and Brussels on Eurostar trains means that some air services are already suffering. Some of the major carriers say that their passenger numbers are down by less than 5% and point to their rivals-Particularly Air France-as having suffered the problems. On the Brussels route, the railway company had less success, and the airlines report anything from around a 5% drop to no visible decline in traffic.
The airlines' optimism on returning traffic levels is based on historical precedent. British Midland, for example, points to its experience on Heathrow Leeds Bradford service which saw passenger numbers fold by 15% when British Rail electrified and modernized the railway line between London and Yorkshire. Two years later, travel had risen between the two destinations to the point where the airline was carrying record numbers of passengers. | 81.txt | 2 |
[
"praise the airlines' clear-mindedness.",
"warn the airlines of high-speed rail services.",
"propose a reduction of London/Paris flights.",
"advise the airlines to follow British Midland as their model."
] | The passage is taken from the first of an essay, from which we may well predict that in the following part the author is going to _ . | If the old maxim that the customer is always right still has meaning, then the airlines that ply the world's busiest air route between London and Paris have a flight on their hands.
The Eurostar train service linking the UK and French capitals via the Channel Tunnel is winning customers in increasing numbers. In late May, it carried its one millionth passenger, having run only a limited service between London, Paris and Brussels since November 1994, starting with two trains a day in each direction to Paris and Brussels. By 1997, the company believes that it will be carrying ten million passengers a year, and continue to grow from there.
From July, Eurostar steps its service to nine trains each way between London and Paris, and five between London and Brussels. Each train carries almost 800 passengers, 210 of them in first class.
The airlines estimate that they will initially lose around 15%-20% of their London-Paris traffic to the railways once Eurostar starts a full service later this year (1995), with 15 trains a day each way. A similar service will start to Brussels. The damage will be limited, however, the airlines believe, with passenger numbers returning to previous levels within two to three years.
In the short term, the damage caused by the 1 million people-levels traveling between London and Paris and Brussels on Eurostar trains means that some air services are already suffering. Some of the major carriers say that their passenger numbers are down by less than 5% and point to their rivals-Particularly Air France-as having suffered the problems. On the Brussels route, the railway company had less success, and the airlines report anything from around a 5% drop to no visible decline in traffic.
The airlines' optimism on returning traffic levels is based on historical precedent. British Midland, for example, points to its experience on Heathrow Leeds Bradford service which saw passenger numbers fold by 15% when British Rail electrified and modernized the railway line between London and Yorkshire. Two years later, travel had risen between the two destinations to the point where the airline was carrying record numbers of passengers. | 81.txt | 1 |
[
"examinations exert a pernicious influence on education.",
"examinations are ineffective.",
"examinations are profitable for institutions.",
"examinations are a burden on students."
] | The main idea of this passage is | Examinations Exert a Pernicious Influence on Education
We might marvel at the progress made in every field ofstudy, but the methods of testing a person's knowledge andability remain as primitive as ever they were. It really isextraordinary that after all these years, educationists have stillfailed to device anything more efficient and reliable thanexaminations. For all the pious claim that examinations text whatyou know, it is common knowledge that they more often do theexact opposite. They may be a good means of testing memory, or the knack of working rapidlyunder extreme pressure, but they can tell you nothing about a person's true ability and aptitude.
As anxiety-makers, examinations are second to none. That is because so much depends on them.They are the mark of success of failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided in onefateful day. It doesn't matter that you weren't feeling very well, or that your mother died. Littlethings like that don't count: the exam goes on. No one can give of his best when he is in mortalterror, or after a sleepless night, yet this is precisely what the examination system expects him todo. The moment a child begins school, he enters a world of vicious competition where success andfailure are clearly defined and measured. Can we wonder at the increasing number of ‘drop-outs':young people who are written off as utter failures before they have even embarked on a career?Can we be surprised at the suicide rate among students?
A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examinationsystem does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus, so thestudent is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, butto restrict his reading; they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge, but inducecramming. They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms.Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching theirsubjects, they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. Themost successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained in thetechnique of working under duress.
The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than a subjective assessment bysome anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they makemistakes. Yet they have to mark stacks of hastily scrawled scripts in a limited amount of time. Theywork under the same sort of pressure as the candidates. And their word carries weight. After ajudge's decision you have the right of appeal, but not after an examiner's. There must surely bemany simpler and more effective ways of assessing a person's true abilities. Is it cynical to suggestthat examinations are merely a profitable business for the institutions that run them? This is what itboils down to in the last analysis. The best comment on the system is this illiterate messagerecently scrawled on a wall: ‘I were a teenage drop-out and now I are a teenage millionaire.' | 242.txt | 0 |
[
"detest.",
"approval.",
"critical.",
"indifferent."
] | The author's attitude toward examinations is | Examinations Exert a Pernicious Influence on Education
We might marvel at the progress made in every field ofstudy, but the methods of testing a person's knowledge andability remain as primitive as ever they were. It really isextraordinary that after all these years, educationists have stillfailed to device anything more efficient and reliable thanexaminations. For all the pious claim that examinations text whatyou know, it is common knowledge that they more often do theexact opposite. They may be a good means of testing memory, or the knack of working rapidlyunder extreme pressure, but they can tell you nothing about a person's true ability and aptitude.
As anxiety-makers, examinations are second to none. That is because so much depends on them.They are the mark of success of failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided in onefateful day. It doesn't matter that you weren't feeling very well, or that your mother died. Littlethings like that don't count: the exam goes on. No one can give of his best when he is in mortalterror, or after a sleepless night, yet this is precisely what the examination system expects him todo. The moment a child begins school, he enters a world of vicious competition where success andfailure are clearly defined and measured. Can we wonder at the increasing number of ‘drop-outs':young people who are written off as utter failures before they have even embarked on a career?Can we be surprised at the suicide rate among students?
A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examinationsystem does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus, so thestudent is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, butto restrict his reading; they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge, but inducecramming. They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms.Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching theirsubjects, they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. Themost successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained in thetechnique of working under duress.
The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than a subjective assessment bysome anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they makemistakes. Yet they have to mark stacks of hastily scrawled scripts in a limited amount of time. Theywork under the same sort of pressure as the candidates. And their word carries weight. After ajudge's decision you have the right of appeal, but not after an examiner's. There must surely bemany simpler and more effective ways of assessing a person's true abilities. Is it cynical to suggestthat examinations are merely a profitable business for the institutions that run them? This is what itboils down to in the last analysis. The best comment on the system is this illiterate messagerecently scrawled on a wall: ‘I were a teenage drop-out and now I are a teenage millionaire.' | 242.txt | 2 |
[
"education.",
"institutions.",
"examinations.",
"students themselves."
] | The fate of students is decided by | Examinations Exert a Pernicious Influence on Education
We might marvel at the progress made in every field ofstudy, but the methods of testing a person's knowledge andability remain as primitive as ever they were. It really isextraordinary that after all these years, educationists have stillfailed to device anything more efficient and reliable thanexaminations. For all the pious claim that examinations text whatyou know, it is common knowledge that they more often do theexact opposite. They may be a good means of testing memory, or the knack of working rapidlyunder extreme pressure, but they can tell you nothing about a person's true ability and aptitude.
As anxiety-makers, examinations are second to none. That is because so much depends on them.They are the mark of success of failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided in onefateful day. It doesn't matter that you weren't feeling very well, or that your mother died. Littlethings like that don't count: the exam goes on. No one can give of his best when he is in mortalterror, or after a sleepless night, yet this is precisely what the examination system expects him todo. The moment a child begins school, he enters a world of vicious competition where success andfailure are clearly defined and measured. Can we wonder at the increasing number of ‘drop-outs':young people who are written off as utter failures before they have even embarked on a career?Can we be surprised at the suicide rate among students?
A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examinationsystem does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus, so thestudent is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, butto restrict his reading; they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge, but inducecramming. They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms.Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching theirsubjects, they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. Themost successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained in thetechnique of working under duress.
The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than a subjective assessment bysome anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they makemistakes. Yet they have to mark stacks of hastily scrawled scripts in a limited amount of time. Theywork under the same sort of pressure as the candidates. And their word carries weight. After ajudge's decision you have the right of appeal, but not after an examiner's. There must surely bemany simpler and more effective ways of assessing a person's true abilities. Is it cynical to suggestthat examinations are merely a profitable business for the institutions that run them? This is what itboils down to in the last analysis. The best comment on the system is this illiterate messagerecently scrawled on a wall: ‘I were a teenage drop-out and now I are a teenage millionaire.' | 242.txt | 2 |
[
"to encourage students to read widely.",
"to train students to think on their own.",
"to teach students how to tackle exams.",
"to master his fate."
] | According to the author, the most important of a good education is | Examinations Exert a Pernicious Influence on Education
We might marvel at the progress made in every field ofstudy, but the methods of testing a person's knowledge andability remain as primitive as ever they were. It really isextraordinary that after all these years, educationists have stillfailed to device anything more efficient and reliable thanexaminations. For all the pious claim that examinations text whatyou know, it is common knowledge that they more often do theexact opposite. They may be a good means of testing memory, or the knack of working rapidlyunder extreme pressure, but they can tell you nothing about a person's true ability and aptitude.
As anxiety-makers, examinations are second to none. That is because so much depends on them.They are the mark of success of failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided in onefateful day. It doesn't matter that you weren't feeling very well, or that your mother died. Littlethings like that don't count: the exam goes on. No one can give of his best when he is in mortalterror, or after a sleepless night, yet this is precisely what the examination system expects him todo. The moment a child begins school, he enters a world of vicious competition where success andfailure are clearly defined and measured. Can we wonder at the increasing number of ‘drop-outs':young people who are written off as utter failures before they have even embarked on a career?Can we be surprised at the suicide rate among students?
A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examinationsystem does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus, so thestudent is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, butto restrict his reading; they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge, but inducecramming. They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms.Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching theirsubjects, they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. Themost successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained in thetechnique of working under duress.
The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than a subjective assessment bysome anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they makemistakes. Yet they have to mark stacks of hastily scrawled scripts in a limited amount of time. Theywork under the same sort of pressure as the candidates. And their word carries weight. After ajudge's decision you have the right of appeal, but not after an examiner's. There must surely bemany simpler and more effective ways of assessing a person's true abilities. Is it cynical to suggestthat examinations are merely a profitable business for the institutions that run them? This is what itboils down to in the last analysis. The best comment on the system is this illiterate messagerecently scrawled on a wall: ‘I were a teenage drop-out and now I are a teenage millionaire.' | 242.txt | 1 |
[
"Give an example.",
"For comparison.",
"It shows that teachers' evolutions depend on the results of examinations.",
"It shows the results of court is more effectise."
] | Why does the author mention court? | Examinations Exert a Pernicious Influence on Education
We might marvel at the progress made in every field ofstudy, but the methods of testing a person's knowledge andability remain as primitive as ever they were. It really isextraordinary that after all these years, educationists have stillfailed to device anything more efficient and reliable thanexaminations. For all the pious claim that examinations text whatyou know, it is common knowledge that they more often do theexact opposite. They may be a good means of testing memory, or the knack of working rapidlyunder extreme pressure, but they can tell you nothing about a person's true ability and aptitude.
As anxiety-makers, examinations are second to none. That is because so much depends on them.They are the mark of success of failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided in onefateful day. It doesn't matter that you weren't feeling very well, or that your mother died. Littlethings like that don't count: the exam goes on. No one can give of his best when he is in mortalterror, or after a sleepless night, yet this is precisely what the examination system expects him todo. The moment a child begins school, he enters a world of vicious competition where success andfailure are clearly defined and measured. Can we wonder at the increasing number of ‘drop-outs':young people who are written off as utter failures before they have even embarked on a career?Can we be surprised at the suicide rate among students?
A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examinationsystem does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus, so thestudent is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, butto restrict his reading; they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge, but inducecramming. They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms.Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching theirsubjects, they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. Themost successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained in thetechnique of working under duress.
The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than a subjective assessment bysome anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they makemistakes. Yet they have to mark stacks of hastily scrawled scripts in a limited amount of time. Theywork under the same sort of pressure as the candidates. And their word carries weight. After ajudge's decision you have the right of appeal, but not after an examiner's. There must surely bemany simpler and more effective ways of assessing a person's true abilities. Is it cynical to suggestthat examinations are merely a profitable business for the institutions that run them? This is what itboils down to in the last analysis. The best comment on the system is this illiterate messagerecently scrawled on a wall: ‘I were a teenage drop-out and now I are a teenage millionaire.' | 242.txt | 1 |
[
"negative",
"neutral",
"positive",
"questioning"
] | The author's attitude toward the development of nuclear power is _ . | In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor "meltdown". Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U. S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U. S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a halt while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice-but-not-necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60's. Millstone, completed for $ 101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $ 5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start up, used his power to force New York's public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. I'oday, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. | 839.txt | 2 |
[
"The inefficiency of the Nuclear Regulation Commission.",
"The enormous cost of construction and operation.",
"The length of time it takes to make investigations.",
"The objection of the opponents of nuclear power."
] | What has made the procedure for licensing nuclear power plants a bad dream? | In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor "meltdown". Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U. S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U. S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a halt while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice-but-not-necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60's. Millstone, completed for $ 101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $ 5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start up, used his power to force New York's public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. I'oday, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. | 839.txt | 3 |
[
"there are not enough safety measures in the U. S. for running new nuclear power plants",
"it is not technical difficulties that prevent the building of nuclear power plants in the U. S.",
"there are already more nuclear power plants than necessary in the U. S.",
"the American government will not allow Japanese nuclear reactors to be installed in the U. S."
] | It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that _ . | In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor "meltdown". Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U. S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U. S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a halt while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice-but-not-necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60's. Millstone, completed for $ 101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $ 5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start up, used his power to force New York's public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. I'oday, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. | 839.txt | 1 |
[
"stop the Shoreham plant from going into operation",
"urge the power company to further increase its power supply",
"permit the Shoreham plant to operate under certain conditions",
"help the power company to solve its financial problems"
] | Governor Mario Cuomo's chief intention in proposing the settlement was to _ . | In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor "meltdown". Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U. S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U. S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a halt while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice-but-not-necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60's. Millstone, completed for $ 101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $ 5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start up, used his power to force New York's public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. I'oday, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. | 839.txt | 0 |
[
"delay",
"end up",
"complete",
"separate"
] | The phrase "single out" is closest in meaning to _ . | In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor "meltdown". Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U. S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U. S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a halt while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice-but-not-necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60's. Millstone, completed for $ 101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $ 5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start up, used his power to force New York's public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. I'oday, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. | 839.txt | 3 |
[
"many customers didn't keep their privacy confidential.",
"it is harmful to give a store clerk a telephone number.",
"careless disposal of personal information can be harmful.",
"customers should inquire its use when giving telephone numbers to others."
] | In the first paragraph, the telephone number is cited to show | The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not seem harmful--so much so that many consumers do it with no questions asked. Yet that one action can set in motion a cascade of silent events, as that data point is acquired, analyzed, categorized, stored and sold over and over again. Future attacks on your privacy may come from anywhere, from anyone with money to purchase that phone number you surrendered. If you doubt the multiplier effect, consider your e-mail inbox. If it's loaded with spam, it's undoubtedly because at some point in time you unknowingly surrendered your e-mall to the wrong Web site.
Do you think your telephone number or address is handled differently? A cottage industry of small companies with names you've probably never heard of--like Acxiom or Merlin--buy and sell your personal information the way other commodities like corn or cattle futures are bartered. You may think your cell phone is unlisted, but if you've ever ordered a pizza, it might not be. Merlin is one of many commercial data brokers that advertises sale of unlisted phone numbers compiled from various sources--including pizza delivery companies. These unintended, unpredictable consequences that flow from simple actions make privacy issues difficult to grasp, and grapple with.
In a larger sense, privacy also is often cast as a tale of "Big Brother"--the government is watching you or An big corporation is watching you. But privacy issues don't necessarily involve large faceless institutions: A spouse takes a casual glance at her husband's Blackberry, a co-worker looks at e-mall over your shoulder or a friend glances at a cell phone text message from the next seat on the bus. while very little of this is news to anyone--people are now well aware there are video cameras and Internet cookies everywhere--there is abundant evidence that people live their lives ignorant of the monitoring, assuming a mythical level of privacy. People write e-mails and type instant messages they never expect anyone to see. Just ask Mark Foley or even Bill Gates, whose e-mails were a cornerstone of the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft.
And polls and studies have repeatedly shown that Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns. The general defense for such indifference is summed up a single phrase: "I have nothing to hide." If you have nothing to hide, why shouldn't the government be able to peek at your phone records, your wife see your e-mail or a company send you junk mail? It's a powerful argument, one that privacy advocates spend considerable time discussing and strategizing over.
It is hard to deny, however, that people behave different when they're being watched. And it is also impossible to deny that Americans are now being watched more than at any time in history. | 4.txt | 2 |
[
"Compile telephone directories for businessmen.",
"Collect and sell personal information to make a profit.",
"Trade commodities like corn on the market.",
"Crack down crimes like stealing private information."
] | What do companies like Acxiom and Merlin do? | The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not seem harmful--so much so that many consumers do it with no questions asked. Yet that one action can set in motion a cascade of silent events, as that data point is acquired, analyzed, categorized, stored and sold over and over again. Future attacks on your privacy may come from anywhere, from anyone with money to purchase that phone number you surrendered. If you doubt the multiplier effect, consider your e-mail inbox. If it's loaded with spam, it's undoubtedly because at some point in time you unknowingly surrendered your e-mall to the wrong Web site.
Do you think your telephone number or address is handled differently? A cottage industry of small companies with names you've probably never heard of--like Acxiom or Merlin--buy and sell your personal information the way other commodities like corn or cattle futures are bartered. You may think your cell phone is unlisted, but if you've ever ordered a pizza, it might not be. Merlin is one of many commercial data brokers that advertises sale of unlisted phone numbers compiled from various sources--including pizza delivery companies. These unintended, unpredictable consequences that flow from simple actions make privacy issues difficult to grasp, and grapple with.
In a larger sense, privacy also is often cast as a tale of "Big Brother"--the government is watching you or An big corporation is watching you. But privacy issues don't necessarily involve large faceless institutions: A spouse takes a casual glance at her husband's Blackberry, a co-worker looks at e-mall over your shoulder or a friend glances at a cell phone text message from the next seat on the bus. while very little of this is news to anyone--people are now well aware there are video cameras and Internet cookies everywhere--there is abundant evidence that people live their lives ignorant of the monitoring, assuming a mythical level of privacy. People write e-mails and type instant messages they never expect anyone to see. Just ask Mark Foley or even Bill Gates, whose e-mails were a cornerstone of the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft.
And polls and studies have repeatedly shown that Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns. The general defense for such indifference is summed up a single phrase: "I have nothing to hide." If you have nothing to hide, why shouldn't the government be able to peek at your phone records, your wife see your e-mail or a company send you junk mail? It's a powerful argument, one that privacy advocates spend considerable time discussing and strategizing over.
It is hard to deny, however, that people behave different when they're being watched. And it is also impossible to deny that Americans are now being watched more than at any time in history. | 4.txt | 1 |
[
"cases of privacy intrusion happen only in large institutions.",
"people are quite aware of how their privacy is intruded.",
"it is not privacy intrusion when a wife glances at her husband's cell phone.",
"Bill Gates' email messages were cited as evidence against him.。"
] | From Paragraph 3, we learn that | The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not seem harmful--so much so that many consumers do it with no questions asked. Yet that one action can set in motion a cascade of silent events, as that data point is acquired, analyzed, categorized, stored and sold over and over again. Future attacks on your privacy may come from anywhere, from anyone with money to purchase that phone number you surrendered. If you doubt the multiplier effect, consider your e-mail inbox. If it's loaded with spam, it's undoubtedly because at some point in time you unknowingly surrendered your e-mall to the wrong Web site.
Do you think your telephone number or address is handled differently? A cottage industry of small companies with names you've probably never heard of--like Acxiom or Merlin--buy and sell your personal information the way other commodities like corn or cattle futures are bartered. You may think your cell phone is unlisted, but if you've ever ordered a pizza, it might not be. Merlin is one of many commercial data brokers that advertises sale of unlisted phone numbers compiled from various sources--including pizza delivery companies. These unintended, unpredictable consequences that flow from simple actions make privacy issues difficult to grasp, and grapple with.
In a larger sense, privacy also is often cast as a tale of "Big Brother"--the government is watching you or An big corporation is watching you. But privacy issues don't necessarily involve large faceless institutions: A spouse takes a casual glance at her husband's Blackberry, a co-worker looks at e-mall over your shoulder or a friend glances at a cell phone text message from the next seat on the bus. while very little of this is news to anyone--people are now well aware there are video cameras and Internet cookies everywhere--there is abundant evidence that people live their lives ignorant of the monitoring, assuming a mythical level of privacy. People write e-mails and type instant messages they never expect anyone to see. Just ask Mark Foley or even Bill Gates, whose e-mails were a cornerstone of the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft.
And polls and studies have repeatedly shown that Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns. The general defense for such indifference is summed up a single phrase: "I have nothing to hide." If you have nothing to hide, why shouldn't the government be able to peek at your phone records, your wife see your e-mail or a company send you junk mail? It's a powerful argument, one that privacy advocates spend considerable time discussing and strategizing over.
It is hard to deny, however, that people behave different when they're being watched. And it is also impossible to deny that Americans are now being watched more than at any time in history. | 4.txt | 3 |
[
"Americans are actually concerned about privacy issues.",
"Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns.",
"Americans are very frank about privacy concerns.",
"Americans are puzzled about privacy concerns."
] | It can be inferred from the fourth paragraph that the author thinks | The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not seem harmful--so much so that many consumers do it with no questions asked. Yet that one action can set in motion a cascade of silent events, as that data point is acquired, analyzed, categorized, stored and sold over and over again. Future attacks on your privacy may come from anywhere, from anyone with money to purchase that phone number you surrendered. If you doubt the multiplier effect, consider your e-mail inbox. If it's loaded with spam, it's undoubtedly because at some point in time you unknowingly surrendered your e-mall to the wrong Web site.
Do you think your telephone number or address is handled differently? A cottage industry of small companies with names you've probably never heard of--like Acxiom or Merlin--buy and sell your personal information the way other commodities like corn or cattle futures are bartered. You may think your cell phone is unlisted, but if you've ever ordered a pizza, it might not be. Merlin is one of many commercial data brokers that advertises sale of unlisted phone numbers compiled from various sources--including pizza delivery companies. These unintended, unpredictable consequences that flow from simple actions make privacy issues difficult to grasp, and grapple with.
In a larger sense, privacy also is often cast as a tale of "Big Brother"--the government is watching you or An big corporation is watching you. But privacy issues don't necessarily involve large faceless institutions: A spouse takes a casual glance at her husband's Blackberry, a co-worker looks at e-mall over your shoulder or a friend glances at a cell phone text message from the next seat on the bus. while very little of this is news to anyone--people are now well aware there are video cameras and Internet cookies everywhere--there is abundant evidence that people live their lives ignorant of the monitoring, assuming a mythical level of privacy. People write e-mails and type instant messages they never expect anyone to see. Just ask Mark Foley or even Bill Gates, whose e-mails were a cornerstone of the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft.
And polls and studies have repeatedly shown that Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns. The general defense for such indifference is summed up a single phrase: "I have nothing to hide." If you have nothing to hide, why shouldn't the government be able to peek at your phone records, your wife see your e-mail or a company send you junk mail? It's a powerful argument, one that privacy advocates spend considerable time discussing and strategizing over.
It is hard to deny, however, that people behave different when they're being watched. And it is also impossible to deny that Americans are now being watched more than at any time in history. | 4.txt | 0 |
[
"Never give your private information to anyone.",
"People should pay more attention to their privacy issues.",
"Do not surrender your email to any website.",
"It does no good saying \"I have nothing to hide\"."
] | Which of the following is the author's viewpoint? | The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not seem harmful--so much so that many consumers do it with no questions asked. Yet that one action can set in motion a cascade of silent events, as that data point is acquired, analyzed, categorized, stored and sold over and over again. Future attacks on your privacy may come from anywhere, from anyone with money to purchase that phone number you surrendered. If you doubt the multiplier effect, consider your e-mail inbox. If it's loaded with spam, it's undoubtedly because at some point in time you unknowingly surrendered your e-mall to the wrong Web site.
Do you think your telephone number or address is handled differently? A cottage industry of small companies with names you've probably never heard of--like Acxiom or Merlin--buy and sell your personal information the way other commodities like corn or cattle futures are bartered. You may think your cell phone is unlisted, but if you've ever ordered a pizza, it might not be. Merlin is one of many commercial data brokers that advertises sale of unlisted phone numbers compiled from various sources--including pizza delivery companies. These unintended, unpredictable consequences that flow from simple actions make privacy issues difficult to grasp, and grapple with.
In a larger sense, privacy also is often cast as a tale of "Big Brother"--the government is watching you or An big corporation is watching you. But privacy issues don't necessarily involve large faceless institutions: A spouse takes a casual glance at her husband's Blackberry, a co-worker looks at e-mall over your shoulder or a friend glances at a cell phone text message from the next seat on the bus. while very little of this is news to anyone--people are now well aware there are video cameras and Internet cookies everywhere--there is abundant evidence that people live their lives ignorant of the monitoring, assuming a mythical level of privacy. People write e-mails and type instant messages they never expect anyone to see. Just ask Mark Foley or even Bill Gates, whose e-mails were a cornerstone of the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft.
And polls and studies have repeatedly shown that Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns. The general defense for such indifference is summed up a single phrase: "I have nothing to hide." If you have nothing to hide, why shouldn't the government be able to peek at your phone records, your wife see your e-mail or a company send you junk mail? It's a powerful argument, one that privacy advocates spend considerable time discussing and strategizing over.
It is hard to deny, however, that people behave different when they're being watched. And it is also impossible to deny that Americans are now being watched more than at any time in history. | 4.txt | 1 |
[
"Wal-Mart would have severe competition with the local stores.",
"War-Mart would provide customers with a larger choice and more benefits.",
"It was said to have ruined the scene of the ancient site.",
"There shouldn't be a store near the ancient site."
] | Why did the opening of Wal-Mart cause stir? | At the end of last week, Bodega Aurrerá, a Mexican subsidiary of the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart, opened a new store in the village of San Juan Teotihuacán, just north of Mexico City. Normally, such an event would cause little stir. Wal-Mart is already Mexico's biggest retailer too. And its shops seem to go down very well with its millions of bargain-hungry customers. But this particular opening was, in fact, the culmination of months of protests, legal actions, hunger strikes and hyperbole by those determined to stop it.
The reason is the location. Just 2.5km（1.6 miles）away is the ancient city of Teotihuacán, probably Mexico's most famous archaeological site. Amongst other attractions, it boasts the third-largest（by volume）pyramid in the world. For many Mexicans, the ancient site, abandoned by its mysterious inhabitants centuries before the Spanish conquerors arrived, remains the ultimate symbol of Mexican identity and nationhood. Thousands troop up to the top of the Pyramid of the Sun to celebrate the summer solstice.
To them, the idea of having a Wal-Mart next door is abhorrent. In the words of Homero Aridjis, a writer and one of the leading opponents, " it is like driving the stake of globalisation into the heart of old Mexico." The controversy is only the latest in a string of protesters' attempts to save Mexican culture from what they see as a creeping menace. They won a famous victory by blocking a McDonalds restaurant from opening in the main square of the pretty southern colonial town of Oaxaca.
But this time they were on much thinner ground. For a start, Wal-Mart went through all the appropriate regulatory hoops, even getting permission from the Paris-based International Council on Monuments and Sites, which judged that the store would cause no harm to the nearby ruins. A small stone platform was indeed found during construction of the new car park, but was preserved.
Just as importantly, the claim that the new store spoils the famous view from the top of the Pyramid of the Sun is clearly bogus, as anyone who cares to get to the top can testify. The problem is not so much that you can see the Wal-Mart, but one of trying to distinguish it from the 30-odd other ugly, squat buildings that litter the surrounding countryside-to say nothing of the car parks, the electricity pylons and the large power station. Sadly, unrestricted building long ago ruined this particular view, as well as many others in Mexico.
To the diehards, the issue counts more than the view. But neither mattered much to the hundreds of locals who queued up for the opening, delighted to be freed of the small and expensive local shops. Despite a legal case pending against Wal-Mart and local officials, brought by an irate local left-wing politician, this is one battle that the American retailer has probably won. | 474.txt | 2 |
[
"the ancient city means a lot to the Mexicans",
"a store will be too noisy for the ancient city",
"the ancient city is very mysterious",
"the pyramid is a good place for holding a big ceremony"
] | From Paragraph 2 we can infer that _ . | At the end of last week, Bodega Aurrerá, a Mexican subsidiary of the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart, opened a new store in the village of San Juan Teotihuacán, just north of Mexico City. Normally, such an event would cause little stir. Wal-Mart is already Mexico's biggest retailer too. And its shops seem to go down very well with its millions of bargain-hungry customers. But this particular opening was, in fact, the culmination of months of protests, legal actions, hunger strikes and hyperbole by those determined to stop it.
The reason is the location. Just 2.5km（1.6 miles）away is the ancient city of Teotihuacán, probably Mexico's most famous archaeological site. Amongst other attractions, it boasts the third-largest（by volume）pyramid in the world. For many Mexicans, the ancient site, abandoned by its mysterious inhabitants centuries before the Spanish conquerors arrived, remains the ultimate symbol of Mexican identity and nationhood. Thousands troop up to the top of the Pyramid of the Sun to celebrate the summer solstice.
To them, the idea of having a Wal-Mart next door is abhorrent. In the words of Homero Aridjis, a writer and one of the leading opponents, " it is like driving the stake of globalisation into the heart of old Mexico." The controversy is only the latest in a string of protesters' attempts to save Mexican culture from what they see as a creeping menace. They won a famous victory by blocking a McDonalds restaurant from opening in the main square of the pretty southern colonial town of Oaxaca.
But this time they were on much thinner ground. For a start, Wal-Mart went through all the appropriate regulatory hoops, even getting permission from the Paris-based International Council on Monuments and Sites, which judged that the store would cause no harm to the nearby ruins. A small stone platform was indeed found during construction of the new car park, but was preserved.
Just as importantly, the claim that the new store spoils the famous view from the top of the Pyramid of the Sun is clearly bogus, as anyone who cares to get to the top can testify. The problem is not so much that you can see the Wal-Mart, but one of trying to distinguish it from the 30-odd other ugly, squat buildings that litter the surrounding countryside-to say nothing of the car parks, the electricity pylons and the large power station. Sadly, unrestricted building long ago ruined this particular view, as well as many others in Mexico.
To the diehards, the issue counts more than the view. But neither mattered much to the hundreds of locals who queued up for the opening, delighted to be freed of the small and expensive local shops. Despite a legal case pending against Wal-Mart and local officials, brought by an irate local left-wing politician, this is one battle that the American retailer has probably won. | 474.txt | 0 |
[
"it proves no harm to the nearby ruins",
"the scene of the ancient sites has been damaged",
"customers want to buy some cheap products",
"it has been widely accepted by the customers there"
] | According to Wal-Mart, it has a good reason to build a store there because _ . | At the end of last week, Bodega Aurrerá, a Mexican subsidiary of the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart, opened a new store in the village of San Juan Teotihuacán, just north of Mexico City. Normally, such an event would cause little stir. Wal-Mart is already Mexico's biggest retailer too. And its shops seem to go down very well with its millions of bargain-hungry customers. But this particular opening was, in fact, the culmination of months of protests, legal actions, hunger strikes and hyperbole by those determined to stop it.
The reason is the location. Just 2.5km（1.6 miles）away is the ancient city of Teotihuacán, probably Mexico's most famous archaeological site. Amongst other attractions, it boasts the third-largest（by volume）pyramid in the world. For many Mexicans, the ancient site, abandoned by its mysterious inhabitants centuries before the Spanish conquerors arrived, remains the ultimate symbol of Mexican identity and nationhood. Thousands troop up to the top of the Pyramid of the Sun to celebrate the summer solstice.
To them, the idea of having a Wal-Mart next door is abhorrent. In the words of Homero Aridjis, a writer and one of the leading opponents, " it is like driving the stake of globalisation into the heart of old Mexico." The controversy is only the latest in a string of protesters' attempts to save Mexican culture from what they see as a creeping menace. They won a famous victory by blocking a McDonalds restaurant from opening in the main square of the pretty southern colonial town of Oaxaca.
But this time they were on much thinner ground. For a start, Wal-Mart went through all the appropriate regulatory hoops, even getting permission from the Paris-based International Council on Monuments and Sites, which judged that the store would cause no harm to the nearby ruins. A small stone platform was indeed found during construction of the new car park, but was preserved.
Just as importantly, the claim that the new store spoils the famous view from the top of the Pyramid of the Sun is clearly bogus, as anyone who cares to get to the top can testify. The problem is not so much that you can see the Wal-Mart, but one of trying to distinguish it from the 30-odd other ugly, squat buildings that litter the surrounding countryside-to say nothing of the car parks, the electricity pylons and the large power station. Sadly, unrestricted building long ago ruined this particular view, as well as many others in Mexico.
To the diehards, the issue counts more than the view. But neither mattered much to the hundreds of locals who queued up for the opening, delighted to be freed of the small and expensive local shops. Despite a legal case pending against Wal-Mart and local officials, brought by an irate local left-wing politician, this is one battle that the American retailer has probably won. | 474.txt | 3 |
[
"the famous view is not as good as it used to be",
"the city lacks planning in building",
"the ancient site is littered with ugly buildings",
"Wal-Mart shouldn't be fully responsible for the ruined view"
] | It can be learned from Paragraph 5 that _ . | At the end of last week, Bodega Aurrerá, a Mexican subsidiary of the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart, opened a new store in the village of San Juan Teotihuacán, just north of Mexico City. Normally, such an event would cause little stir. Wal-Mart is already Mexico's biggest retailer too. And its shops seem to go down very well with its millions of bargain-hungry customers. But this particular opening was, in fact, the culmination of months of protests, legal actions, hunger strikes and hyperbole by those determined to stop it.
The reason is the location. Just 2.5km（1.6 miles）away is the ancient city of Teotihuacán, probably Mexico's most famous archaeological site. Amongst other attractions, it boasts the third-largest（by volume）pyramid in the world. For many Mexicans, the ancient site, abandoned by its mysterious inhabitants centuries before the Spanish conquerors arrived, remains the ultimate symbol of Mexican identity and nationhood. Thousands troop up to the top of the Pyramid of the Sun to celebrate the summer solstice.
To them, the idea of having a Wal-Mart next door is abhorrent. In the words of Homero Aridjis, a writer and one of the leading opponents, " it is like driving the stake of globalisation into the heart of old Mexico." The controversy is only the latest in a string of protesters' attempts to save Mexican culture from what they see as a creeping menace. They won a famous victory by blocking a McDonalds restaurant from opening in the main square of the pretty southern colonial town of Oaxaca.
But this time they were on much thinner ground. For a start, Wal-Mart went through all the appropriate regulatory hoops, even getting permission from the Paris-based International Council on Monuments and Sites, which judged that the store would cause no harm to the nearby ruins. A small stone platform was indeed found during construction of the new car park, but was preserved.
Just as importantly, the claim that the new store spoils the famous view from the top of the Pyramid of the Sun is clearly bogus, as anyone who cares to get to the top can testify. The problem is not so much that you can see the Wal-Mart, but one of trying to distinguish it from the 30-odd other ugly, squat buildings that litter the surrounding countryside-to say nothing of the car parks, the electricity pylons and the large power station. Sadly, unrestricted building long ago ruined this particular view, as well as many others in Mexico.
To the diehards, the issue counts more than the view. But neither mattered much to the hundreds of locals who queued up for the opening, delighted to be freed of the small and expensive local shops. Despite a legal case pending against Wal-Mart and local officials, brought by an irate local left-wing politician, this is one battle that the American retailer has probably won. | 474.txt | 3 |
[
"objective",
"optimistic",
"pessimistic",
"biased"
] | Toward the fate of Wal-Mart, the writer's attitude can be said to be _ . | At the end of last week, Bodega Aurrerá, a Mexican subsidiary of the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart, opened a new store in the village of San Juan Teotihuacán, just north of Mexico City. Normally, such an event would cause little stir. Wal-Mart is already Mexico's biggest retailer too. And its shops seem to go down very well with its millions of bargain-hungry customers. But this particular opening was, in fact, the culmination of months of protests, legal actions, hunger strikes and hyperbole by those determined to stop it.
The reason is the location. Just 2.5km（1.6 miles）away is the ancient city of Teotihuacán, probably Mexico's most famous archaeological site. Amongst other attractions, it boasts the third-largest（by volume）pyramid in the world. For many Mexicans, the ancient site, abandoned by its mysterious inhabitants centuries before the Spanish conquerors arrived, remains the ultimate symbol of Mexican identity and nationhood. Thousands troop up to the top of the Pyramid of the Sun to celebrate the summer solstice.
To them, the idea of having a Wal-Mart next door is abhorrent. In the words of Homero Aridjis, a writer and one of the leading opponents, " it is like driving the stake of globalisation into the heart of old Mexico." The controversy is only the latest in a string of protesters' attempts to save Mexican culture from what they see as a creeping menace. They won a famous victory by blocking a McDonalds restaurant from opening in the main square of the pretty southern colonial town of Oaxaca.
But this time they were on much thinner ground. For a start, Wal-Mart went through all the appropriate regulatory hoops, even getting permission from the Paris-based International Council on Monuments and Sites, which judged that the store would cause no harm to the nearby ruins. A small stone platform was indeed found during construction of the new car park, but was preserved.
Just as importantly, the claim that the new store spoils the famous view from the top of the Pyramid of the Sun is clearly bogus, as anyone who cares to get to the top can testify. The problem is not so much that you can see the Wal-Mart, but one of trying to distinguish it from the 30-odd other ugly, squat buildings that litter the surrounding countryside-to say nothing of the car parks, the electricity pylons and the large power station. Sadly, unrestricted building long ago ruined this particular view, as well as many others in Mexico.
To the diehards, the issue counts more than the view. But neither mattered much to the hundreds of locals who queued up for the opening, delighted to be freed of the small and expensive local shops. Despite a legal case pending against Wal-Mart and local officials, brought by an irate local left-wing politician, this is one battle that the American retailer has probably won. | 474.txt | 1 |
[
"masterful lyricism as expressed in her writings on the dance",
"concerted efforts to subdue the natural movements of the dance",
"belated recognition that she could not actually fulfill all of her ideals for the dance",
"basic standards for the dance form that she wished to create and perform"
] | The author is primarily concerned with Duncan's | Isadora Duncan's masterly writings on the dance reveal the depth of her determination to create a lyric form of the art which was free of characterization, storytelling, and the theatrical exhibition of skills. She wished to discard the traditional methods and established vocabularies of such dance forms as ballet and to explore the internal sources of human expressiveness. She shunned bodily ornamentation and strove to use only the natural movements of her body, undistorted by acrobatic exaggeration and stimulated only by internal compulsion. In her recitals Duncan danced to the music of Beethoven, Wagner, and Gluck, among others, but, contrary to popular belief, she made no attempt to visualize or to interpret the music; rather, she simply relied on it to provide the inspiration for expressing inner feelings through movement. She did not regard this use of music as ideal, however, believing that she would someday dispense with music entirely. That day never came. | 1873.txt | 3 |
[
"interpret musical works solely by means of natural body movements",
"foster the illusion that music serves as an inspiration for the dance",
"inspire the expression of inner feeling when she danced",
"validate the public belief that music inspires the expression of feeling through movement"
] | The author implies that Duncan relied on music in her recitals in order to | Isadora Duncan's masterly writings on the dance reveal the depth of her determination to create a lyric form of the art which was free of characterization, storytelling, and the theatrical exhibition of skills. She wished to discard the traditional methods and established vocabularies of such dance forms as ballet and to explore the internal sources of human expressiveness. She shunned bodily ornamentation and strove to use only the natural movements of her body, undistorted by acrobatic exaggeration and stimulated only by internal compulsion. In her recitals Duncan danced to the music of Beethoven, Wagner, and Gluck, among others, but, contrary to popular belief, she made no attempt to visualize or to interpret the music; rather, she simply relied on it to provide the inspiration for expressing inner feelings through movement. She did not regard this use of music as ideal, however, believing that she would someday dispense with music entirely. That day never came. | 1873.txt | 2 |
[
"avoid the use of standard ballet techniques",
"revitalize an earlier established vocabulary",
"draw on internal sources of human expressiveness",
"create intended effects without the use of acrobatic exaggeration"
] | According to the passage, Duncan intended to develop an art form that would do all of the following EXCEPT | Isadora Duncan's masterly writings on the dance reveal the depth of her determination to create a lyric form of the art which was free of characterization, storytelling, and the theatrical exhibition of skills. She wished to discard the traditional methods and established vocabularies of such dance forms as ballet and to explore the internal sources of human expressiveness. She shunned bodily ornamentation and strove to use only the natural movements of her body, undistorted by acrobatic exaggeration and stimulated only by internal compulsion. In her recitals Duncan danced to the music of Beethoven, Wagner, and Gluck, among others, but, contrary to popular belief, she made no attempt to visualize or to interpret the music; rather, she simply relied on it to provide the inspiration for expressing inner feelings through movement. She did not regard this use of music as ideal, however, believing that she would someday dispense with music entirely. That day never came. | 1873.txt | 1 |
[
"Using music to stimulate the inspiration to dance",
"Attempting to free an art form of both characterization and storytelling",
"Minimizing the theatrical exhibition of skills",
"Being inspired to express inner feeling through movement"
] | It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following endeavors is LEAST compatible with Duncan's ideals for the dance? | Isadora Duncan's masterly writings on the dance reveal the depth of her determination to create a lyric form of the art which was free of characterization, storytelling, and the theatrical exhibition of skills. She wished to discard the traditional methods and established vocabularies of such dance forms as ballet and to explore the internal sources of human expressiveness. She shunned bodily ornamentation and strove to use only the natural movements of her body, undistorted by acrobatic exaggeration and stimulated only by internal compulsion. In her recitals Duncan danced to the music of Beethoven, Wagner, and Gluck, among others, but, contrary to popular belief, she made no attempt to visualize or to interpret the music; rather, she simply relied on it to provide the inspiration for expressing inner feelings through movement. She did not regard this use of music as ideal, however, believing that she would someday dispense with music entirely. That day never came. | 1873.txt | 0 |
[
"People's Daily",
"Shenzhen Special Zone Daily",
"school in Shenzhen City",
"parents in Shenzhen City"
] | This piece of news was reported by. | Schools and parents in Shenzhen City have been asked to take better care of children's eyesight as 45 percent of them, were found to be shortsighted. Too much reading, poor lighting and too much TV are blamed. Of the city's high school graduates. who applied to attend college this summer, two-thirds had to have their choices limited because of poor eyesight, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily said. | 1795.txt | 1 |
[
"criticize children who are shortsighted",
"blame parents and schools for children's being shortsighted",
"ask the high school graduates to pay attention to their eyesight",
"draw people's special attention to eye hygiene"
] | The purpose of this passage is to. | Schools and parents in Shenzhen City have been asked to take better care of children's eyesight as 45 percent of them, were found to be shortsighted. Too much reading, poor lighting and too much TV are blamed. Of the city's high school graduates. who applied to attend college this summer, two-thirds had to have their choices limited because of poor eyesight, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily said. | 1795.txt | 3 |
[
"45 percent",
"less than half",
"55 percent",
"two-thirds"
] | Only of the children in Shenzhen City have good eyesight. | Schools and parents in Shenzhen City have been asked to take better care of children's eyesight as 45 percent of them, were found to be shortsighted. Too much reading, poor lighting and too much TV are blamed. Of the city's high school graduates. who applied to attend college this summer, two-thirds had to have their choices limited because of poor eyesight, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily said. | 1795.txt | 2 |
[
"poorer",
"still better",
"poor",
"brighter"
] | Generally speaking, high school students have eyesight than primary school students. | Schools and parents in Shenzhen City have been asked to take better care of children's eyesight as 45 percent of them, were found to be shortsighted. Too much reading, poor lighting and too much TV are blamed. Of the city's high school graduates. who applied to attend college this summer, two-thirds had to have their choices limited because of poor eyesight, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily said. | 1795.txt | 0 |
[
"weren't allowed to enter college",
"couldn't graduate from high school",
"couldn't choose to study what they liked best",
"lost their limited time"
] | Because of being shortsighted many school graduates. | Schools and parents in Shenzhen City have been asked to take better care of children's eyesight as 45 percent of them, were found to be shortsighted. Too much reading, poor lighting and too much TV are blamed. Of the city's high school graduates. who applied to attend college this summer, two-thirds had to have their choices limited because of poor eyesight, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily said. | 1795.txt | 2 |
[
"read books",
"wear glasses",
"make their eyes too tired",
"see things far away"
] | In order to protect their eyes, children shouldn't. | Schools and parents in Shenzhen City have been asked to take better care of children's eyesight as 45 percent of them, were found to be shortsighted. Too much reading, poor lighting and too much TV are blamed. Of the city's high school graduates. who applied to attend college this summer, two-thirds had to have their choices limited because of poor eyesight, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily said. | 1795.txt | 2 |
[
"It inspired many leading designers to start going green.",
"It showed that designers using organic fabrics would go far.",
"It served as an example of how fashion shows should be organized.",
"It convinced the public that fashionable clothes should be made durable."
] | What is said about FutureFashion? | The January fashion show, called FutureFashion, exemplified how far green design has come. Organized by the New York-based nonprofit Earth Pledge, the show inspired many top designers to work with sustainable fabrics for the first time. Several have since made pledges to include organic fabrics in their lines.
The designers who undertake green fashion still face many challenges. Scott Hahn, cofounder with Gregory of Rogan and Loomstate, which uses all-organic cotton, says high-quality sustainable materials can still be tough to find. "Most designers with existing labels are finding there aren't comparable fabrics that can just replace what you're doing and what your customers are used to," he says. For example, organic cotton and non-organic cotton are virtually indistinguishable once woven into a dress. But some popular synthetics, like stretch nylon, still have few eco-friendly equivalents.
Those who do make the switch are finding they have more support. Last year the influential trade show Designers & Agents stopped charging its participation fee for young green entrepreneurs who attend its two springtime shows in Los Angeles and New York and gave special recognition to designers whose collections are at least 25% sustainable. It now counts more than 50 green designers, up from fewer than a dozen two years ago. This week Wal-Mart is set to announce a major initiative aimed at helping cotton farmers go organic: it will buy transitional cotton at higher prices, thus helping to expand the supply of a key sustainable material. "Mainstream is about to occur," says Hahn.
Some analysts are less sure. Among consumers, only 18% are even aware that ecofashion exists, up from 6% four years ago. Natalie Hormilla, a fashion writer, is an example of the unconverted consumer. When asked if she owned any sustainable clothes, she replied: "Not that I'm aware of." Like most consumers, she finds little time to shop, and when she does, she's on the hunt for "cute stuff that isn't too expensive." By her own admission, green just isn't yet on her mind. But-thanks to the combined efforts of designers, retailers and suppliers-one day it will be. | 1746.txt | 0 |
[
"much more time is needed to finish a dress using sustainable materials",
"they have to create new brands for clothes made of organic materials",
"customers have difficulty telling organic from non-organic materials",
"quality organic replacements for synthetics are not readily available"
] | According to Scott Hahn, one big challenge to designers who will go organic is that _ . | The January fashion show, called FutureFashion, exemplified how far green design has come. Organized by the New York-based nonprofit Earth Pledge, the show inspired many top designers to work with sustainable fabrics for the first time. Several have since made pledges to include organic fabrics in their lines.
The designers who undertake green fashion still face many challenges. Scott Hahn, cofounder with Gregory of Rogan and Loomstate, which uses all-organic cotton, says high-quality sustainable materials can still be tough to find. "Most designers with existing labels are finding there aren't comparable fabrics that can just replace what you're doing and what your customers are used to," he says. For example, organic cotton and non-organic cotton are virtually indistinguishable once woven into a dress. But some popular synthetics, like stretch nylon, still have few eco-friendly equivalents.
Those who do make the switch are finding they have more support. Last year the influential trade show Designers & Agents stopped charging its participation fee for young green entrepreneurs who attend its two springtime shows in Los Angeles and New York and gave special recognition to designers whose collections are at least 25% sustainable. It now counts more than 50 green designers, up from fewer than a dozen two years ago. This week Wal-Mart is set to announce a major initiative aimed at helping cotton farmers go organic: it will buy transitional cotton at higher prices, thus helping to expand the supply of a key sustainable material. "Mainstream is about to occur," says Hahn.
Some analysts are less sure. Among consumers, only 18% are even aware that ecofashion exists, up from 6% four years ago. Natalie Hormilla, a fashion writer, is an example of the unconverted consumer. When asked if she owned any sustainable clothes, she replied: "Not that I'm aware of." Like most consumers, she finds little time to shop, and when she does, she's on the hunt for "cute stuff that isn't too expensive." By her own admission, green just isn't yet on her mind. But-thanks to the combined efforts of designers, retailers and suppliers-one day it will be. | 1746.txt | 3 |
[
"can attend various trade shows free",
"are readily recognized by the fashion world",
"can buy organic cotton at favorable prices",
"are gaining more and more support"
] | We learn from Paragraph 3 that designers who undertake green fashion _ . | The January fashion show, called FutureFashion, exemplified how far green design has come. Organized by the New York-based nonprofit Earth Pledge, the show inspired many top designers to work with sustainable fabrics for the first time. Several have since made pledges to include organic fabrics in their lines.
The designers who undertake green fashion still face many challenges. Scott Hahn, cofounder with Gregory of Rogan and Loomstate, which uses all-organic cotton, says high-quality sustainable materials can still be tough to find. "Most designers with existing labels are finding there aren't comparable fabrics that can just replace what you're doing and what your customers are used to," he says. For example, organic cotton and non-organic cotton are virtually indistinguishable once woven into a dress. But some popular synthetics, like stretch nylon, still have few eco-friendly equivalents.
Those who do make the switch are finding they have more support. Last year the influential trade show Designers & Agents stopped charging its participation fee for young green entrepreneurs who attend its two springtime shows in Los Angeles and New York and gave special recognition to designers whose collections are at least 25% sustainable. It now counts more than 50 green designers, up from fewer than a dozen two years ago. This week Wal-Mart is set to announce a major initiative aimed at helping cotton farmers go organic: it will buy transitional cotton at higher prices, thus helping to expand the supply of a key sustainable material. "Mainstream is about to occur," says Hahn.
Some analysts are less sure. Among consumers, only 18% are even aware that ecofashion exists, up from 6% four years ago. Natalie Hormilla, a fashion writer, is an example of the unconverted consumer. When asked if she owned any sustainable clothes, she replied: "Not that I'm aware of." Like most consumers, she finds little time to shop, and when she does, she's on the hunt for "cute stuff that isn't too expensive." By her own admission, green just isn't yet on her mind. But-thanks to the combined efforts of designers, retailers and suppliers-one day it will be. | 1746.txt | 3 |
[
"She doesn't seem to care about it.",
"She doesn't think it is sustainable.",
"She is doubtful of its practical value.",
"She is very much opposed to the idea."
] | What is Natalie Hormilla's attitude toward ecofashion? | The January fashion show, called FutureFashion, exemplified how far green design has come. Organized by the New York-based nonprofit Earth Pledge, the show inspired many top designers to work with sustainable fabrics for the first time. Several have since made pledges to include organic fabrics in their lines.
The designers who undertake green fashion still face many challenges. Scott Hahn, cofounder with Gregory of Rogan and Loomstate, which uses all-organic cotton, says high-quality sustainable materials can still be tough to find. "Most designers with existing labels are finding there aren't comparable fabrics that can just replace what you're doing and what your customers are used to," he says. For example, organic cotton and non-organic cotton are virtually indistinguishable once woven into a dress. But some popular synthetics, like stretch nylon, still have few eco-friendly equivalents.
Those who do make the switch are finding they have more support. Last year the influential trade show Designers & Agents stopped charging its participation fee for young green entrepreneurs who attend its two springtime shows in Los Angeles and New York and gave special recognition to designers whose collections are at least 25% sustainable. It now counts more than 50 green designers, up from fewer than a dozen two years ago. This week Wal-Mart is set to announce a major initiative aimed at helping cotton farmers go organic: it will buy transitional cotton at higher prices, thus helping to expand the supply of a key sustainable material. "Mainstream is about to occur," says Hahn.
Some analysts are less sure. Among consumers, only 18% are even aware that ecofashion exists, up from 6% four years ago. Natalie Hormilla, a fashion writer, is an example of the unconverted consumer. When asked if she owned any sustainable clothes, she replied: "Not that I'm aware of." Like most consumers, she finds little time to shop, and when she does, she's on the hunt for "cute stuff that isn't too expensive." By her own admission, green just isn't yet on her mind. But-thanks to the combined efforts of designers, retailers and suppliers-one day it will be. | 1746.txt | 0 |
[
"Green products will soon go mainstream.",
"It has a very promising future.",
"Consumers have the final say.",
"It will appeal more to young people."
] | What does the author think of green fashion? | The January fashion show, called FutureFashion, exemplified how far green design has come. Organized by the New York-based nonprofit Earth Pledge, the show inspired many top designers to work with sustainable fabrics for the first time. Several have since made pledges to include organic fabrics in their lines.
The designers who undertake green fashion still face many challenges. Scott Hahn, cofounder with Gregory of Rogan and Loomstate, which uses all-organic cotton, says high-quality sustainable materials can still be tough to find. "Most designers with existing labels are finding there aren't comparable fabrics that can just replace what you're doing and what your customers are used to," he says. For example, organic cotton and non-organic cotton are virtually indistinguishable once woven into a dress. But some popular synthetics, like stretch nylon, still have few eco-friendly equivalents.
Those who do make the switch are finding they have more support. Last year the influential trade show Designers & Agents stopped charging its participation fee for young green entrepreneurs who attend its two springtime shows in Los Angeles and New York and gave special recognition to designers whose collections are at least 25% sustainable. It now counts more than 50 green designers, up from fewer than a dozen two years ago. This week Wal-Mart is set to announce a major initiative aimed at helping cotton farmers go organic: it will buy transitional cotton at higher prices, thus helping to expand the supply of a key sustainable material. "Mainstream is about to occur," says Hahn.
Some analysts are less sure. Among consumers, only 18% are even aware that ecofashion exists, up from 6% four years ago. Natalie Hormilla, a fashion writer, is an example of the unconverted consumer. When asked if she owned any sustainable clothes, she replied: "Not that I'm aware of." Like most consumers, she finds little time to shop, and when she does, she's on the hunt for "cute stuff that isn't too expensive." By her own admission, green just isn't yet on her mind. But-thanks to the combined efforts of designers, retailers and suppliers-one day it will be. | 1746.txt | 1 |
[
"She feels unhappy working in male-dominated fields.",
"She is fed up with the issue of gender discrimination.",
"She is not good at telling stories of the kind.",
"She finds space research more important."
] | Why doesn't the author want to talk about being a woman scientist again? | I don't ever want to talk about being a woman scientist again. There was a time in my life when people asked constantly for stories about what it's like to work in a field dominated by men. I was never very good at telling those stories because truthfully I never found them interesting. What I do find interesting is the origin of the universe, the shape of space-time and the nature of black holes.
At 19, when I began studying astrophysics, it did not bother me in the least to be the only woman in the classroom. But while earning my Ph.D. at MIT and then as a post-doctor doing space research, the issue started to bother me. My every achievement-jobs, research papers, awards-was viewed through the lens of gender politics. So were my failures. Sometimes, when I was pushed into an argument on left brain versus right brain, or nature versus nurture , I would instantly fight fiercely on my behalf and all womankind.
Then one day a few years ago, out of my mouth came a sentence that would eventually become my reply to any and all provocations: I don't talk about that anymore. It took me 10 years to get back the confidence I had at 19 and to realize that I didn't want to deal with gender issues. Why should curing sexism be yet another terrible burden on every female scientist? After all, I don't study sociology or political theory.
Today I research and teach at Barnard, a women's college in . Recently, someone asked me how may of the 45 students in my class were women. You cannot imagine my satisfaction at being able to answer, 45. I know some of my students worry how they will manage their scientific research and a desire for children. And I don't dismiss those concerns. Still, I don't tell them "war" stories. Instead, I have given them this: the visual of their physics professor heavily pregnant doing physics experiments. And in turn they have given me the image of 45 women driven by a love of science. And that's a sight worth talking about. | 1517.txt | 1 |
[
"the very fact that she is a woman",
"her involvement in gender politics",
"her over-confidence as a female astrophysicist",
"the burden she bears in a male-dominated society"
] | From Paragraph 2, we can infer that people would attribute the author's failures to _ . | I don't ever want to talk about being a woman scientist again. There was a time in my life when people asked constantly for stories about what it's like to work in a field dominated by men. I was never very good at telling those stories because truthfully I never found them interesting. What I do find interesting is the origin of the universe, the shape of space-time and the nature of black holes.
At 19, when I began studying astrophysics, it did not bother me in the least to be the only woman in the classroom. But while earning my Ph.D. at MIT and then as a post-doctor doing space research, the issue started to bother me. My every achievement-jobs, research papers, awards-was viewed through the lens of gender politics. So were my failures. Sometimes, when I was pushed into an argument on left brain versus right brain, or nature versus nurture , I would instantly fight fiercely on my behalf and all womankind.
Then one day a few years ago, out of my mouth came a sentence that would eventually become my reply to any and all provocations: I don't talk about that anymore. It took me 10 years to get back the confidence I had at 19 and to realize that I didn't want to deal with gender issues. Why should curing sexism be yet another terrible burden on every female scientist? After all, I don't study sociology or political theory.
Today I research and teach at Barnard, a women's college in . Recently, someone asked me how may of the 45 students in my class were women. You cannot imagine my satisfaction at being able to answer, 45. I know some of my students worry how they will manage their scientific research and a desire for children. And I don't dismiss those concerns. Still, I don't tell them "war" stories. Instead, I have given them this: the visual of their physics professor heavily pregnant doing physics experiments. And in turn they have given me the image of 45 women driven by a love of science. And that's a sight worth talking about. | 1517.txt | 0 |
[
"Lack of confidence in succeeding in space science.",
"Unfair accusations from both inside and outside her circle.",
"People's stereotyped attitude toward female scientists.",
"Widespread misconceptions about nature and nurtured."
] | What did the author constantly fight against while doing her Ph.D. and post-doctoral research? | I don't ever want to talk about being a woman scientist again. There was a time in my life when people asked constantly for stories about what it's like to work in a field dominated by men. I was never very good at telling those stories because truthfully I never found them interesting. What I do find interesting is the origin of the universe, the shape of space-time and the nature of black holes.
At 19, when I began studying astrophysics, it did not bother me in the least to be the only woman in the classroom. But while earning my Ph.D. at MIT and then as a post-doctor doing space research, the issue started to bother me. My every achievement-jobs, research papers, awards-was viewed through the lens of gender politics. So were my failures. Sometimes, when I was pushed into an argument on left brain versus right brain, or nature versus nurture , I would instantly fight fiercely on my behalf and all womankind.
Then one day a few years ago, out of my mouth came a sentence that would eventually become my reply to any and all provocations: I don't talk about that anymore. It took me 10 years to get back the confidence I had at 19 and to realize that I didn't want to deal with gender issues. Why should curing sexism be yet another terrible burden on every female scientist? After all, I don't study sociology or political theory.
Today I research and teach at Barnard, a women's college in . Recently, someone asked me how may of the 45 students in my class were women. You cannot imagine my satisfaction at being able to answer, 45. I know some of my students worry how they will manage their scientific research and a desire for children. And I don't dismiss those concerns. Still, I don't tell them "war" stories. Instead, I have given them this: the visual of their physics professor heavily pregnant doing physics experiments. And in turn they have given me the image of 45 women driven by a love of science. And that's a sight worth talking about. | 1517.txt | 2 |
[
"Female students no longer have to bother about gender issues.",
"Her students' performance has brought back her confidence.",
"Her female students can do just as well as male students.",
"More female students are pursuing science than before."
] | Why does the author feel great satisfaction when talking about her class? | I don't ever want to talk about being a woman scientist again. There was a time in my life when people asked constantly for stories about what it's like to work in a field dominated by men. I was never very good at telling those stories because truthfully I never found them interesting. What I do find interesting is the origin of the universe, the shape of space-time and the nature of black holes.
At 19, when I began studying astrophysics, it did not bother me in the least to be the only woman in the classroom. But while earning my Ph.D. at MIT and then as a post-doctor doing space research, the issue started to bother me. My every achievement-jobs, research papers, awards-was viewed through the lens of gender politics. So were my failures. Sometimes, when I was pushed into an argument on left brain versus right brain, or nature versus nurture , I would instantly fight fiercely on my behalf and all womankind.
Then one day a few years ago, out of my mouth came a sentence that would eventually become my reply to any and all provocations: I don't talk about that anymore. It took me 10 years to get back the confidence I had at 19 and to realize that I didn't want to deal with gender issues. Why should curing sexism be yet another terrible burden on every female scientist? After all, I don't study sociology or political theory.
Today I research and teach at Barnard, a women's college in . Recently, someone asked me how may of the 45 students in my class were women. You cannot imagine my satisfaction at being able to answer, 45. I know some of my students worry how they will manage their scientific research and a desire for children. And I don't dismiss those concerns. Still, I don't tell them "war" stories. Instead, I have given them this: the visual of their physics professor heavily pregnant doing physics experiments. And in turn they have given me the image of 45 women driven by a love of science. And that's a sight worth talking about. | 1517.txt | 3 |
[
"Women students needn't have the concerns of her generation.",
"Women have more barriers on their way to academic success.",
"Women can balance a career in science and having a family.",
"Women now have fewer problems pursuing a science career."
] | What does the image the author presents to her students suggest? | I don't ever want to talk about being a woman scientist again. There was a time in my life when people asked constantly for stories about what it's like to work in a field dominated by men. I was never very good at telling those stories because truthfully I never found them interesting. What I do find interesting is the origin of the universe, the shape of space-time and the nature of black holes.
At 19, when I began studying astrophysics, it did not bother me in the least to be the only woman in the classroom. But while earning my Ph.D. at MIT and then as a post-doctor doing space research, the issue started to bother me. My every achievement-jobs, research papers, awards-was viewed through the lens of gender politics. So were my failures. Sometimes, when I was pushed into an argument on left brain versus right brain, or nature versus nurture , I would instantly fight fiercely on my behalf and all womankind.
Then one day a few years ago, out of my mouth came a sentence that would eventually become my reply to any and all provocations: I don't talk about that anymore. It took me 10 years to get back the confidence I had at 19 and to realize that I didn't want to deal with gender issues. Why should curing sexism be yet another terrible burden on every female scientist? After all, I don't study sociology or political theory.
Today I research and teach at Barnard, a women's college in . Recently, someone asked me how may of the 45 students in my class were women. You cannot imagine my satisfaction at being able to answer, 45. I know some of my students worry how they will manage their scientific research and a desire for children. And I don't dismiss those concerns. Still, I don't tell them "war" stories. Instead, I have given them this: the visual of their physics professor heavily pregnant doing physics experiments. And in turn they have given me the image of 45 women driven by a love of science. And that's a sight worth talking about. | 1517.txt | 2 |
[
"they are both something beautiful",
"they both make people feel pleased",
"they both depend on more than one factor",
"they are both hard to achieve"
] | Happiness and symphonic music are common in that _ . | Happiness pays off, studies show.
Psychologists seeking the real secrets of happiness report that very happy people tend to be more extroverted and agreeable than less happy people.
"Our findings suggest that very happy people have rich and satisfying social relationships and spend little time alone relative to average people," write psychologists Ed Diener and Martin E.P. Seligman in the journal Psychological Science.
Solid social relationships do not promise happiness, but they are an important contributing factor. The very happy people whom the authors studied all said they had good quality social relationships. However, the authors write, there is no single key to high happiness. "High happiness seems to be like beautiful symphonicmusic-including many instruments, without any one being enough for the beautiful quality."
Diener regards happiness as "subjective well-being" ―in other words, the person evaluateshis or her own quality of life. The question to ask is, "Is my life going well, according to the standards I choose to use?" If the answer is "yes", then that person is judged to be happy.
Because people evaluate their lives based on happiness, "subjective well-being is very important. Though necessary, it is not enough for having a good life. Subjective well-being "seems quite necessary for the good society, although it is not enough for that society because there are other things we also value and would want in such a place," says Diener.
Can subjective well-being be measured scientifically? Diener points out three parts contributing to happiness: pleasant emotions and moods, lack of negative emotions and moods, and satisfaction judgment, to which other factors-including cheerfulness and feelings of fulfillment-may be added.
There is no magic formulafor happiness. Diener suggests steps you can take to ensure you are as happy as you can be. Surrounding yourself with good friends and family-people who care about you and whom you care about - is a start. Joining in activities you enjoy and value is also important; whether it's work or play, keeping busy in an environment enjoyable to you will contribute much to your subjective well-being. In addition, a healthy outlook is necessary. | 1023.txt | 2 |
[
"has rich social relationships",
"spends more time with other people",
"lives a quality life",
"thinks his life is going well according to the standards he chooses to use"
] | According to Diener, a person can be judged to be happy when he _ . | Happiness pays off, studies show.
Psychologists seeking the real secrets of happiness report that very happy people tend to be more extroverted and agreeable than less happy people.
"Our findings suggest that very happy people have rich and satisfying social relationships and spend little time alone relative to average people," write psychologists Ed Diener and Martin E.P. Seligman in the journal Psychological Science.
Solid social relationships do not promise happiness, but they are an important contributing factor. The very happy people whom the authors studied all said they had good quality social relationships. However, the authors write, there is no single key to high happiness. "High happiness seems to be like beautiful symphonicmusic-including many instruments, without any one being enough for the beautiful quality."
Diener regards happiness as "subjective well-being" ―in other words, the person evaluateshis or her own quality of life. The question to ask is, "Is my life going well, according to the standards I choose to use?" If the answer is "yes", then that person is judged to be happy.
Because people evaluate their lives based on happiness, "subjective well-being is very important. Though necessary, it is not enough for having a good life. Subjective well-being "seems quite necessary for the good society, although it is not enough for that society because there are other things we also value and would want in such a place," says Diener.
Can subjective well-being be measured scientifically? Diener points out three parts contributing to happiness: pleasant emotions and moods, lack of negative emotions and moods, and satisfaction judgment, to which other factors-including cheerfulness and feelings of fulfillment-may be added.
There is no magic formulafor happiness. Diener suggests steps you can take to ensure you are as happy as you can be. Surrounding yourself with good friends and family-people who care about you and whom you care about - is a start. Joining in activities you enjoy and value is also important; whether it's work or play, keeping busy in an environment enjoyable to you will contribute much to your subjective well-being. In addition, a healthy outlook is necessary. | 1023.txt | 3 |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
Race-C : additional data for race (high school/middle school) but for college level https://github.com/mrcdata/race-c
@InProceedings{pmlr-v101-liang19a,
title={A New Multi-choice Reading Comprehension Dataset for Curriculum Learning},
author={Liang, Yichan and Li, Jianheng and Yin, Jian},
booktitle={Proceedings of The Eleventh Asian Conference on Machine Learning},
pages={742--757},
year={2019}
}
- Downloads last month
- 0
Size of downloaded dataset files:
38.5 MB
Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:
6.19 MB
Number of rows:
14,122