درباره این مجموعه: گردآوری و ویرایششده از متون واقعی ریدینگ که داوطلبان به یاد آوردهاند. آیلتس از بانک سوالات جهانی استفاده میکند، بنابراین این متون در سراسر جهان تکرار میشوند. برای اینکه یک تست کامل و قابل اجرا داشته باشید، متونی که در یک بازه زمانی مشابه گزارش شدهاند کنار هم قرار گرفتهاند — بنابراین یک مجموعه ممکن است شامل متونی از چند تاریخ مختلف آزمون باشد، نه فقط یک جلسه. برای راحتی مطالعه سازماندهی شده است. بر اساس خاطرات داوطلبان — محتوای رسمی آیلتس نیست.
Reading Passage 1: An important language development
Cuneiform, the world’s first known system of handwriting, originated some 6,000 years ago in Sumer in what is now southern Iraq. It was most often inscribed on palm-sized, rectangular clay tablets measuring several centimetres across, although occasionally larger tablets or cylinders were used. Clay was an excellent medium for writing. Other surfaces which have been employed—for example, parchment, papyrus and paper—are not long-lasting and are easily destroyed by fire and water. But clay has proved to be resistant to those particular kinds of damage.
The word ‘cuneiform’ actually refers to the marks or signs inscribed in the clay. The original cuneiform signs consisted of a series of lines—triangular, vertical, diagonal, and horizontal. Sumerian writers would impress these lines into the wet clay with a stylus—a long, thin, pointed instrument which looked somewhat like a pen. Oddly, the signs were often almost too small to see with the naked eye. Cuneiform signs were used for the writing of at least a dozen languages. This is similar to how the Latin alphabet is used today for writing English, French, Spanish and German, for example.
Before the development of cuneiform, tokens were used by the Sumerians to record certain information. For example, they might take small stones and use them as tokens or representations of something else, like a goat. A number of tokens, then, might mean a herd of goats. These tokens might then be placed in a cloth container and provided to a buyer as a receipt for a transaction, perhaps five tokens for five animals. It was not that different from what we do today when we buy some bread and the clerk gives us back a piece of paper with numbers on it to confirm the exchange.
By the 4th century BCE, the Sumerians had adapted this system to a form of writing. They began putting tokens in a container resembling an envelope, one made of clay instead of cloth. They then stamped the outside to indicate the number and type of tokens inside. A person could then ‘read’ what was stamped on the container and know what was inside.
Gradually, Sumerians developed symbols for words. When first developed, each symbol looked like the concrete thing it represented. For example, an image which resembled the drawing of a sheep meant just that. Then another level of abstraction was introduced when symbols were developed for intangible ideas such as ‘female’ or ‘hot’ or ‘God’. Cuneiform, in other words, evolved from a way used primarily to track and store information into a way to represent the world symbolically. Over the centuries, the marks became ever more abstract, finally evolving into signs that looked nothing like what they referred to, just as the letters ‘h-o-u-s-e’ have no visual connection to the place we live in. At this last stage in the evolution of cuneiform, the signs took the form of triangles, which became common cuneiform signs.
As the marks became more abstract, the system became more efficient because there were fewer marks for a ‘reader’ to learn. But cuneiform also became more complex because society itself was becoming more complex, so there were more ideas and concepts that needed to be expressed. However, most linguists and historians agree cuneiform developed primarily as a tool for accounting. Of the cuneiform tablets that have been discovered, excavated and translated, about 75 percent contain this type of practical information, rather than artistic or imaginative work.
Cuneiform writing was used for thousands of years, but it eventually ceased to be used in everyday life. In fact, it died out and remained unintelligible for almost 2,000 years. In the late 19th century, a British army officer, Henry Rawlinson, discovered cuneiform inscriptions which had been carved into the surface of rocks in the Behistun Mountains in what is present-day Iran. Rawlinson made impressions of the marks on large pieces of paper as he balanced dangerously on the surrounding rocks.
Rawlinson took his copies home to Britain and studied them for years to determine what each line stood for, and what each group of symbols meant. He found that, in the writing on those particular rocks, every word was repeated three times in three languages: Old Persian, Elamite and Babylonian. Since the meanings in these languages were already known to linguists, he could thus translate the cuneiform. Eventually, he fully decoded the cuneiform marks and discovered that they described the life of Darius, a king of the Persian Empire in the 5th century BCE.
- 1
Cuneiform tablets were produced in different shapes and sizes.
- 2
When Sumerian writers marked the clay tablets, the tablets were dry.
- 3
Cuneiform was often difficult to read because of its size.
- 4
A number of languages adopted cuneiform.
- 5
Cuneiform signs can be found in some modern alphabets.
- 6
Before cuneiform: tokens, for example, _______ were often used.
- 7
Before cuneiform: the first tokens were kept in containers made of _______.
- 8
Before cuneiform: tokens were used as a _______ to give when selling something.
- 9
By the 4th century BCE: tokens were put in a container that looked like a clay _______.
- 10
Complex, abstract symbols developed: at first, signs looked like what they indicated, e.g. _______.
- 11
Complex, abstract symbols developed: eventually, cuneiform signs shaped like _______ were developed.
- 12
According to experts, cuneiform was mainly used for _______.
- 13
19th-century translation of cuneiform inscriptions by Henry Rawlinson: Rawlinson copied the inscriptions onto _______.
Reading Passage 2: Solving the problem of waste disposal
With the amount of rubbish being produced around the world increasing, Mark Rowe asks whether a new generation of incineration plants can help to solve the problem.
A
For many years, burning rubbish has been portrayed as the lazy option when it comes to dealing with the problem of waste disposal, since it sends toxic fumes into the air and appears to support a consumerist, throwaway society. Norway, however, appears to be burning its way through a sizeable chunk of Europe’s municipal waste, using the heat created by this process to warm and power homes in many of its cities. Norway isn’t alone: Germany, Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands all burn significant quantities of rubbish, and across Europe there are 420 plants burning municipal waste. With Europe dumping 150 million tonnes of rubbish into landfill every year, there would seem to be a limitless supply.
B
Those who support burning waste say that a new generation of incinerators has made it a more attractive option. Filters and scrubbing mechanisms now capture harmful substances such as mercury, hydrochloric acid and heavy metals. According to Ted Michaels, president of the US-based Energy Recovery Centre, ‘There has been constant evolution in combustion engineering and emissions-control technology, and the output from these facilities is now minuscule.’ Above all, however, supporters say that incineration is the only way of preventing the long-term impacts of landfill. In ten years’ time, says the World Bank, humans will be generating 2.2 billion tonnes of solid waste per year. Advocates see incineration as a practical way to deal swiftly with an immediate problem.
C
Levels of waste generation vary hugely around the world. ‘It’s a problem for the developed nations,’ says Joergen Fenhann, a senior scientist working with the UN Environment Programme in Denmark. ‘The more you develop, the more you produce, buy and throw away.’ But the growth of incineration hasn’t been universally welcomed. Lars Haltbrekken, chairman of Friends of the Earth in Norway, is concerned that incineration plants appear to generate demand for their services. ‘The problem in Norway,’ he explains, ‘is that we have built too many waste-burning factories. So we’ve ended up importing waste from other countries. If you look at this in a very small perspective, it is, of course, better for the climate to burn rubbish from the UK rather than leave it in landfill there,’ he continues. ‘But in a broader perspective, it’s a lazy way of getting rid of waste; you don’t stimulate the goals of reducing, reusing and recycling.’
D
Incineration is also at odds with EU policy, which promotes a ‘recycling hierarchy’: ideally, we simply produce less waste in the first place; failing that, we reuse objects more; the next step is recycling; only then should we consider incineration, while dumping in landfill is the last resort. Dealing with the problem of waste disposal involves tracing the whole process that took the material from its inception to landfill. We used to call this the ‘cradle to grave’ life cycle; now, the talk is of ‘cradle to cradle’ and an even more comprehensive concept known as ‘zero waste’. ‘The philosophy of cradle to cradle is about designing products that are actually good for the environment at the end of their life,’ says Joan Marc Simon, European spokesman for the environmental movement GAIA. ‘You design a bottle that contains no toxins, is fully recyclable and requires the minimum amount of energy to be produced.’ As Simon points out, however, without the right mechanisms in place ‘nothing guarantees that this bottle will end up being properly collected and treated in the appropriate recycling facility’.
E
Tim Burns, policy manager at Keep Britain Tidy, says, ‘In the UK alone, people waste £10 billion of food every year. You can argue about composting that, or not buying it in the first place — if you do that, then that’s money the retailers don’t get, so it’s not always clear-cut.’ The implications of zero waste are that we’re going to have to take a good long look at those well-stocked supermarket shelves, too. ‘Supermarkets keep their shelves stocked even when demand isn’t there, which means they have to pay to dispose of a lot of food,’ says Burns. ‘But that cost is less to them than the cost in brand damage of having empty shelves.’
F
Recent history and changes in trends in recycling suggest that we should be prepared for unexpected developments. ‘If someone back in the 1980s had suggested what waste would be like now, they would be completely wrong,’ says Richard Fisher, a PhD researcher at Cranfield University. ‘Consumerism has developed at a pace we never expected. Nobody would have said there would be so much electronic waste. But recycling has grown, too — ten years ago nobody would have predicted today’s levels of recycling.’ But he points out that the need to reduce waste is still a difficult message to sell to consumers. He suggests that what people are really concerned about is their loved ones and the future they face. ‘Perhaps we can align the environmental message to these deep-seated values,’ he says. ‘We need to look at whether it’s business that drives consumers or the other way around. You need government to play a leadership role, whereas countries such as the UK seem to be stepping away from the environment in pursuit of short-term economic goals.’
- 14
Paragraph A
- i. New terminology reflecting changing attitudes to waste disposal
- ii. Fundamental changes in behaviour in the past and future
- iii. Ways of rewarding the public for recycling
- iv. A surprising approach to waste disposal by several countries
- v. Difficult choices for individuals and businesses
- vi. Arguments against incineration from a country that uses it
- vii. A number of justifications for the use of incineration
- 15
Paragraph B
- 16
Paragraph C
- 17
Paragraph D
- 18
Paragraph E
- 19
Paragraph F
- 20
Ted Michaels
- A. Incineration does not encourage responsible attitudes to waste disposal.
- B. Recycling can sometimes create serious problems for the future.
- C. Greater consumerism leads to higher levels of waste.
- D. Proper systems are needed for the recycling of environmentally-friendly products.
- E. Landfill is better for the environment than incineration.
- F. Incineration of waste is now relatively harmless to the environment.
- G. Efforts to reduce waste may affect profits for some types of companies.
- 21
Joergen Fenhann
- 22
Joan Marc Simon
- 23
Tim Burns
- 24
Complete the summary: There has, for example, been unexpected growth in waste from ______ products.
- 25
He suggests that the need to protect the environment should be linked to basic values, and adds that it might be better if consumers had more influence over ______ and more direction was provided by ______.
Reading Passage 3: The Peopling of Patagonia
The human settlement of the southern extremity of the Americas has always fascinated pre-historians. Viewed from a global perspective, this was the last major continental land mass to be reached by human beings. The earliest occupation of Patagonia carries obvious implications for understanding when the North and South American continents were peopled, because it gives a baseline that all calculations regarding the rate of dispersion of humans throughout both continents must take into account.
For many years the human settlement of North and South America has been conceived of as beginning in the far north and travelling progressively southwards to Patagonia. However, fundamental disagreements developed concerning the length of time involved. Some scholars accepted a human presence in the Americas as early as 20,000 years ago, while others proposed that it could date no earlier than 8,000 years ago, and the debate is still with us today.
The idea of a relatively 'late' settlement of the Americas (around 8,000 years ago) implies that a rapid process of migration took place. Herein lies a second debate which revolves around the question of how migration is to be understood. The 'late' model demands a hypothetical migration conceived of as a single, continually advancing wave of settlement. This has always been difficult to take seriously and many scholars now support the idea of an early model that sees the migration as a less ordered migration, and this is surely the most realistic scenario as migrants slowly adapted to the diverse natural habitats they would have met while travelling through the continent.
Those who argue for an earlier settlement, however, must contend with the lack of unequivocal evidence for archaeological sites older than around 14,000 years. Nevertheless, evidence for human occupation of the centre of South America is now securely dated to around 12,500 years ago at the Monte Verde site, which casts doubt on the 'late model'. The lack of archaeological evidence further south for this time period may be explained by the obstacle to humans on foot posed by the huge glacial streams that were present at that time.
We can speculate then that the retreat of the Patagonian glaciers around 14,000 years ago allowed the initial human intrusion into a pristine environment, which was similar to that of early post-glacial Europe. Human settlement of the vast horizontal expanse of treeless high country must have been tenuous at best, and the evidence for this occupation remains relatively scant, most of it coming from rock shelters in Argentina and Chile. There is, however, reliable evidence from these sites to confirm the presence of humans by around 11,000 years ago in different habitats, and some hints of an even older occupation. However, some other sites where evidence for even earlier human occupation was initially posited, have recently come under fresh scrutiny. This is because anthropologists have come to recognise that bones or other evidence may be deposited in caves by natural agency, in other words by other forces such as floods or predators, and not necessarily by human.
We shall turn now to a more detailed discussion of the archaeological evidence found in various parts of Patagonia. At the site located beside Chinchihuapi Creek, excavations have produced convincing evidence of human occupation, including hut foundations and wooden artefacts. They were buried in layers of peat, which has the property of preserving wood remarkably well, and as a result radiocarbon dating tests have shown these artefacts to date from around 12,500 years ago. One of the most famous Patagonian sites is a cave known as Los Toldos. However, the evidence from this site has recently been called into question, because dispersed flecks of carbon used in the test process were taken unsystematically from many different places in the site. As a result, the association of this material with the artefacts is not at all clear. About 150 kilometres south is the site called El Ceibo, where a similar collection of artefacts to that found at Los Toldos has been discovered from the lowest levels of the dig, but as yet no radiocarbon dates are available and this sort of analysis of the existing evidence is required before the site's value can be confirmed.
The Arroyo Feo site is located very close to the high plateau. The artefacts from the earliest occupations were found at the same depth and have the same origins as those from Los Toldos, and have been securely dated to around 9,000 years ago. Another site that is mentioned in the debate is at Las Buitreras, where a number of stone flakes associated with bone remains of various animals have been discovered. However, anthropologists now believe that presumed cut marks on the bones are somewhat dubious, and despite detailed testing there is no way of securely relating any of these remains with human occupation. Finally some 50 kilometers to the south is the site at Cueva Fell, which was the first Patagonian site to be systematically studied by modern archaeological methods. However, it is now recognised that the utility of this site must be restricted to its direct vicinity, given changes to the nearby area caused by flooding, and findings cannot be freely extrapolated further afield.
In conclusion, based on the evidence from a number of reliable sites, it seems probable that human populations reached Patagonia around 11,000 years ago.
- 26
27 In the first paragraph, what is the writer's main point about migration to Patagonia?
- A. It started earlier than previously thought.
- B. Historians have overlooked its importance.
- C. It impacts on research into the wider region.
- D. Researchers have calculated its effects on the environment.
- 27
28 In the second paragraph, what is the writer's purpose?
- A. to challenge previous research
- B. to propose new areas to investigate
- C. to summarise a scholarly debate
- D. to suggest reasons for human migration
- 28
29 The writer refers to the 'late' model in order to
- A. compare it with another theory of migration.
- B. evaluate the success of American migration.
- C. criticise the speed of research into migration.
- D. compare migration in different parts of the world.
- 29
30 What is the writer's main point about the 'early' model?
- A. Scholars support the idea of fast migrations.
- B. It is too random to be a convincing theory.
- C. South America was more habitable at an earlier time.
- D. It is more consistent with the physical conditions of the land.
- 30
31 What does the writer suggest about the Monte Verde site?
- A. It is much younger than researchers once estimated.
- B. It provides supporting evidence for relatively early settlement.
- C. Archaeologists believe the site is of questionable value.
- D. Streams exposed the site, making new research possible.
- 31
32 The conditions encountered by the first migrants to Patagonia were unique.
- 32
33 In the high country the first migrants hunted wild animals for food.
- 33
34 Archaeologist have failed to draw conclusions from the evidence found at rock shelters in Argentina and Chile.
- 34
35 Archaeological evidence can be moved from place to place in a variety of ways.
- 35
36 Building remains and other evidence have been found in ______ at the Chinchihuapi Creek site, and because of this it has been possible to date them to around 12,500 years ago.
- A. fixed date
- B. random collection
- C. similar properties
- D. good condition
- E. scientific evaluation
- F. huge quantities
- G. new samples
- H. reliable connection
- I. skilled preservation
- J. immediate surroundings
- 36
37 However, the ______ of the samples taken from Los Toldos means that this site is of doubtful value.
- A. fixed date
- B. random collection
- C. similar properties
- D. good condition
- E. scientific evaluation
- F. huge quantities
- G. new samples
- H. reliable connection
- I. skilled preservation
- J. immediate surroundings
- 37
38 The remains found at the Arroyo Feo site show ______ and date from around 9,000 years ago.
- A. fixed date
- B. random collection
- C. similar properties
- D. good condition
- E. scientific evaluation
- F. huge quantities
- G. new samples
- H. reliable connection
- I. skilled preservation
- J. immediate surroundings
- 38
39 Unfortunately no ______ can be made between the samples taken from Las Buitreras and human presence.
- A. fixed date
- B. random collection
- C. similar properties
- D. good condition
- E. scientific evaluation
- F. huge quantities
- G. new samples
- H. reliable connection
- I. skilled preservation
- J. immediate surroundings
- 39
40 The findings of the work carried out at Cueva Fell cannot provide useful information beyond the ______.
- A. fixed date
- B. random collection
- C. similar properties
- D. good condition
- E. scientific evaluation
- F. huge quantities
- G. new samples
- H. reliable connection
- I. skilled preservation
- J. immediate surroundings
نمایش پاسخنامه
پاسخنامه
1. TRUE
2. FALSE
3. TRUE
4. TRUE
5. NOT GIVEN
6. stones
7. cloth
8. receipt
9. envelope
10. sheep
11. triangles
12. accounting
13. paper
14. iv
15. vii
16. vi
17. i
18. v
19. ii
20. F
21. C
22. D
23. G
24. electronic
25. business / government
26. C
27. C
28. A
29. D
30. B
31. NOT GIVEN
32. NOT GIVEN
33. NO
34. YES
35. D
36. B
37. C
38. H
39. J