Đề thi thử thpt quốc gia 2020 môn tiếng anh (đề 9)

Mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the word whose underlined partdiffers from the other three in pronunciation in each of the following questions.

Mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the word whose underlined partdiffers from the other three in pronunciation in each of the following questions

Mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the word that differs from the other three in the position of primary stress in each of the following questions

Mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the word that differs from the other three in the position of primary stress in each of the following questions.

Caffeine is very ______, which is why people drink so much coffee.

Tom seldom drinks coffee, ______?

The diagrams ______ by  young  Faraday were sent to Sir Humphrey  Davy  at the end of the  year 1812.

Someone is going to have to take responsibility for this disaster. Who is going to ______?

What noisy neighbors you’ve got! If my neighbors ______ as bad as yours, I ______ crazy.

Apart from those three very cold weeks in January, it has been a very ______ winter.

The ______ of toothpaste are located in the health and beauty section of the supermarket.

If orders keep coming in like this, I'll have to ______ more staff.

You ______ for me; I could have found the way all right.

We've had to postpone ______ to France because the children are ill.

In today’s paper, it ______ that there will be a new government soon.

His clothes are in a mess because he ______ the house all morning.

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  word(s)  CLOSEST  in meaning to the underlined word(s) in each of the following questions.

When the police arrived the thieves took to flight leaving all the stolen things behin

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  word(s)  CLOSEST  in meaning to the underlined word(s) in each of the following questions.

Please, you are so nervous, do try to contain your anger.

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  word(s)  OPPOSITE  in meaning to the underlined word(s) in each of the following questions.

I didn't take a deliberate decision to lose weight. It just happened.

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  word(s)  OPPOSITE  in meaning to the underlined word(s) in each of the following questions.

The position fell vacant when Rodman was promoted.

Jane and Suzie are talking after school.

Tom: “I’m awfully sorry I can’t go with you.”

Mary: “______? Haven’t you agreed?”

Peter and Mike are talking during a class break.

Peter: “What are you doing this weekend?” 

Mike: “______.”

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct word or phrase that best fits each of the numbered blanks from 23 to 27.

SOCIAL NETWORK

A  16-year-old  girl  from  Essex  has  been  sacked  after  describing  her  job  as  boring  on  the  social  networking website, Facebook. The teenager, who had been working (23) _________  an administrative assistant at a marketing company for just three weeks, didn’t feel very enthusiastic about the duties she was asked to do. (24) _________  of moaning  to  her  friends  she  decided  to  express  her  thoughts  on  her  Facebook  page  to  a  colleague,  who  (25) _________  the  boss’s  attention  to  it.  He  immediately  fired  her  on  the  (26)  _________  that  her  public  display  of dissatisfaction made it impossible for her to continue working for the company. She later told newspapers she had been treated totally unfairly, especially as she hadn’t  even mentioned the company’s name. She claimed she’s  been  perfectly  happy  with  her  job  and  that  her  light-hearted  comments  shouldn’t  (27)  _________  taken seriously. A spokesperson from a workers’ union said the incident demonstrated two things: firstly, that people need to protect their privacy online and secondly, that employers should be less sensitive to criticism.

Điền vào ô 23

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct word or phrase that best fits each of the numbered blanks from 23 to 27.

SOCIAL NETWORK

A  16-year-old  girl  from  Essex  has  been  sacked  after  describing  her  job  as  boring  on  the  social  networking website, Facebook. The teenager, who had been working (23) _________  an administrative assistant at a marketing company for just three weeks, didn’t feel very enthusiastic about the duties she was asked to do. (24) _________  of moaning  to  her  friends  she  decided  to  express  her  thoughts  on  her  Facebook  page  to  a  colleague,  who  (25) _________  the  boss’s  attention  to  it.  He  immediately  fired  her  on  the  (26)  _________  that  her  public  display  of dissatisfaction made it impossible for her to continue working for the company. She later told newspapers she had been treated totally unfairly, especially as she hadn’t  even mentioned the company’s name. She claimed she’s  been  perfectly  happy  with  her  job  and  that  her  light-hearted  comments  shouldn’t  (27)  _________  taken seriously. A spokesperson from a workers’ union said the incident demonstrated two things: firstly, that people need to protect their privacy online and secondly, that employers should be less sensitive to criticism.

Điền vào ô 24

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct word or phrase that best fits each of the numbered blanks from 23 to 27.

SOCIAL NETWORK

A  16-year-old  girl  from  Essex  has  been  sacked  after  describing  her  job  as  boring  on  the  social  networking website, Facebook. The teenager, who had been working (23) _________  an administrative assistant at a marketing company for just three weeks, didn’t feel very enthusiastic about the duties she was asked to do. (24) _________  of moaning  to  her  friends  she  decided  to  express  her  thoughts  on  her  Facebook  page  to  a  colleague,  who  (25) _________  the  boss’s  attention  to  it.  He  immediately  fired  her  on  the  (26)  _________  that  her  public  display  of dissatisfaction made it impossible for her to continue working for the company. She later told newspapers she had been treated totally unfairly, especially as she hadn’t  even mentioned the company’s name. She claimed she’s  been  perfectly  happy  with  her  job  and  that  her  light-hearted  comments  shouldn’t  (27)  _________  taken seriously. A spokesperson from a workers’ union said the incident demonstrated two things: firstly, that people need to protect their privacy online and secondly, that employers should be less sensitive to criticism.

Điền vào ô 25

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct word or phrase that best fits each of the numbered blanks from 23 to 27.

SOCIAL NETWORK

A  16-year-old  girl  from  Essex  has  been  sacked  after  describing  her  job  as  boring  on  the  social  networking website, Facebook. The teenager, who had been working (23) _________  an administrative assistant at a marketing company for just three weeks, didn’t feel very enthusiastic about the duties she was asked to do. (24) _________  of moaning  to  her  friends  she  decided  to  express  her  thoughts  on  her  Facebook  page  to  a  colleague,  who  (25) _________  the  boss’s  attention  to  it.  He  immediately  fired  her  on  the  (26)  _________  that  her  public  display  of dissatisfaction made it impossible for her to continue working for the company. She later told newspapers she had been treated totally unfairly, especially as she hadn’t  even mentioned the company’s name. She claimed she’s  been  perfectly  happy  with  her  job  and  that  her  light-hearted  comments  shouldn’t  (27)  _________  taken seriously. A spokesperson from a workers’ union said the incident demonstrated two things: firstly, that people need to protect their privacy online and secondly, that employers should be less sensitive to criticism.

Điền vào ô 26

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct word or phrase that best fits each of the numbered blanks from 23 to 27.

SOCIAL NETWORK

A  16-year-old  girl  from  Essex  has  been  sacked  after  describing  her  job  as  boring  on  the  social  networking website, Facebook. The teenager, who had been working (23) _________  an administrative assistant at a marketing company for just three weeks, didn’t feel very enthusiastic about the duties she was asked to do. (24) _________  of moaning  to  her  friends  she  decided  to  express  her  thoughts  on  her  Facebook  page  to  a  colleague,  who  (25) _________  the  boss’s  attention  to  it.  He  immediately  fired  her  on  the  (26)  _________  that  her  public  display  of dissatisfaction made it impossible for her to continue working for the company. She later told newspapers she had been treated totally unfairly, especially as she hadn’t  even mentioned the company’s name. She claimed she’s  been  perfectly  happy  with  her  job  and  that  her  light-hearted  comments  shouldn’t  (27)  _________  taken seriously. A spokesperson from a workers’ union said the incident demonstrated two things: firstly, that people need to protect their privacy online and secondly, that employers should be less sensitive to criticism.

Điền vào ô 27

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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

What does the passage mainly discuss?

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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

According to the passage, which of the following is NOT true?

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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

The word “assist” in paragraph 3 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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

The word “unveiling” 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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

According to the passage, who is King Chow?

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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

According to paragraph 4, what animals are in danger of extinction?

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.

Therapeutic cloning

Reproductive cloning involves implanting a cloned embryo into a uterus in the hope of producing a healthy foetus. A company called Clonaid claims to have successfully cloned thirteen human babies. They say that all  of the babies are healthy and are in various location including Hong Kong, UK, Spain and Brazil. Clonaid states that they are using human cloning to assist infertile couples, homosexual couples and families who have lost a beloved relative.

The same technology can be used for animal cloning. If endangered species such as the giant panda and Sumatran tiger could be cloned, they could be saved from extinction. Livestock such as cows could also be cloned to allow farmers to reproduce cattle that produce the best meat and most milk. This could greatly help developing countries where cows produce significantly less meat and milk.

The word “it” in paragraph 2 refers 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 35 to 42.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

The word “preposterous” in paragraph 3 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 35 to 42.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

Which of the following is NOT an important factor mentioned in paragraphs 5 and 6?

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.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

What is the overall point that the writer makes in the reading 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.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

The word “its” in paragraph 7 refers 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 35 to 42.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

What does the writer say about peasants?

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.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

What is an important point the writer wishes to make in paragraph 7?

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.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

Lasagna is an example of a dish ______.

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.

THE PRAISE OF FAST FOOD

The media and a multitude of cookbook writers would have us believe that modern, fast, processed food is a disaster, and that it is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and sliced white bread while yearning for stone-ground flour and a brick oven. Perhaps, we should call those scorn industrialised food, culinary Luddites, after the 19th-century English workers who rebelled against the machines that destroyed their way of life. Instead of technology, what these Luddites abhor is commercial sauces and any synthetic aid to flavouring our food.

Eating fresh, natural food was regarded with suspicion verging on horror; only the uncivilised, the poor, and the starving resorted to it. The ancient Greeks regarded the consumption of greens and root vegetables as a sign of bad times, and many succeeding civilizations believed the same. Happiness was not a verdant garden abounding in fresh fruits, but a securely locked storehouse jammed with preserved, processed foods.

What about the idea that the best food is handmade in the country? That food comes from the country goes without saying. However, the idea that country people eat better than city dwellers is preposterous. Very few of our ancestors working the land were independent peasants baking their own bread and salting down their own pig. Most were burdened with heavy taxes and rent, often paid directly by the food they produced. Many were ultimately serfs or slaves, who subsisted on what was left over; on watery soup and gritty flatbread.

The dishes we call ethnic and assume to be of peasant origin were invented for the urban, or at least urbane, aristocrats who collected the surplus. This is as true of the lasagna of northern Italy as it is of the chicken korma of Mughal Delhi, the moo shu pork of imperial China, and the pilafs and baklava of the great Ottoman palace in Istanbul. Cities have always enjoyed the best food and have invariably been the focal points of culinary innovation.

Preparing home-cooked breakfast, dinner, and tea for eight to ten people 365 days a year was servitude. Churning butter or skinning and cleaning rabbits, without the option of picking up the phone for a pizza if something went wrong, was unremitting, unforgiving toil. Not long ago, in Mexico, most women could expect to spend five hours a day kneeling at the grindstone preparing the dough for the family's tortillas.

In the first half of the 20th century, Italians embraced factory-made pasta and canned tomatoes. In the second half, Japanese women welcomed factory-made bread because they could sleep a little longer instead of getting up to make rice. As supermarkets appeared in Eastern Europe, people rejoiced at the convenience of readymade goods. Culinary modernism had proved what was wanted: food that was processed, preservable, industrial, novel, and fast, the food of the elite at a price everyone could afford. Where modern food became available, people grew taller and stronger and lived longer.

So the sunlit past of the culinary Luddites never existed and their ethos is based not on history but on a fairy tale. So what? Certainly no one would deny that an industrialised food supply has its own problems. Perhaps we should eat more fresh, natural, locally sourced, slow food. Does it matter if the history is not quite right? It matters quite a bit, I believe. If we do not understand that most people had no choice but to devote their lives to growing and cooking food, we are incapable of comprehending that modern food allows us unparalleled choices. If we urge the farmer to stay at his olive press and the housewife to remain at her stove, all so that we may eat traditionally pressed olive oil and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old. If we fail to understand how scant and monotonous most traditional diets were, we fail to appreciate the 'ethnic foods' we encounter.

Culinary Luddites are right, though, about two important things: We need to know how to prepare good food, and we need a culinary ethos. As far as good food goes, they've done us all a service by teaching us how to use the bounty delivered to us by the global economy. Their ethos, though, is another matter. Were we able to turn back the clock, as they urge, most of us would be toiling all day in the fields or the kitchen, and many of us would be starving.

The word “servitude” in paragraph 5 is closest in meaning to ______.

Mark the letter A, B,  C, or  D on your answer sheet to indicate  the underlined part that needs correction in each of the following questions.

Many people who live near the ocean depend on it as a source of food, recreation, and to have economic opportunities.

Mark the letter A, B,  C, or  D on your answer sheet to indicate  the underlined part that needs correction in each of the following questions.

The techniques of science and magic are quite different, but their basic aims – to understand and control nature, they are very similar.

Mark the letter A, B,  C, or  D on your answer sheet to indicate  the underlined part that needs correction in each of the following questions.

The various parts of the body require so different surgical skills that many surgical specialties have developed.

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  sentence  that  is  closest  in meaning to each of the following questions.

It’s a waste of time asking Peter for help because he is too busy.

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  sentence  that  is  closest  in meaning to each of the following questions.

“I’m sorry for not keeping my promise, Mum!” said John.

Mark  the  letter  A,  B,  C,  or  D  on  your  answer  sheet  to  indicate  the  sentence  that  is  closest  in meaning to each of the following questions.

We’re still hesitating about which school our son ought to go to.

Mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the sentence that best combines each pair of sentences in the following questions.

I’d like to blame you. However, I know I can’t.

Mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the sentence that best combines each pair of sentences in the following questions.

My brother couldn’t speak a word. He could do that when he turned three.