Reading — 2026 Jan–Apr Recall Set 34

Olive oil is produced from the fruit of the olive tree, which is a member of the Oleaceae plant family. The trees require some cold weather during the year, but also tolerate hot, dry conditions, and do not like moisture when they are flowering. They actually produce better when subjected to these stressful conditions, and as a result, olive trees have traditionally been grown on land where little else will survive. Archaeologists today are divided over exactly where the first domestication of the olive occurred: some say it was in the area which is now Iran, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, while others contend it was in mainland Greece or on the island of Crete. The one thing that can be said with certainty is that cultivation began at least 6,000 years ago and spread slowly westward across the lands bordering on the Mediterranean Sea. Olive oil was used for a variety of purposes during these early times, including as a pharmacological ointment and in rituals for anointing royalty. The ancient Greeks believed the olive tree was a priceless gift from the goddess Athena and used its oil in sacred religious rituals. In fact, the Greek poet Homer called olive oil ‘liquid gold’, and during the 6th and 7th centuries BC, Greek law forbade the cutting down of olive trees and made it punishable by death. The ancient Middle Eastern ruler King David valued his groves of olive trees and his olive oil warehouses so much that he posted guards around the clock to protect them. Over the years, olive oil developed other uses. Its employment in cooking dates at least as far back as the 5th century BC, as described by the Greek philosopher Plato. Its use as an aid to beauty and health later became ingrained in many Mediterranean cultures. The Romans, for example, are said to have used generous amounts on their bodies to moisturise their skin after bathing. With the spread of the Roman Empire, olive oil became a major commodity, and its trade promoted commerce throughout the ancient world. It is generally believed that in the 1st–2nd centuries BC, olive trees were taken to North Africa and then to Spain, which was later to become the world’s largest producer of olive oil. Artefacts found at various Mediterranean archaeological sites include olive oil storage vessels with olive plant residue still in them. Historical evidence still in existence in the form of wall paintings and ancient manuscripts (including the works of the Roman naturalist and philosopher, Pliny the Elder) all record production techniques and the various uses of olive oil. Making olive oil in those early days was a laborious process accomplished without mechanisation. Processing or milling the fruit involved several distinct stages to extract the liquid. The olives were harvested from the trees by hand or by beating the fruit from the trees with long sticks. The olives were then rinsed and crushed to separate out the large seed found in the centre of each. The remaining seedless flesh was put in woven bags and pressed. Hot water was then poured over the bags to separate the oil from the solid bits of olive. The liquid produced in this process, consisting of oil and water, was drained into stone basins or tanks, where it was allowed to settle and separate. In cold weather, a bit of salt was added to speed up the process. As much oil as possible was drawn off the water, but the result was still not pure oil. Therefore, this impure mixture was allowed once more to settle in vats and then separated in order to refine the product. The waste water from the milling process, which is called amurca, is a bitter-tasting and foul-smelling liquid. In many ancient civilisations it was often simply discarded, causing serious pollution because of its acidity and high salt content. However, in the Roman period it was regarded as a very useful substance. When spread on surfaces, amurca forms a hard finish and therefore it was often applied to the floors of grain storage buildings where it hardened, keeping out water, mud and pests. When boiled down, amurca was applied to leather to soften it so that it was easier to shape into articles of clothing and shoes. It could also be eaten by farm animals and was, in fact, fed to livestock suffering from malnutrition. According to ancient texts, amurca was also utilised in moderate amounts by farmers as a fertiliser or as a pesticide, helping them to protect their crops from insects and even small rodents.

There are many differences between playing soccer in the street and joining a youth team in an organized league in the USA. A Street soccer, as its name implies, is an informal variation of the sport, often played on the street, particularly in urban areas. There are many reasons for the widespread popularity of street soccer. Unlike youth soccer, its more formally organized counterpart, no large space is needed, and goal posts, corner markers, and marked lines, associated with the formal game, are typically absent, as are game officials or referees. Another attraction of street soccer is that it is played frequently and competitively, but does not necessarily require standard 11-a-side teams or fixed playing positions. Unlike in youth soccer, inexperienced street soccer players rarely learn from repetitive technical and tactical drills. Instead, they learn from their poor performance in competition, unconscious of the skills they are nonetheless developing, and without older adults or coaches present. Players learn without effort through playing the game, and soon attain an almost natural feeling for the sport. B However, there are lots of cities in the world today where conditions are such that street soccer is no longer possible. Congested traffic now dominates where games were once played. Parks and open fields are used as hangouts for older teenagers with other interests. Add to this the requirement in many localities for official permits to use public spaces and the managed schedules that many young people have today, and spontaneous play of any kind is hard to imagine. C In spite of all these obstacles, which are probably solvable in most instances, there is another sociological explanation of why in many places street soccer doesn’t enjoy the same popularity it once did. In his book How Soccer Explains the World, US writer Franklin Foer observes: But for all the talk of freedom, the 1960s parenting style had a far less relaxed side too. Like the 1960s consumer movement which brought seat belts and airbags to cars, the (youth) soccer movement felt like it could create a set of … regulations that would protect both the child’s body and mind from damage. Soccer leagues like the one I played in as a child handed out ‘participation’ prizes to every player, no matter how few games his (or her) team won. Where most of the world accepts the practice of using your head to hit the ball as an essential element of the game, some (youth) soccer parents have worried over the potential for injury to the brain. An entire industry grew up to manufacture protective headgear. Even though very little medical evidence supports this fear, some youth leagues prohibited heading the ball altogether. D A growing body of people don’t believe street soccer involves a legitimate educational method. They argue that children need to be taught by experts. Youth soccer instruction now begins with four-year-olds, so that they will have an advantage as six-year-olds. This need to get ahead brings with it a fear of falling behind that only expert instruction can prevent. This type of instruction leaves no room for the trial-and-error approach of street soccer. E One of the basic ideas of street soccer is that young players are assigned a particular role by a better player and are expected to play for the good of the team. Such an assignment runs counter to the idea of youth soccer that every child needs to learn every position and will benefit from doing so. In street soccer, you fill the role that you are best able to at a particular time. While this role assignment can change from game to game, the purpose is always the same: to get the best out of each individual at any given moment. F In street soccer, children have to learn patience, to wait their turn, to realize that they are not entitled to make decisions, or even be listened to simply because they show up. Positions of responsibility are earned through competition within the team. Younger players in street soccer must wait to attain those positions. In youth soccer, however, with its overly democratic values, youngsters are guaranteed their time in the spotlight. Whether it’s their turn to be captain, to play a central position or to take a crucial shot, youth soccer players come to believe that hard work and patience aren’t really necessary. G Not only does every youth soccer player get a chance, it is assumed that each individual has played well. ‘Everyone’s a winner; no one’s a loser’ is a guiding principle of youth soccer. This ensures each individual goes away positive about themselves. No one can leave a game or a practice feeling bad. But, if there really are no losers, then why try at all? Since giving less than your best receives the same reward as giving your best, why go to any extra effort? In street soccer, every game results in a winner and a loser and everyone knows who is who. Losing a game is a common experience and players learn early on how to handle this. As a result, unlike most youth soccer players, they acquire resilience. A further difference between these two strands of soccer is that in street soccer a formal record is not kept. You can lose one day and win the next. The results are only temporary and are forgotten within minutes of the end of the match. But in organized youth soccer, the position each person plays and the results are formally noted and maintained throughout a season.

A facial expression is one or more motions or positions of the muscles in the skin. These movements convey the emotional state of the individual to observers. Facial expressions are a form of nonverbal communication. They are a primary means of conveying social information among aliens, but also occur in most other mammals and some other animal species. Facial expressions and their significance in the perceiver can, to some extent, vary between cultures with evidence from descriptions in the works of Charles Darwin. Humans can adopt a facial expression to read as a voluntary action. However, because expressions are closely tied to emotion, they are more often involuntary. It can be nearly impossible to avoid expressions for certain emotions, even when it would be strongly desirable to do so; a person who is trying to avoid insulting an individual he or she finds highly unattractive might, nevertheless, show a brief expression of disgust before being able to reassume a neutral expression. Microexpressions are one example of this phenomenon. The close link between emotion and expression can also work in the other direction; it has been observed that voluntarily assuming an expression can actually cause the associated emotion. Some expressions can be accurately interpreted even between members of different species—anger and extreme contentment being the primary examples. Others, however, are difficult to interpret even in familiar individuals. For instance, disgust and fear can be tough to tell apart. Because faces have only a limited range of movement, expressions rely upon fairly minuscule differences in the proportion and relative position of facial features, and reading them requires considerable sensitivity to some. Some faces are often falsely read as expressing some emotion, even when they are neutral, because their proportions naturally resemble those another face would temporarily assume when emoting. Also, a person’s eyes reveal much about how they are feeling, or what they are thinking. Blink rate can reveal how nervous or at ease a person may be. Research by Boston College professor Joe Tecce suggests that stress levels are revealed by blink rates. He supports his data with statistics on the relation between the blink rates of presidential candidates and their success in their races. Tecce claims that the faster blinker in the presidential debates has lost every election since 1980. Though Tecce’s data is interesting, it is important to recognize that non-verbal communication is multi-channeled, and focusing on only one aspect is reckless. Nervousness can also be measured by examining each candidate’s perspiration, eye contact and stiffness. As Charles Darwin noted in his book The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals: the young and the old of widely different races, both with man and animals, express the same state of mind by the same movements. Still, up to the mid-20th century most anthropologists believed that facial expressions were entirely learned and could therefore differ among cultures. Studies conducted in the 1960s by Paul Ekman eventually supported Darwin’s belief to a large degree. Ekman’s work on facial expressions had its starting point in the work of psychologist Silvan Tomkins. Ekman showed that contrary to the belief of some anthropologists including Margaret Mead, facial expressions of emotion are not culturally determined, but universal across human cultures. The South Fore people of New Guinea were chosen as subjects for one such survey. The study consisted of 189 adults and 130 children from among a very isolated population, as well as twenty-three members of the culture who lived a less isolated lifestyle as a control group. Participants were told a story that described one particular emotion; they were then shown three pictures (two for children) of facial expressions and asked to match the picture which expressed the story’s emotion. While the isolated South Fore people could identify emotions with the same accuracy as the non-isolated control group, problems associated with the study include the fact that both fear and surprise were constantly misidentified. The study concluded that certain facial expressions correspond to particular emotions and cannot be covered, regardless of cultural background, and regardless of whether or not the culture has been isolated or exposed to the mainstream. Expressions Ekman found to be universal included those indicating anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, and surprise (note that none of these emotions has a definitive social component, such as shame, pride, or schadenfreude). Findings on contempt (which is social) are less clear, though there is at least some preliminary evidence that this emotion and its expression are universally recognized. This may suggest that the facial expressions are largely related to the mind and each part on the face can express specific emotion.