Chocolate – there’s nothing quite like it, is there?
Chocolate is simply delicious. What is chocolate? Where does it come from?
Christopher Columbus was probably the first to take cacao
beans from the New World to Europe in around 1502. But the history of chocolate
goes back at least 4,000 years! The Aztecs, who lived in America, through that
their bitter cacao drink was a divine gift from heaven. In fact, the scientist
Carolus Linnaeus named the plant Theobroma, which means “food of the gods”
The Spanish explorer Hernando Cortex went to America in
1519. He visited the Mexican emperor Montezuma. He saw that Montezuma drank
cacao mixed with vanilla and spices. Cortez took some cacao home as a gift to the
Spanish King Charles. In Spain, people began to drink Cortez’s chocolate in
drink with chili peppers. However, the natural taste of cacao was too bitter
for most people. To sweeten the drink, Europeans added sugar to the cacao
drink. As a sweet drink, it became more popular. By the 17th
century, rich people in Europe were drinking it.
Later, people started using chocolate in pastries, like pies and cakes. In 1828, Dutch chocolate
makers started using a new process for removing the fat from cacao beans, and
getting to the center of the cacao bean. The Dutch chocolate maker Conrad J.
Van Houten made a machine that pressed the fat from the bean. The resulting powder
mixed better with water than cacao did. Now, some call van Houten’s chocolate “Dutch
chocolate.”
It was easy to mix Dutuch chocolate powder with sugar. So
other chocolate makers started trying new recipes that used powdered chocolate. People started
mixing sweetened chocolate with cocoa butter to make solid chocolate bars. In
1849, an English chocolate maker made the first chocolate bar. In the 19th
century, the Swiss started making milk chocolate by mixing powdered milk with
sweetened chocolate. Milk chocolate has not changed much since this process was
invented.
Today, two countries – Brazil and Ivory Coast – account for
almost half the world’s chocolate. The United States imports most of the
chocolate in the world, but the Swiss eat the most chocolate per person. The
most chocolate eaten today is sweet milk chocolate, but people also eat white
chocolate and dark chocolate.
Cocoa and dark chocolate are believed to help prevent heart
attacks, or help keep from happening. They are supposed to be good for the
circulatory system. On the other hand, the high fat content of chocolate can
cause weight gain, which is not good for people’s health. Other health claims
for chocolate have not been proven, but some research shows that chocolate
could be good for the brain.
Chocolate is a popular holiday gift. A popular Valentine’s
Day gift is a box of chocolate candies with a card and flowers. Chocolate is
sometimes given for Christmas and birthdays. Chocolate eggs are sometimes given
at Easter.
Chocolate is toxic to some animals. An ingredient in chocolate
is poisonous to dogs, cats, parrots, small rodents, and some livestock. Their
bodies cannot process some if the chemicals found in chocolate. Therefore, they
should never be fed chocolate.
Why did Linnaeus name the plant Theobroma?
Although cynics may like to see he government’s policy for
women in terms of the party’s internal power struggles, it will nevertheless be
churlish to deny that it represents a pioneering effect aimed at bringing about
sweeping social reforms. In its language, scope and strategies, the policy documents
displays a degree of understanding of women’s needs that is uncommon in
government pronouncements. This is due in large part to the participatory
process that marked its formulation, seeking the active involvement right from
the start of women’s groups, academic institutions and non-government
organizations with grass roots experience. The result is not just a lofty
declaration of principles but a blueprint for a practical program of action.
The policy delineates a series of concrete measures to accord women a
decision-making role in the political domain and greater control over their
economic status. Of especially far-reaching impart are the devolution of
control of economic infrastructure to women, notably at the gram panchayat
level, and the amendment proposed in the Act of 1956 to give women comparcenary
rights.
And enlightened aspect of the policy is its recognition that
actual change in the status of women cannot be brought about by the mere enactment
of socially progressive legislation. Accordingly, it focuses on reorienting
development programs and sensitizing administrations to address specific
situations as, for instance, the growing number of households headed by women,
which is a consequence of rural-urban migration. The proposal to create an
equal-opportunity police force and give women greater control of police
stations is an acknowledgement of the biases and callousness displayed by the
generally all-male law-enforcement authorities in case of dowery and domestic
violence. While the mere enunciation of such a policy has the salutary effect
of sensitizing the administration as a whole, it does not make the task of its
implementation any easier. This is because the changes it envisages in the
political and economic status of woman strike at the root of power structures
in society and the basis of man-woman relationship. There is also the danger
that reservation for women in public life, while necessary for their greater
visibility, could lapse into tokenism or become a tool in the hands of vote
seeking politicians. Much will depend on the dissemination of the policy and
the ability of elected representatives and government agencies to reorder their
priorities.
Which of the following
words is most nearly the same in meaning as the word ‘enunciation’ as used in
the passage?
When we are young, we learn that
tigers and sharks are dangerous animals. We might be scared of them because
they are big and powerful. As we get older, however, we learn that sometimes
the most dangerous animals are also the smallest animals. In fact, the animal
that kills the most people every year is one that you have probably killed
yourself many times: the mosquito.
While it may seem that all
mosquitoes are biters, this is not actually the case. Male mosquitoes eat plant
nectar. One the other hand, female mosquitoes feed on animal blood. They need
this blood to live and produce eggs. When a female mosquito bites a human
being, it transmits a small amount of saliva into the blood. The saliva may or
may not contain a deadly disease. The result of the bite can be as minor as an
itchy bump or as serious as death.
Because a mosquito can bite many
people in the course of its life, it can carry diseases from one person to
another very easily. Two of the most deadly diseases carried by mosquitoes are
malaria and yellow fever. More than 700 million people become sick from these
diseases every year. At least 2 million of these people will die from these
diseases.
Many scientists are working on
safer and better ways to kill mosquitoes, but so far, there is no sure way to
protect everyone in the world from their deadly bites. Mosquito nests can be
placed over beds to protect people against being bitten. These nets help people
stay safe at night, but they do not kill any mosquitoes. Mosquitoes have many
natural enemies like bats, birds, dragonflies, and certain kinds of fish.
Bringing more of these animals into places where mosquitoes live might help to
cut down the amount of mosquitoes in that area. This is a natural solution, but
is does not always work very well. Mosquitoes can also be killed with poisons
or sprays. Even though these sprays kill mosquitoes, they may also harm other
plants or animals.
Although mosquitoes may not seem
as scary as larger, more powerful animals, they are far more dangerous to human
beings. But things are changing. It is highly likely that one day scientists
will find a way to keep everyone safe from mosquitoes and the diseases they
carry.
Which of the following words best
described the author’s overall attitude towards the prospect of solving the
mosquito problem?
Although cynics may like to see he government’s policy for
women in terms of the party’s internal power struggles, it will nevertheless be
churlish to deny that it represents a pioneering effect aimed at bringing about
sweeping social reforms. In its language, scope and strategies, the policy documents
displays a degree of understanding of women’s needs that is uncommon in
government pronouncements. This is due in large part to the participatory
process that marked its formulation, seeking the active involvement right from
the start of women’s groups, academic institutions and non-government
organizations with grass roots experience. The result is not just a lofty
declaration of principles but a blueprint for a practical program of action.
The policy delineates a series of concrete measures to accord women a
decision-making role in the political domain and greater control over their
economic status. Of especially far-reaching impart are the devolution of
control of economic infrastructure to women, notably at the gram panchayat
level, and the amendment proposed in the Act of 1956 to give women comparcenary
rights.
And enlightened aspect of the policy is its recognition that
actual change in the status of women cannot be brought about by the mere enactment
of socially progressive legislation. Accordingly, it focuses on reorienting
development programs and sensitizing administrations to address specific
situations as, for instance, the growing number of households headed by women,
which is a consequence of rural-urban migration. The proposal to create an
equal-opportunity police force and give women greater control of police
stations is an acknowledgement of the biases and callousness displayed by the
generally all-male law-enforcement authorities in case of dowery and domestic
violence. While the mere enunciation of such a policy has the salutary effect
of sensitizing the administration as a whole, it does not make the task of its
implementation any easier. This is because the changes it envisages in the
political and economic status of woman strike at the root of power structures
in society and the basis of man-woman relationship. There is also the danger
that reservation for women in public life, while necessary for their greater
visibility, could lapse into tokenism or become a tool in the hands of vote
seeking politicians. Much will depend on the dissemination of the policy and
the ability of elected representatives and government agencies to reorder their
priorities.
According to the passage,
which of the following aspects has been identified as, it alone would not bring
change in the status of women?
This is the age of machine.
Machines are everywhere, in the fields, in the factory, in the home, In the
street, in the city, in the country, everywhere. To fly, it is not necessary to
have wings; there are machines. To swim under the sea, it is not necessary to
have gills; there are machines. To kill our fellowmen in over-whelming numbers,
there are machines. Petrol machines alone provide ten times more power than all
human beings in the world. In the busiest countries, each individual has six
hundred human slaves in his machines.
What
are the consequences of this abnormal power? Before the war, it looked as
though it might be possible, for the first time in history to provide food and
clothing and shelter for the teaming population of the world-every man, woman
and child. This would have been the greatest triumphs of science. And yet, if
you remember, we saw the world crammed, full of food and people hungry. Today,
the leaders are bare and millions, starving. That’s more begin to hum, are we
going to see again more and more food, and people still hungry? For the goods,
it makes the goods, but avoids the consequences.
The
machine age produces:
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, if true,
would present the biggest challenge to the author’s argument set forth in
paragraph 5?
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.
How would you describe the synonym
of the word “Verisimilitude”?
First introduced in 1927, The Hardy
Boys Mystery Stories are a series of books about the adventures of brothers
Frank and Joe Hardy, teenaged detectives who solve one baffling mystery after
another. The Hardy Boys were so popular among young boys that in 1930 a similar
series was created for girls featuring a sixteen-year-old detective named Nancy
Drew. The cover of each volume of The Hardy Boys states that he author of the
series is Franklin W. Dixon; the Nancy Drew Mystery Stories are supposedly
written by Carolyn Keene. Over the years, though, many fans of both series have
been surprised to find out that Franklin W. Dixon and Carolyn Keene are not
real people. If Franklin W. Dixon and Carolyn Keene never existed, then who
wrote The Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew mysteries?
The Hardy Boys and the Nancy Drew
books were written through a process called ghostwriting. A ghostwriter writes
a book according to a specific formula. While ghostwriters are paid for writing
the books, their authorship is not acknowledged, and their names do not appear
on the published books. Ghostwriters can write books for children or adults,
the content of which is unspecific. Sometimes they work on book series with a
lot of individual titles, such as The Hardy Boys and the Nancy Drew series.
The initial idea for both The Hardy
Boys and the Nancy Drew series was developed by a man named Edward Stratemeyer,
who owned a publishing company that specialized in children’s book.
Stratemeyer noticed the increasing
popularity of mysteries among adult, and surmised that children would enjoy
reading mysteries about younger detectives with whom they could identify.
Stratemeyer first developed each book with an outline describing the plot and
setting. Once he completed the outline, Stratemeyer then hired a ghostwriter to
convert it into a book of slightly over 200 pages. After the ghostwriter had
written a draft of a book, he or she would send it back to Stratemeyer, who
would make a list of corrections and mail it back to the ghostwriter. The
ghostwriter would revise the book according to Stratemeyer’s instructions and
then return it to him. Once Stratemeyer approved the book, it was ready for
publication.
Because each series ran for so many
years, Nancy Drew and The Hardy Boys both had a number of different
ghostwriters producing books; however, the first ghostwrites for each series proved
to be the most influential. The initial ghostwriter for The Hardy Boys was a
Canadian journalist named Leslie McFarlane. A few years later, Mildred A. Wirt,
a young writer from lowa, began writing the Nancy Drew books. Although they
were using prepared outlines as guides, both McFarlane and Wirt developed the
characters themselves. The personalities of Frank and Joe Hardy and Nancy arose
directly from McFarlane’s and wirt’s imaginations. For example, Mildred Wirt
had been a star college athelete and gave Nancy similar athletic abilities. The
ghostwriters were also responsible for numerous plot and setting details.
Leslie McFarlane used elements of his small C fictional hometown.
Although The Hardy Boys and Nancy
Drew books were very popular with children, not everyone approved of them.
Critics thought their plots were unrealistic and even far-fetched, since most
teenagers did not experience the adventures Frank and Joe Hardy or Nancy Drew
did. The way the books were written also attracted criticism. Many teachers and
librarians objected to the ghostwriting process, claiming it was designed to
produce books quickly rather than create quality literature. Some libraries –
including the New York Public Library – even refused to include the books in
their children’s collections. Ironically, this decision actually helped sales
of his books, because children simply purchased them when they were unavailable
in local libraries.
Regardless of the debates about
their literary merit, each series of books has exerted an undeniable influence
on American and even global culture. Most Americans have never heard of Edward
Stratemeyer, Leslie McFarlane, or Mildred wirt, but people throughout the world
are familiar with Nancy Drew and Frank and Joe Hardy.
Based on information in the passage,
it can be inferred that Leslie McFarlane and Mildred Wirt
