Danh sách câu hỏi

Có 50,580 câu hỏi trên 1,012 trang
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. In 1826, a Frenchman named Niépce needed pictures for his business. He was not a good artist, so he invented a very simple camera. He put it in a window of his house and took a picture of his yard. That was the first photograph. The next important date in the history of photography was 1837. That year, Daguerre, another Frenchman, took a picture of his studio. He used a new kind of camera and a different process. In his pictures, you could see everything clearly, even the smallest details. This kind of photograph was called a daguerreotype. Soon, other people began to use Daguerre's process. Travelers brought back daguerreotypes from all around the world. People photographed famous buildings, cities, and mountains. In about 1840, the process was improved. Then photographers could take pictures of people and moving things. The process was not simple and photographers had to carry lots of film and processing equipment. However, this did not stop photographers, especially in the United States. After 1840, daguerreotype artists were popular in most cities. Matthew Brady was one well-known American photographer. He took many portraits of famous people. The portraits were unusual because they were lifelike and full of personality. Brady was also the first person to take pictures of a war. His 1862 Civil War pictures showed dead soldiers and ruined cities. They made the war seem more real and more terrible. In the 1880s, new inventions began to change photography. Photographers could buy film ready- made in rolls, instead of having to make the film themselves. Also, they did not have to process the film immediately. They could bring it back to their studios and develop it later. They did not have to carry lots of equipment. And finally, the invention of the small handheld camera made photography less expensive. With a small camera, anyone could be a photographer. People began to use cameras just for fun. They took pictures of their families, friends, and favorite places. They called these pictures "snapshots". Documentary photographs became popular in newspapers in the 1890s. Soon magazines and books also used them. These pictures showed true events and people. They were much more real than drawings. Some people began to think of photography as a form of art. They thought that photographycould do more than show the real world. It could also show ideas and feelings, like other art forms. From “Reading Power” by Beatrice S. Mikulecky and Linda Jeffries The word “lifelike” in the passage is closest in meaning to “______”.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. In 1826, a Frenchman named Niépce needed pictures for his business. He was not a good artist, so he invented a very simple camera. He put it in a window of his house and took a picture of his yard. That was the first photograph. The next important date in the history of photography was 1837. That year, Daguerre, another Frenchman, took a picture of his studio. He used a new kind of camera and a different process. In his pictures, you could see everything clearly, even the smallest details. This kind of photograph was called a daguerreotype. Soon, other people began to use Daguerre's process. Travelers brought back daguerreotypes from all around the world. People photographed famous buildings, cities, and mountains. In about 1840, the process was improved. Then photographers could take pictures of people and moving things. The process was not simple and photographers had to carry lots of film and processing equipment. However, this did not stop photographers, especially in the United States. After 1840, daguerreotype artists were popular in most cities. Matthew Brady was one well-known American photographer. He took many portraits of famous people. The portraits were unusual because they were lifelike and full of personality. Brady was also the first person to take pictures of a war. His 1862 Civil War pictures showed dead soldiers and ruined cities. They made the war seem more real and more terrible. In the 1880s, new inventions began to change photography. Photographers could buy film ready- made in rolls, instead of having to make the film themselves. Also, they did not have to process the film immediately. They could bring it back to their studios and develop it later. They did not have to carry lots of equipment. And finally, the invention of the small handheld camera made photography less expensive. With a small camera, anyone could be a photographer. People began to use cameras just for fun. They took pictures of their families, friends, and favorite places. They called these pictures "snapshots". Documentary photographs became popular in newspapers in the 1890s. Soon magazines and books also used them. These pictures showed true events and people. They were much more real than drawings. Some people began to think of photography as a form of art. They thought that photographycould do more than show the real world. It could also show ideas and feelings, like other art forms. From “Reading Power” by Beatrice S. Mikulecky and Linda Jeffries The word “ruined” in the passage is closest in meaning to “______”.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. Most journeys in Britain and the US are made by road. Some of these are made on public transport but most are by private car. In Britain many people rely on their cars for daily local activities, e.g. getting to work, doing the shopping, and visiting friends. People living in urban areas may use buses, trains or, in London, the Underground, to get to city centres, mainly because traffic is often heavy and it is difficult to find anywhere to park a car. Some places in the country may have a bus only two or three times a week so people living there have no choice but to rely on their cars. In the US large cities have good public transportation systems. The El railroad in Chicago and the underground systems of New York, Boston, San Francisco and Washington, DC are heavily used. Elsewhere, most Americans prefer to use their cars. Families often have two cars and, outside major cities, have to drive fairly long distances to schools, offices, shops, banks, etc. Many college and even high-school students have their own cars. Long-distance travel in Britain is also mainly by road, though railways link most towns and cities. Most places are linked by motorways or other fast roads and many people prefer to drive at their own convenience rather than use a train, even though they may get stuck in a traffic jam. Long- distance coach/bus services are usually a cheaper alternative to trains, but they take longer and may be less comfortable. Some long-distance travel, especially that undertaken for business reasons, may be by air. There are regular flights between regional airports, as well as to and from London. A lot of freight is also istributed by road, though heavier items and raw materials often go by rail. In the US much long-distance travel is by air. America has two main long-distance bus companies, Greyhound and Trailways. Amtrak, the national network, provides rail services for passengers. Private railway companies such as Union Pacific now carry only freight, though in fact over 70% of freight goes by road. The main problems associated with road transport in both Britain and the US are traffic congestion and pollution. It is predicted that the number of cars on British roads will increase by a third within a few years, making both these problems worse. The British government would like more people to use public transport, but so far they have had little success in persuading people to give up their cars or to share rides with neighbours. Most people say that public transport is simply not good enough. Americans too have resisted government requests to share cars because it is less convenient and restricts their freedom. Petrol/gasoline is relatively cheap in the US and outside the major cities public transport is bad, so they see no reason to use their cars less. (Extracted from Oxford Guide to British and American Culture, Oxford University Press, 2000) According to the passage, people in Britain refuse public transport because ______.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. Most journeys in Britain and the US are made by road. Some of these are made on public transport but most are by private car. In Britain many people rely on their cars for daily local activities, e.g. getting to work, doing the shopping, and visiting friends. People living in urban areas may use buses, trains or, in London, the Underground, to get to city centres, mainly because traffic is often heavy and it is difficult to find anywhere to park a car. Some places in the country may have a bus only two or three times a week so people living there have no choice but to rely on their cars. In the US large cities have good public transportation systems. The El railroad in Chicago and the underground systems of New York, Boston, San Francisco and Washington, DC are heavily used. Elsewhere, most Americans prefer to use their cars. Families often have two cars and, outside major cities, have to drive fairly long distances to schools, offices, shops, banks, etc. Many college and even high-school students have their own cars. Long-distance travel in Britain is also mainly by road, though railways link most towns and cities. Most places are linked by motorways or other fast roads and many people prefer to drive at their own convenience rather than use a train, even though they may get stuck in a traffic jam. Long- distance coach/bus services are usually a cheaper alternative to trains, but they take longer and may be less comfortable. Some long-distance travel, especially that undertaken for business reasons, may be by air. There are regular flights between regional airports, as well as to and from London. A lot of freight is also istributed by road, though heavier items and raw materials often go by rail. In the US much long-distance travel is by air. America has two main long-distance bus companies, Greyhound and Trailways. Amtrak, the national network, provides rail services for passengers. Private railway companies such as Union Pacific now carry only freight, though in fact over 70% of freight goes by road. The main problems associated with road transport in both Britain and the US are traffic congestion and pollution. It is predicted that the number of cars on British roads will increase by a third within a few years, making both these problems worse. The British government would like more people to use public transport, but so far they have had little success in persuading people to give up their cars or to share rides with neighbours. Most people say that public transport is simply not good enough. Americans too have resisted government requests to share cars because it is less convenient and restricts their freedom. Petrol/gasoline is relatively cheap in the US and outside the major cities public transport is bad, so they see no reason to use their cars less. (Extracted from Oxford Guide to British and American Culture, Oxford University Press, 2000) The phrase “at their own convenience” in paragraph 4 is closest in meaning to ______.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. Most journeys in Britain and the US are made by road. Some of these are made on public transport but most are by private car. In Britain many people rely on their cars for daily local activities, e.g. getting to work, doing the shopping, and visiting friends. People living in urban areas may use buses, trains or, in London, the Underground, to get to city centres, mainly because traffic is often heavy and it is difficult to find anywhere to park a car. Some places in the country may have a bus only two or three times a week so people living there have no choice but to rely on their cars. In the US large cities have good public transportation systems. The El railroad in Chicago and the underground systems of New York, Boston, San Francisco and Washington, DC are heavily used. Elsewhere, most Americans prefer to use their cars. Families often have two cars and, outside major cities, have to drive fairly long distances to schools, offices, shops, banks, etc. Many college and even high-school students have their own cars. Long-distance travel in Britain is also mainly by road, though railways link most towns and cities. Most places are linked by motorways or other fast roads and many people prefer to drive at their own convenience rather than use a train, even though they may get stuck in a traffic jam. Long- distance coach/bus services are usually a cheaper alternative to trains, but they take longer and may be less comfortable. Some long-distance travel, especially that undertaken for business reasons, may be by air. There are regular flights between regional airports, as well as to and from London. A lot of freight is also istributed by road, though heavier items and raw materials often go by rail. In the US much long-distance travel is by air. America has two main long-distance bus companies, Greyhound and Trailways. Amtrak, the national network, provides rail services for passengers. Private railway companies such as Union Pacific now carry only freight, though in fact over 70% of freight goes by road. The main problems associated with road transport in both Britain and the US are traffic congestion and pollution. It is predicted that the number of cars on British roads will increase by a third within a few years, making both these problems worse. The British government would like more people to use public transport, but so far they have had little success in persuading people to give up their cars or to share rides with neighbours. Most people say that public transport is simply not good enough. Americans too have resisted government requests to share cars because it is less convenient and restricts their freedom. Petrol/gasoline is relatively cheap in the US and outside the major cities public transport is bad, so they see no reason to use their cars less. (Extracted from Oxford Guide to British and American Culture, Oxford University Press, 2000) Which of the following is NOT true according to the passage?
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. Most journeys in Britain and the US are made by road. Some of these are made on public transport but most are by private car. In Britain many people rely on their cars for daily local activities, e.g. getting to work, doing the shopping, and visiting friends. People living in urban areas may use buses, trains or, in London, the Underground, to get to city centres, mainly because traffic is often heavy and it is difficult to find anywhere to park a car. Some places in the country may have a bus only two or three times a week so people living there have no choice but to rely on their cars. In the US large cities have good public transportation systems. The El railroad in Chicago and the underground systems of New York, Boston, San Francisco and Washington, DC are heavily used. Elsewhere, most Americans prefer to use their cars. Families often have two cars and, outside major cities, have to drive fairly long distances to schools, offices, shops, banks, etc. Many college and even high-school students have their own cars. Long-distance travel in Britain is also mainly by road, though railways link most towns and cities. Most places are linked by motorways or other fast roads and many people prefer to drive at their own convenience rather than use a train, even though they may get stuck in a traffic jam. Long- distance coach/bus services are usually a cheaper alternative to trains, but they take longer and may be less comfortable. Some long-distance travel, especially that undertaken for business reasons, may be by air. There are regular flights between regional airports, as well as to and from London. A lot of freight is also istributed by road, though heavier items and raw materials often go by rail. In the US much long-distance travel is by air. America has two main long-distance bus companies, Greyhound and Trailways. Amtrak, the national network, provides rail services for passengers. Private railway companies such as Union Pacific now carry only freight, though in fact over 70% of freight goes by road. The main problems associated with road transport in both Britain and the US are traffic congestion and pollution. It is predicted that the number of cars on British roads will increase by a third within a few years, making both these problems worse. The British government would like more people to use public transport, but so far they have had little success in persuading people to give up their cars or to share rides with neighbours. Most people say that public transport is simply not good enough. Americans too have resisted government requests to share cars because it is less convenient and restricts their freedom. Petrol/gasoline is relatively cheap in the US and outside the major cities public transport is bad, so they see no reason to use their cars less. (Extracted from Oxford Guide to British and American Culture, Oxford University Press, 2000) According to the passage, people in London may prefer the Underground to their own cars due to____.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions. Most journeys in Britain and the US are made by road. Some of these are made on public transport but most are by private car. In Britain many people rely on their cars for daily local activities, e.g. getting to work, doing the shopping, and visiting friends. People living in urban areas may use buses, trains or, in London, the Underground, to get to city centres, mainly because traffic is often heavy and it is difficult to find anywhere to park a car. Some places in the country may have a bus only two or three times a week so people living there have no choice but to rely on their cars. In the US large cities have good public transportation systems. The El railroad in Chicago and the underground systems of New York, Boston, San Francisco and Washington, DC are heavily used. Elsewhere, most Americans prefer to use their cars. Families often have two cars and, outside major cities, have to drive fairly long distances to schools, offices, shops, banks, etc. Many college and even high-school students have their own cars. Long-distance travel in Britain is also mainly by road, though railways link most towns and cities. Most places are linked by motorways or other fast roads and many people prefer to drive at their own convenience rather than use a train, even though they may get stuck in a traffic jam. Long- distance coach/bus services are usually a cheaper alternative to trains, but they take longer and may be less comfortable. Some long-distance travel, especially that undertaken for business reasons, may be by air. There are regular flights between regional airports, as well as to and from London. A lot of freight is also istributed by road, though heavier items and raw materials often go by rail. In the US much long-distance travel is by air. America has two main long-distance bus companies, Greyhound and Trailways. Amtrak, the national network, provides rail services for passengers. Private railway companies such as Union Pacific now carry only freight, though in fact over 70% of freight goes by road. The main problems associated with road transport in both Britain and the US are traffic congestion and pollution. It is predicted that the number of cars on British roads will increase by a third within a few years, making both these problems worse. The British government would like more people to use public transport, but so far they have had little success in persuading people to give up their cars or to share rides with neighbours. Most people say that public transport is simply not good enough. Americans too have resisted government requests to share cars because it is less convenient and restricts their freedom. Petrol/gasoline is relatively cheap in the US and outside the major cities public transport is bad, so they see no reason to use their cars less. (Extracted from Oxford Guide to British and American Culture, Oxford University Press, 2000) In Britain and the US most people travel by ______.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42. While watching sports on TV, the chances are children will see professional players cheating, having tantrums, fighting, or abusing officials. In addition, it’s highly likely that children will be aware of well-known cases of sportspeople being caught using drugs to improve their performance. The danger of all this is that it could give children the idea that winning is all that counts and you should win at all costs. Good behavior and fair play aren’t the message that comes across. Instead, it looks as if cheating and bad behavior are reasonable ways of getting what you want. This message is further bolstered by the fact that some of these sportspeople acquire enormous fame and wealth, making it seem they are being handsomely rewarded either despite or because of their bad behavior. What can parents do about this? They can regard sport on television as an opportunity to discuss attitudes and behavior with their children. When watching sports together, if parents see a player swearing at the referee, they can get the child’s opinion on that behavior and discuss whether a player’s skill is more important than their behavior. Ask what the child thinks the player’s contribution to the team is. Point out that no player can win a team game on their own, so it’s important for members to work well together. Another thing to focus on is what the commentators say. Do they frown on bad behavior from players, think it’s amusing or even consider it’s a good thing? What about the officials? If they let players get away with a clear foul, parents can discuss with children whether this is right and what effect it has on the game. Look too at the reactions of coaches and managers. Do they accept losing with good grace or scowl and show a bad attitude? Parents can use this to talk about attitudes to winning and losing and to remind children that both are part of sport. However, what children learn from watching sports is by no means all negative and parents should make sure they accentuate the positives too. They should emphasise to children the high reputation that well-behaved players have, not just with their teammates but also with spectators and the media. They can focus on the contribution made by such players during a game, discussing how valuable they are in the team. In the interviews after a game, point out to a child that the well-behaved sportspeople don’t gloat when they win or sulk when they lose. And parents can stress how well these people conduct themselves in their personal lives and the good work they do for others when not playing. In other words, parents should get their children to focus on the positive role models, rather than the antics of the badly behaved but often more publicized players. (Adapter from “New English File – Advanced” by Will Maddox) Which of the following about sport is NOT mentioned in the passage?
  Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42. While watching sports on TV, the chances are children will see professional players cheating, having tantrums, fighting, or abusing officials. In addition, it’s highly likely that children will be aware of well-known cases of sportspeople being caught using drugs to improve their performance. The danger of all this is that it could give children the idea that winning is all that counts and you should win at all costs. Good behavior and fair play aren’t the message that comes across. Instead, it looks as if cheating and bad behavior are reasonable ways of getting what you want. This message is further bolstered by the fact that some of these sportspeople acquire enormous fame and wealth, making it seem they are being handsomely rewarded either despite or because of their bad behavior. What can parents do about this? They can regard sport on television as an opportunity to discuss attitudes and behavior with their children. When watching sports together, if parents see a player swearing at the referee, they can get the child’s opinion on that behavior and discuss whether a player’s skill is more important than their behavior. Ask what the child thinks the player’s contribution to the team is. Point out that no player can win a team game on their own, so it’s important for members to work well together. Another thing to focus on is what the commentators say. Do they frown on bad behavior from players, think it’s amusing or even consider it’s a good thing? What about the officials? If they let players get away with a clear foul, parents can discuss with children whether this is right and what effect it has on the game. Look too at the reactions of coaches and managers. Do they accept losing with good grace or scowl and show a bad attitude? Parents can use this to talk about attitudes to winning and losing and to remind children that both are part of sport. However, what children learn from watching sports is by no means all negative and parents should make sure they accentuate the positives too. They should emphasise to children the high reputation that well-behaved players have, not just with their teammates but also with spectators and the media. They can focus on the contribution made by such players during a game, discussing how valuable they are in the team. In the interviews after a game, point out to a child that the well-behaved sportspeople don’t gloat when they win or sulk when they lose. And parents can stress how well these people conduct themselves in their personal lives and the good work they do for others when not playing. In other words, parents should get their children to focus on the positive role models, rather than the antics of the badly behaved but often more publicized players. (Adapter from “New English File – Advanced” by Will Maddox) The word “accentuate” in paragraph 4 can be best replaced by _______.  
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42. While watching sports on TV, the chances are children will see professional players cheating, having tantrums, fighting, or abusing officials. In addition, it’s highly likely that children will be aware of well-known cases of sportspeople being caught using drugs to improve their performance. The danger of all this is that it could give children the idea that winning is all that counts and you should win at all costs. Good behavior and fair play aren’t the message that comes across. Instead, it looks as if cheating and bad behavior are reasonable ways of getting what you want. This message is further bolstered by the fact that some of these sportspeople acquire enormous fame and wealth, making it seem they are being handsomely rewarded either despite or because of their bad behavior. What can parents do about this? They can regard sport on television as an opportunity to discuss attitudes and behavior with their children. When watching sports together, if parents see a player swearing at the referee, they can get the child’s opinion on that behavior and discuss whether a player’s skill is more important than their behavior. Ask what the child thinks the player’s contribution to the team is. Point out that no player can win a team game on their own, so it’s important for members to work well together. Another thing to focus on is what the commentators say. Do they frown on bad behavior from players, think it’s amusing or even consider it’s a good thing? What about the officials? If they let players get away with a clear foul, parents can discuss with children whether this is right and what effect it has on the game. Look too at the reactions of coaches and managers. Do they accept losing with good grace or scowl and show a bad attitude? Parents can use this to talk about attitudes to winning and losing and to remind children that both are part of sport. However, what children learn from watching sports is by no means all negative and parents should make sure they accentuate the positives too. They should emphasise to children the high reputation that well-behaved players have, not just with their teammates but also with spectators and the media. They can focus on the contribution made by such players during a game, discussing how valuable they are in the team. In the interviews after a game, point out to a child that the well-behaved sportspeople don’t gloat when they win or sulk when they lose. And parents can stress how well these people conduct themselves in their personal lives and the good work they do for others when not playing. In other words, parents should get their children to focus on the positive role models, rather than the antics of the badly behaved but often more publicized players. (Adapter from “New English File – Advanced” by Will Maddox) According to paragraph 2, what should parents teach their children through watching sports?
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42. While watching sports on TV, the chances are children will see professional players cheating, having tantrums, fighting, or abusing officials. In addition, it’s highly likely that children will be aware of well-known cases of sportspeople being caught using drugs to improve their performance. The danger of all this is that it could give children the idea that winning is all that counts and you should win at all costs. Good behavior and fair play aren’t the message that comes across. Instead, it looks as if cheating and bad behavior are reasonable ways of getting what you want. This message is further bolstered by the fact that some of these sportspeople acquire enormous fame and wealth, making it seem they are being handsomely rewarded either despite or because of their bad behavior. What can parents do about this? They can regard sport on television as an opportunity to discuss attitudes and behavior with their children. When watching sports together, if parents see a player swearing at the referee, they can get the child’s opinion on that behavior and discuss whether a player’s skill is more important than their behavior. Ask what the child thinks the player’s contribution to the team is. Point out that no player can win a team game on their own, so it’s important for members to work well together. Another thing to focus on is what the commentators say. Do they frown on bad behavior from players, think it’s amusing or even consider it’s a good thing? What about the officials? If they let players get away with a clear foul, parents can discuss with children whether this is right and what effect it has on the game. Look too at the reactions of coaches and managers. Do they accept losing with good grace or scowl and show a bad attitude? Parents can use this to talk about attitudes to winning and losing and to remind children that both are part of sport. However, what children learn from watching sports is by no means all negative and parents should make sure they accentuate the positives too. They should emphasise to children the high reputation that well-behaved players have, not just with their teammates but also with spectators and the media. They can focus on the contribution made by such players during a game, discussing how valuable they are in the team. In the interviews after a game, point out to a child that the well-behaved sportspeople don’t gloat when they win or sulk when they lose. And parents can stress how well these people conduct themselves in their personal lives and the good work they do for others when not playing. In other words, parents should get their children to focus on the positive role models, rather than the antics of the badly behaved but often more publicized players. (Adapter from “New English File – Advanced” by Will Maddox) According to paragraph 1, misconduct exhibited by players may lead children to think that _______.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42. While watching sports on TV, the chances are children will see professional players cheating, having tantrums, fighting, or abusing officials. In addition, it’s highly likely that children will be aware of well-known cases of sportspeople being caught using drugs to improve their performance. The danger of all this is that it could give children the idea that winning is all that counts and you should win at all costs. Good behavior and fair play aren’t the message that comes across. Instead, it looks as if cheating and bad behavior are reasonable ways of getting what you want. This message is further bolstered by the fact that some of these sportspeople acquire enormous fame and wealth, making it seem they are being handsomely rewarded either despite or because of their bad behavior. What can parents do about this? They can regard sport on television as an opportunity to discuss attitudes and behavior with their children. When watching sports together, if parents see a player swearing at the referee, they can get the child’s opinion on that behavior and discuss whether a player’s skill is more important than their behavior. Ask what the child thinks the player’s contribution to the team is. Point out that no player can win a team game on their own, so it’s important for members to work well together. Another thing to focus on is what the commentators say. Do they frown on bad behavior from players, think it’s amusing or even consider it’s a good thing? What about the officials? If they let players get away with a clear foul, parents can discuss with children whether this is right and what effect it has on the game. Look too at the reactions of coaches and managers. Do they accept losing with good grace or scowl and show a bad attitude? Parents can use this to talk about attitudes to winning and losing and to remind children that both are part of sport. However, what children learn from watching sports is by no means all negative and parents should make sure they accentuate the positives too. They should emphasise to children the high reputation that well-behaved players have, not just with their teammates but also with spectators and the media. They can focus on the contribution made by such players during a game, discussing how valuable they are in the team. In the interviews after a game, point out to a child that the well-behaved sportspeople don’t gloat when they win or sulk when they lose. And parents can stress how well these people conduct themselves in their personal lives and the good work they do for others when not playing. In other words, parents should get their children to focus on the positive role models, rather than the antics of the badly behaved but often more publicized players. (Adapter from “New English File – Advanced” by Will Maddox) The word “bolstered” in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to _______.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 28 to 34. When we meet people for the first time, we often make decisions about them based entirely on how they look. And of course, we too are being judged on our appearance. Undoubtedly, it’s what’s inside that’s important but sometimes we can send out the wrong signals and so get a negative reaction, simply by wearing inappropriate clothing. When selecting your clothes each day, it is therefore important to think about who you’re likely to meet, where you are going to be spending most of your time and what tasks you are likely to perform. Clearly, on a practical level, some outfits will be more appropriate to different sorts of activity and this will dictate your choice to an extent. However, there’s no need to abandon your individual taste completely. After all, if you dress to please somebody else’s idea of what looks good, you may end up feeling uncomfortable and not quite yourself. Some colours bring your natural colouring to life and others can give you a washed-out appearance. Try out new ones by all means, but remember that dressing in bright colours when you really like subtle neutral tones or vice versa will make you feel self-conscious and uncomfortable. You know deep down where your own taste boundaries lie. It may be fun to cross these sometimes, but do take care not to go too far all at once. Reappraising your image isn’t selfish because everyone who comes into contact with you will benefit. You’ll look better and you’ll feel a better person all round. And if in doubt, you only need to read Professor Albert Mehrabian’s book Silent Messages, which showed that the impact we make on each other depends 55 percent on how we look and behave, 38 percent on how we speak, and only seven percent on what we actually say. (Adapter from “Expert First” by Jan Bell and Roger Gower) According to Professor Albert Mehrabian, the impact we make on each other depends mainly on _______.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 28 to 34. When we meet people for the first time, we often make decisions about them based entirely on how they look. And of course, we too are being judged on our appearance. Undoubtedly, it’s what’s inside that’s important but sometimes we can send out the wrong signals and so get a negative reaction, simply by wearing inappropriate clothing. When selecting your clothes each day, it is therefore important to think about who you’re likely to meet, where you are going to be spending most of your time and what tasks you are likely to perform. Clearly, on a practical level, some outfits will be more appropriate to different sorts of activity and this will dictate your choice to an extent. However, there’s no need to abandon your individual taste completely. After all, if you dress to please somebody else’s idea of what looks good, you may end up feeling uncomfortable and not quite yourself. Some colours bring your natural colouring to life and others can give you a washed-out appearance. Try out new ones by all means, but remember that dressing in bright colours when you really like subtle neutral tones or vice versa will make you feel self-conscious and uncomfortable. You know deep down where your own taste boundaries lie. It may be fun to cross these sometimes, but do take care not to go too far all at once. Reappraising your image isn’t selfish because everyone who comes into contact with you will benefit. You’ll look better and you’ll feel a better person all round. And if in doubt, you only need to read Professor Albert Mehrabian’s book Silent Messages, which showed that the impact we make on each other depends 55 percent on how we look and behave, 38 percent on how we speak, and only seven percent on what we actually say. (Adapter from “Expert First” by Jan Bell and Roger Gower) The word “Reappraising” in paragraph 4 is closest in meaning to _______.