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?
Recent advances in science and technology have made it
possible for geneticists to find out abnormalities in the unborn foetus and
take remedial action to rectify some defects which would otherwise prove to be
fatal to the child. Though genetic engineering is still at its infancy,
scientists can now predict with greater accuracy a genetic disorder. It is not
yet an exact science since they are not in a position to predict when exactly a
genetic disorder will set in. While they have not yet been able to change the
genetic order of the gene in germs, they are optimistic and are holding out
that in the near future they might be successful in achieving this feat. They
have, however, acquired the ability in manipulating tissue cells. However,
genetic mis-information can sometimes be damaging for it may adversely affect
people psychologically. Genetic information may lead to a tendency to brand
some people as inferiors. Genetic information can therefore be abused and its
application in deciding the sex of the foetus and its subsequent abortion is
now hotly debated on ethical lines. But on this issue geneticists cannot be
squarely blamed though this charge has often been leveled at them. It is mainly
a societal problem. At present genetic engineering is a costly process of
detecting disorders but scientists hope to reduce the costs when technology
becomes more advanced. This is why much progress in this area has been possible
in scientifically advanced and rich countries like the U.S.A., U.K. and Japan.
It remains to be seen if in the future this science will lead to the
development of a race of supermen or will be able to obliterate disease from
this world.
Why, according to the author, is genetic misinformation
severely damaging?
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.
Which of the following best
describes the organization of this passage?
Sport shall be mentioned next. I have had a
liking for more than one form of sport, but an actual passion for salmon and
trout fishing. Salmon fishing, as I have enjoyed it, fishing not from a boat
but from one’s feet, either on the bank or wading deep in the stream, is a
glorious and sustained exercise for the whole body, as well as being an
exciting-sport; but many of my friends do not care for it. To them, I say, as
one who was fond of George Meredith’s Novels once said to be man who complained
that he should not read them, ‘why should you?’ if you do not care for fishing,
do not fish. Why should you? But if we are to be one equal term and you are be
one the same happy level as I hav3e been, then find something for yourself
which you like as much as I like fishing.
The writer recommends game for the youth which
test the:
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.
According to the passage, the lack
of critical attention paid to Jane Austen can be explained by all of the
following nineteenth-century attitudes towards the novel
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.
Based on its use in passage, it
can be understood that ‘dilapidated’ belongs to which of the following words
groups?
The public distribution system, which provides food at low
prices, is a subject of vital concern. There is a growing realization that
thought Pakistan has enough food to feed its masses three square meals a day,
the monster of starvation and food insecurity continues to haunt the poor in
our country.
Increasing the purchasing power of the poor through
providing productive employment leading to rising income, and thus good standard
of living is the ultimate objective of public policy. However, till then, there
is a need to provide assured supply of food through a restructured more
efficient and decentralized public distribution system (PDS).
Although the PDS is extensive – it is one of the largest
such systems in the world – it has yet to reach the rural poor and the far off
places. It remains an urban phenomenon, with the majority of the rural poor
still out of its reach due to lack of economic and physical access. The poorest
in the cities and the migrants are left out, for they generally do not possess
ration cards. The allocation of PDS supplies in big cities is larger than in
rural areas. In view of such deficiencies in the system, the PDS urgently needs
to be streamlined. In addition, considering the large food grains production
combined with food subsidy on one hand and the continuing slow starvation and dismal
poverty of the rural population on the other, there is a strong case for making
PDS target group oriented.
The growing salaried class is provided job security, regular
income, and percent insulation against inflation. These gains of development
have not percolated down to the vast majority of our working population. If one
compares only dearness allowance to the employees in public and private sector
and looks at its growth in the past few years, the rising food subsidy is
insignificant to the point of inequity. The food subsidy is a kind of D.A. to
the poor, the self-employed and those in the unorganized sector of the economy.
However, what is most unfortunate is that out of the large budget of the so –
called food subsidy, the major part of it is administrative cost and wastages.
A small portion of the above budget goes to the real consumer and an even
lesser portion to the poor who are in real need.
It is true that subsidies should not become a permanent feature
except for the destitute, disabled widows and the old. It is also true that
subsidies often create a psychology of dependence and hence is habit – forming,
killing the general initiative of the people. By making PDS target group
oriented, not only the poorest and neediest would be reached without additional
cost, but it will actually cut overall costs incurred on large cities and for
better off localities. When the food and food subsidy are limited the rural and
urban poor should have the priority in the PDS supplies. The PDS should be
closely linked with programs of employment generation and nutrition
improvement.
Which of the following is true of public distribution
system?
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 supplies information for
answering which of the following questions?
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.
What makes the other houses on the
street stand out visually from the Baxter house?
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
As used in paragraph 3, which is
the best synonym for ”purchase”?
