ECAT Pre Computer Science MCQ Test With Answer for English Chapter 8 (Comprehension)

At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so-called immoral characters so interesting that young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Coleridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when the asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s powers.”

These attitudes towards novels help explain why Austen received little attention from early nineteenth-century literary cities. (In any case a novelist published anonymously, as Austen was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention.) The literary response that was accorded to her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth-century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience,” for example. Scott made an insightful remark about the merits of Austen’s fiction.

Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth-century Flemish painting.” Scott did not use the word ‘realism’, but he undoubtedly used a standard of realistic probability in judging novels. The critic Whately did not use the word ‘realism’, either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s ‘realistic method’ her characters, wrote Whately, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that we feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own.” Moral instruction, explained Whately, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recongnizably human and interesting characters than when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whitely especially praised Austen’s ability to create character who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whitely concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Dickens’, starting his preference for Austen’s.

Yet, the response of nineteenth-century literary critics to Austen was not always so laudatory, and often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century literary critics. An example of such a response was Lewes complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subject and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that, nonetheless her focus was too often only upon the unlofty and the commonplace. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper middle class.) In any case having being rescued by literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The passage suggest that twentieth-century Marxists would have admired Jane Austen’s novels more if the novels, as the Marxists understood them, had

The Baxter house is located at the end of the street. This house sits farther back from the curb than the other houses. It is almost difficult to see from the road without peering behind the deformed oak tree that has obscured it for years. Even so, the Baxter house stands out from the other houses on the street. It is tall and white. However, this white is no longer pristinely white, but a dingy grayish cram color. Long vines hang from the tattered roof. The Baxter house is two stories tall and has a large yard in the back that has never been mowed. The other houses on the street are a mere one story and have been painted a variety of colors. The newer, single story properties all appear to have been built around the same time; the yards mostly being of the same size, and the houses appearing to be clones of one another. Aside from the Baxter house at the end, this street is a perfect slice of middle America. The inhabitants of the other houses wonder who lives in the ancient, dilapidated house at the end of the street.

In the middle of the passage, the author writes, “[the Baxter] white is no longer pristinely white, but a dingy grayish cream color. Long vines hang from the tattered roof. The Baxter house is two stories tall and has a large yard in the back that has never been mowed.” Using this information, it can be concluded

Paul’s wife knows Paul loves to read cookbooks. She decides to get him one for his birthday. Paul tells her he will try to make a new recipe for three days in a row. On Monday, Paul makes blueberry pancakes for breakfast. He gets the blueberries from the farmers’ market. On Tuesday, Paul makes beef soup for dinner. He puts in cubes of beef, carrots, and onions. The recipe calls for cream, but Paul does not cream. He uses water instead. On Wednesday, Paul makes a tomato salad with cucumbers and onions. He picks the cucumbers and tomatoes from his garden. He likes this dish best. It was also the easiest for him to make.

Why doesn’t Paul use cream?

Arrowheads, which are ancient hunting tools, are often themselves ‘hunted’ for their interesting value both as artifacts and as art. Some of the oldest arrowheads in the United States date back 12,000 years. They are not very difficult to find. You need only to walk with downcast eyes in a field that has been recently tilled for the spring planting season, and you might find one.

Arrowheads are tiny stones or pieces of wood, bone, or metal which have been sharpened in order to create a tipped weapon used in hunting. The material is honed to an edge, usually in a triangular fashion, and is brought to a deadly tip. On the edge opposite the tip is a flared tail. Though designs vary depending on the region, purpose, and era of the arrowhead’s origin, the tails serve the same purpose. The tail of the arrowhead is meant to be strapped onto a shaft, which is a straight wooden piece such as a spear or an arrow. When combined, the arrowhead point and the shaft become a lethal projectile weapon to be thrown by arm or shot with a bow at prey.

Indian arrowheads are important artifacts that give archeologists (scientists who study past human societies) clues about the lives of Native Americans. By analyzing an arrowhead’s shape, they can determine the advancement of tool technologies among certain Native American groups. By determining the origin of the arrowhead material (bone, rock, wood, or metal), they can trace the patterns of travel and trade of the hunters. By examine the location of the arrowheads, archeologists can map out hunting grounds and other social patterns.

Arrowheads are commonly found along riverbanks or near creek beds because animals drawn to natural water sources to sustain life were regularly found drinking along the banks. For this reason, riverbeds were a prime hunting ground for the Native Americans. Now, dry and active riverbeds are prime hunting grounds for arrowhead collectors.

Indian arrowheads are tiny pieces of history that fit in the palm of your hand. They are diary entries in the life of a hunter. They are museum pieces that hide in the dirt. They are symbolic of the eternal struggle between life and death.

In the final paragraph, the author writes, “They are museum pieces symbolic of the eternal struggle between life and death.” Which of the following is the best way to combine these two sentences, while keeping their original meaning?

I am writing in response to response to the article “Protecting our public spaces” in issue 14, published this spring in it, the author claims that “all graffiti is public spaces.” I would like to point out that many people believe that graffiti is an art from that can benefit our public spaces just as much as sculpture, fountains, or other, more accepted art forms.

People who object to graffiti usually do so more because of where it is, not what it is. They argue, as your author does, that posting graffiti in public places constitutes an illegal act of property damage. But the location of such graffiti should not prevent the images themselves from being considered genuine art.

I would argue that graffiti is the ultimate public art form. Spray paint is a medium unlike any other. Though graffiti, the entire world has become a canvas. No one has to pay admission or travel to a museum to see this kind of art. The artists usually do not receive payment for their efforts. These works of art dotting the urban landscape are available, free of charge, to everyone who passes by.

To be clear, I do not consider random words or names sprayed on stop signs to be art. Plenty of graffiti is just vandalism, pure and simple. However, there is also graffiti that is breathtaking in its intricate detail, its realism, or its creativity. It takes great talent to create such involved designs with spray paint.

Are these creators not artists just because they use a can of spray paint instead of a paintbrush, or because they cover the side of a building rather than a canvas?

To declare that all graffiti is vandalism, and nothing more, is an overly simplistic statement that I find out of place in such a thoughtful publication as your magazine. Furthermore, graffiti is not going anywhere, so might as well find a way to live with it and enjoy its benefits. One option could be to make a percentage of public space, such as walls or benches in parks, open to graffiti artists. By doing this, the public might feel like part owners of these works of art, rather than just the victims of a crime.

According to the writer, random words sprayed on stop sings are not

Right now, I am looking at a shelf full or relics, a collection of has-beens, old-timers, antiques, fossils. Right now I am lolling at a shelf full of books. Yes that’s right. If you have some spare cash (the doing rate is about $89) and are looking to enhance your reading experience, then I highly suggest you consider purchasing an e-reader. E-readers are replacing the books of old, and I welcome them with open arms (as you should).

If you haven’t heard of an e-reader and don’t know what it is, then please permit the following explanation. An e-reader is a device that allows you to read e-books. An e-book is a book-length publication in digital form, consisting of text, images, or both, and produced on, published through, and readable on computers or other electronic devices. Sometimes the equivalent of a conventional printed book, e-books can also be born digital. The Oxford Dictionary or English defines the e-book as “an electronic version of a printed book, “but e-book can and do exist without any printed equivalent.

So now you know what an e-reader is. But you still may be wondering why they put printed books to shame. E-readers are superior to printed books because they save space, are environmentally friendly, and provide helpful reading tips and tools that printed books do not.

E-readers are superior to printed books because they save space. The average e-reader can store thousands of digital book, providing a veritable library at your fingertips. What is more, being the size and weight of a thin hardback, the e-reader itself is relatively petite. It is easy to hold and can fit in a pocketbook or briefcase easily. This makes handling ponderous behemoths such as War and Peace, Anna Karenina, and Les Miserables a breeze. Perhaps the only drawback to the space-saving aspect of an e-reader is that it requires you to find new things to put on your shelves.

In addition, e-readers are superior to books because they are environmentally friendly. The average novel is about 300 pages long. So, if a novel is printed 1000 times, it will use 300,000 pieces of paper. That’s a lot of paper! If there are about 80,000 pieces of paper in a tree, this means it takes almost 4 trees to make these 1000 books. Now, we know that the average bestseller sells about 20,000 copies per week. That means that it takes over 300 trees each month to sustain this rate. And for the super bestsellers, these figures increase dramatically. For example, the Harry Potter book series has sold over 450 million copies. That’s about 2 million trees! Upon viewing these figures, it is not hard to grasp the severe impact of printed books on the environment. Since e-reader use no trees, they represent a significant amount of preservation in terms of the environment and its resources.

Finally, e-reader are superior to books because they provide helpful reading tips and tolls that printed books do not. The typical e-reader allows its user to customize letter size, font, and line spacing. It also allows highlighting and electronic bookmarking. Furthermore, it grants users the ability to get an overview of a book and then jump to a specific electronic bookmarking. Furthermore, it grants users the ability to get an overview of a book and then jump to a specific location based on that overview. While these are all nice features, perhaps the most helpful of all is the ability to get dictionary definitions at the touch of a finger. On even the most basic e-reader, users can conjure instant definitions without having to hunt through a physical dictionary.

It can be seen that e-readers are superior to printed books. They save space, are environmentally friendly, and provide helpful reading tips and tools that printed books do not. So what good are printed books? Well, they certainly make nice decorations.

Based on information in the passage, it can be inferred that War and Peace, Anna Karenina, and Les Miserables are all

Right now, I am looking at a shelf full or relics, a collection of has-beens, old-timers, antiques, fossils. Right now I am lolling at a shelf full of books. Yes that’s right. If you have some spare cash (the doing rate is about $89) and are looking to enhance your reading experience, then I highly suggest you consider purchasing an e-reader. E-readers are replacing the books of old, and I welcome them with open arms (as you should).

If you haven’t heard of an e-reader and don’t know what it is, then please permit the following explanation. An e-reader is a device that allows you to read e-books. An e-book is a book-length publication in digital form, consisting of text, images, or both, and produced on, published through, and readable on computers or other electronic devices. Sometimes the equivalent of a conventional printed book, e-books can also be born digital. The Oxford Dictionary or English defines the e-book as “an electronic version of a printed book, “but e-book can and do exist without any printed equivalent.

So now you know what an e-reader is. But you still may be wondering why they put printed books to shame. E-readers are superior to printed books because they save space, are environmentally friendly, and provide helpful reading tips and tools that printed books do not.

E-readers are superior to printed books because they save space. The average e-reader can store thousands of digital book, providing a veritable library at your fingertips. What is more, being the size and weight of a thin hardback, the e-reader itself is relatively petite. It is easy to hold and can fit in a pocketbook or briefcase easily. This makes handling ponderous behemoths such as War and Peace, Anna Karenina, and Les Miserables a breeze. Perhaps the only drawback to the space-saving aspect of an e-reader is that it requires you to find new things to put on your shelves.

In addition, e-readers are superior to books because they are environmentally friendly. The average novel is about 300 pages long. So, if a novel is printed 1000 times, it will use 300,000 pieces of paper. That’s a lot of paper! If there are about 80,000 pieces of paper in a tree, this means it takes almost 4 trees to make these 1000 books. Now, we know that the average bestseller sells about 20,000 copies per week. That means that it takes over 300 trees each month to sustain this rate. And for the super bestsellers, these figures increase dramatically. For example, the Harry Potter book series has sold over 450 million copies. That’s about 2 million trees! Upon viewing these figures, it is not hard to grasp the severe impact of printed books on the environment. Since e-reader use no trees, they represent a significant amount of preservation in terms of the environment and its resources.

Finally, e-reader are superior to books because they provide helpful reading tips and tolls that printed books do not. The typical e-reader allows its user to customize letter size, font, and line spacing. It also allows highlighting and electronic bookmarking. Furthermore, it grants users the ability to get an overview of a book and then jump to a specific electronic bookmarking. Furthermore, it grants users the ability to get an overview of a book and then jump to a specific location based on that overview. While these are all nice features, perhaps the most helpful of all is the ability to get dictionary definitions at the touch of a finger. On even the most basic e-reader, users can conjure instant definitions without having to hunt through a physical dictionary.

It can be seen that e-readers are superior to printed books. They save space, are environmentally friendly, and provide helpful reading tips and tools that printed books do not. So what good are printed books? Well, they certainly make nice decorations.

According to the author, which of the following reading tips and tools are offered by the e-reader?

I line spacing customization

II the ability to quickly jump to the end of a book

III access to an online thesaurus at the touch of a finger

Many people like to eat pizza, but not everyone knows knows how to make it. Making the perfect pizza can be complicated, but there are lots of ways for you to make basic version at home.

When you make pizza, you must begin with the crust. The crust can be hard to make. If you want to make the crust yourself, you will have to make dough using flour, water, and yeast. You will have to knead the dough with your hands. If you do not have enough time to do this, you can use a prepared crust that you buy from the store.

After you have chosen your crust, you must then add the sauce. Making your own sauce from scratch can take a long time. You have to buy tomatoes, peel them, and then cook them with spices. If this sounds like too much work, you can also purchase jarred sauce from the store. Many jarred sauces taste almost as good as the kind you make at home.

Now that you have your crust and your sauce, you need to add the cheese. Cheese comes from milk, which comes from cows. Do you have a cow in your backyard? Do you how to milk the cow? Do you know how to turn that milk into cheese? If not, you might want to buy cheese from the grocery store instead of making it yourself. When you have the crust, sauce, and cheese ready, you can add other toppings. Some people like to put meat on their pizza, while other people like to add vegetables. Some people even like to add pineapple! The best part of making a pizza at home is that you can customize it by adding your own favorite ingredients

Which of the following conclusions would work best at the end of this passage?