Reading Comprehension MCQ Set 2

Passage 7:For a period of more than two centuries paleontologists have been intrigued by the fossilized remains of pterosaurs, the first flying vertebartes. The issues, which puzzle them, are how these heavy creatures, having a wingspan of about 8-12 meters managed the various problems associated with powered flight and whether these creatures were reptiles or birds. Perhaps the least controversial assertion about the pterosaurs is that they were reptiles. Their skulls, pelvises, and hind feet are reptilian. The anatomy of their wings suggests that they did not evolve into the class of birds. In pterosaurs a greatly elongated fourth finger of each forelimb supported a winglike membrane. The other fingers were short and reptilian, with sharp claws. In birds the second finger is the principal strut of the wing, which consists primarily of feathers. If the pterosaurs walked on all fours, the three short fingers may have been employed for grasping. When a pterosaurs walked or remained stationary, the fourth finger, and with it the wing, could only urn upward in an extended inverted V- shape along each side of the animal's body. In resemblance they were extremely similar to both birds and bats, with regard to their overall body structure and proportion. This is hardly surprising as the design of any flying vertebrate is subject to aerodynamic constraints. Both the pterosaurs and the birds have hollow bones, a feature that represents a savings in weight. There is a difference, which is that the bones of the birds are more massively reinforced by internal struts. Although scales typically cover reptiles, the pterosaurs probably had hairy coats. T.H. Huxley reasoned that flying vertebrates must have been warm-blooded because flying implies a high rate of metabolism, which in turn implies a high internal temperature. Huxley speculated that a coat of hair would insulate against loss of body heat and might streamline the body to reduce drag in flight. The recent discovery of a pterosaur specimen covered in long, dense, and relatively thick hair like fossil material was the first clear evidence that his reasoning was correct. Some paleontologists are of the opinion that the pterosaurs jumped from s dropped from trees or perhaps rose into the light winds from the crests of waves in order to become airborne. Each theory has its associated difficulties. The first makes a wrong assumption that the pterosaurs hind feet resembled a bat's and could serve as hooks by which the animal could hang in preparation for flight. The second hypothesis seems unlikely because large pterosaurs could not have landed in trees without damaging their wings. The third calls for high aces to channel updrafts. The pterosaurs would have been unable to control their flight once airborne as the wind from which such waves arose would have been too strong.

Question 1: As seen in the above passage scientists generally agree that:

1. the pterosaurs could fly over large distances because of their large wingspan.
2. a close evolutionary relationship can be seen between the pterosaurs and bats, when the structure of their skeletons is studied.
3. the study of the fossilized remains of the pterosaurs reveals how they solved the problem associated with powered flight
4. the pterosaurs were reptiles
5. Pterosaurs walked on all fours.

Question 2: The view that, the pterosaurs rose into light winds from the crest of the waves to become airborne, is viewed by the author as

1. revolutionary
2. unlikely
3. unassailable
4. probable
5. outdated

Question 3: As inferred from the passage, the skeleton of a pterosaur is distinguishable from that of a bird by the

1. length of its wingspan
2. hollow spaces in its bones
3. anatomic origin of its wing strut
4. evidence of the hooklike projections on its hind feet
5. location of the shoulder joint joining the wing to its body.

Question 4: From the viewpoint of T.H.Huxley, as given in the passage, which of the following statements is he most likely to agree with?

1. An animal can master complex behaviors irrespective of the size of it's brain.
2. Environmental capabilities and physical capabilities often influence the appearance of an animal.
3. Usually animals in a particular family group do not change their appearance dramatically over a period of time
4. The origin of flight in vertebrates was an accidental development rather than the outcome of specialization or adaption
5. The pterosaurs should be classified as birds, not reptiles.

Question 5: According to the passage which of the following is a characteristic of the pterosaurs?

1. The pterosaurs were not able to fold their wings when not in use
2. Like the bats, they hung upside down from branches
3. They flew in order to capture prey
4. They can be said to be an earlier stage in the evolution of the birds
5. They lived principally in a forest like habitat.

Question 6: The organization of the last paragraph of the passage can best be described as:

1. New data is introduced in order to support a traditional point of view
2. Three explanations are put forth and each of them is disputed by means of specific information
3. An outline of three hypotheses are given and evidence supporting each of them is given
4. Description of three recent discoveries is presented, and their implications for future study are projected
5. The material in the earlier paragraphs is summarized and certain conclusions are from it.

Question 7: According to the passage, some scientists believe that pterosaurs

1. Lived near large bodies of water
2. Had sharp teeth for tearing food
3. Were attacked and eaten by larger reptiles
4. Had longer tails than many birds
5. Consumed twice their weight daily to maintain their body temperature.

Passage 8:Certain scraps of evidence bear out those who hold a very high opinion of the average level of culture among the Athenians of the great age. Pericles's funeral speech is undoubtedly the most famous evidence from Athenian literature, that its level was indeed high. However, Pericles was a politician, and it is possible that he was flattering his audience. We know that thousands of Athenians sat hour after hour in the theater listening to the plays of the great Greek dramatists. The Greek plays, particularly the tragedies, maintained an extremely high intellectual level throughout, with no letdowns, no concessions to the lowbrows or to the demands of ''realism'', like the gravediggers scene in Shakespeare's Hamlet. The music and dancing seen in these plays were also of an equally high level. The best modern parallel can be seen in the restrained, difficult opera of the 18th century. The comparison is no doubt dangerous, but can you imagine almost the entire population of an American city (in suitable installments, of course) sitting through performances of Mozart's Don Giovanni or Gluck's Orpheus? Perhaps the Athenian masses went to these plays because of a lack of other amusements. They could at least understand something of what went on, since the subjects were part of their folklore. Undoubtedly the theme of grand opera is not part of the folklore of the American people.

Question 1: From the passage it is evident that the author seems to question the sincerity of

1. politicians
2. playwrights
3. opera goers
4. ''low brows''
5. gravediggers

Question 2: According to the author the average American

1. Enjoys Hamlet
2. Loves folklore
3. Is not able to understand grand opera
4. Seeks a high cultural level
5. Lacks entertainment.

Question 3: From the passage, we can say that the author's attitude toward Greek plays is one of

1. Qualified approval
2. Grudging admiration
3. Studied indifference
4. Partial hostility
5. Great respect.

Question 4: The author makes a suggestion that Greek plays

1. Were demanding on the actors
2. Flattered their audiences
3. Were focussed on a limited audience
4. Were dominated by music and dancing
5. Stimulated their audiences.

Passage 9: Everyone conforms to infancy, infancy conforms to nobody, so that one babe commonly makes four or five out of the adults who prattle and play to it. So God has armed youth and puberty and manhood no less with its own piquancy and charm, and made it enviable and gracious and its claims not to be put by, if it will stand by itself. Do not think the youth has no force, because he cannot speak to you and me. Hark! In the next room his voice is sufficiently clear and emphatic. It seems he knows how to speak to his contemporaries. Bashful or bold, then, he will know how to make us seniors very unnecessary. The healthy attitude of human nature can be seen in the nonchalance of boys who are sure of a dinner, and would disdain as much as a lord to do or say aught to conciliate one. A boy is in the parlor what the pit is in the playhouse; independent, irresponsible, looking out from his corner on such people and facts as pass by, he tries and sentences them on their merits, in the swift, summary way of boys, as good, bad, interesting, silly, eloquent, troublesome. He never cumbers himself regarding consequences, about interests and he gives an independent, genuine verdict. You should court him: he will not court you. But the man is, as it were, clapped into jail by his consciousness. As soon as he has once acted or spoken with eclat, he is a committed person, watched by the sympathy or the hatred of hundreds, whose affections must now enter into his account. There is no Lethe for this. Ah, that he could pass again into his neutrality. These are the voices, which we hear in solitude, but they grow faint and inaudible as we enter into the world. Everywhere society is conspiring against the manhood of every one of its members. Society is joint - stock company, in which members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity. It is averse to self-reliance. What it loves is names and customs and not realities and creators. Whosoever is a man has to be a nonconformist. He who would gather immortal palms must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind. No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that to this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only right is what is after me constitution, the only wrong what is against it. A man is to carry himself in the presence of all opposition as if every thing were titular and ephemeral but he. I am ashamed to think how easily we capitulate to badges and names, to large societies and dead institutions. Every decent and well-spoken individual affects and sways me more than is right. I ought to go upright and vital, and speak the rude truth in all ways. I shun father and mother and wife and brother, when my genius calls me. I would write on the lintels of the doorpost, whim. I hope it is somewhat better than whim at last, but we cannot spend the day in explanation. Except me not to show cause why I seek or why I exclude company. Then, again, do not tell me, as a good man did not to-day, of my obligation to put all poor men in good situations. Are they my poor? I tell thee, thou foolish philanthropist, that I grudge the dollar, the time, the cent, I give to such men as do not belong to me and to whom I do not belong. There is a class of person to whom by all spiritual affinity I am bought and sold; for them I will go to prison, if need be; but your miscellaneous popular charities; the education at collage of fools; the building of meeting - house to the vain end to which many now stand; alms to sots; and the thousandfold Relief Societies; - though I confess with shame I sometimes succumb and give the dollar, it is a wicked dollar which by and by I shall have the manhood to withhold. If you refuse to conform, you can experience the displeasure of the world. Hence, a man should know how to estimate a sour face. The by - standers look askance on him in the public street or in the friend's parlor. In case this aversion originates from contempt and resistance similar to his own, it might result in a sad countenance; but the sour faces of the multitude, like their sweet faces, have no deep cause, but are caused by reasons as diverse as the direction of the wind and what he reads in the newspapers. Yet is the discontent of the multitude more formidable than that of the senate and the collage. Another factor, which frightens us from self - trust in our consistency; a reverence for our past act or word, because the eyes of others have no other data for computing our orbit than our past acts, and we are loath to disappoint them. But why should you keep your head over your shoulder? Why drag about this corpse of your memory, lest you contradict somewhat you have stated in this or that public place? Suppose you should contradict yourself; what then? This is a rather silly consistency in our minds, which is adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. Uniformly a great soul has almost nothing to do, he could just occupy himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words; and to-morrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict everything you said to-day. - ''Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.'' - Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. What can be considered to be truly great is to be misunderstood.

Question 1: Which of the following statements would best describe the main theme of the above passage?

1. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little mind."
2. "Eternal youth means eternal independence."
3. "Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist."
4. "Colleges are designed to educate fools."
5. "Infancy conforms to nobody."

Question 2: When is the period during which we are most nonconformist?

1. infancy
2. puberty
3. youth
4. manhood
5. old age

Question 3: In his statement ''What can be considered to be truly great is to be misunderstood'' the author means:

1. One should refrain from saying, what one exactly means
2. Being misunderstood, equals being great
3. All great man have always been misunderstood
4. Even though a person might be considered inconsistent, he shouldn't hesitate to change his mind if he feels the need to.
5. It is seldom, that nice people succeed

Question 4: As inferred from the passage, the refusal of young people to cater to accept public opinion is:

1. A feature of the rebelliousness of youth
2. A healthy attitude of human nature
3. A manifestation of deep - seated immaturity
4. Simply bad manners
5. Part of growing up

Question 5: "Society is a joint-stock company etc." is one way which the author shows

1. The anti-culture attitude of the public
2. Society is highly organized and structured
3. The self-rejection of society
4. The lack of room for solitude in our world
5. The public's interest in the stock market

Question 6: " I would write on the lintels of the doorpost, whim." What does the author mean by this statement:

1. That one should renounce his immediate family
2. That signposts have an important educational function in our society
3. That an impulsive action may have a subsequent rational explanation
4. That one must never be held responsible for what one says and does
5. That everyone should do foolish things occasionally

Question 7: Which of the following statements best summarizes the spirit and sense of the above passage?

1. "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
2. "With consistency, a great soul; has simply nothing to do."
3. "Do not think the youth has no force, because cannot speak to you and me."
4. "The virtue in most request is conformity."
5. "A man must know how to estimate a sour force."

Passage 10:Furthermore, insofar as any conclusion about its author can be drawn from five or six plays attributed to him, the Wakefield Master is without exception considered to be a man of sharp contemporary observation. He was, probably clerically educated, as indicated by his Latin and music, his Biblical and patristic lore. Even today he is remembered for his his quick sympathy for the oppressed and forgotten man, his sharp eye for character, a ready ear for colloquial, vernacular turns of speech and a humor alternately rude and boisterous, coarse and happy. Therefore in spite of his conscious artistry as can be seen in his feeling for intricate metrical and stanza forms, he is regarded as a kind of medieval Steinbeck, indignantly angry at, uncompromisingly and even brutally realistic in presenting the plight of the agricultural poor. It is now fairly accepted to regard the play as a kind of ultimate point in the secularization of the medieval drama. Therefore more stress has been laid on it as depicting realistically humble manners and pastoral life in the bleak of the west riding of Yorkshire on a typically cold night of December 24th. After what are often regarded as almost ''documentaries'' given in the three successive monologues of the three shepherds, critics go on to affirm that the realism is then intensified into a burlesque mock-treatment of the Nativity. Finally as a sort of epilogue or after-thought in deference to the Biblical origins of the materials, the play slides back into an atavistic mood of early innocent reverence. In actuality, the final scene is the culminating scene and also the raison d’etre of the introductory ''realism.'' Superficially the present play supports the conventional view of its mood of secular realism. At the same time, the ''realism'' of the Wakefield Master is of a paradoxical turn. His wide knowledge of people, as well as books indicates no cloistered contemplative but one in close relation to his times. Still, that life was after all a predominantly religious one, a time which never neglected the belief that man was a rebellious and sinful creature in need of redemption . So deeply (one can hardly say ''naively'' of so sophisticated a writer) and implicitly religious is the Master that he is less able (or less willing) to present actual history realistically than is the author of the Brome Abraham and Isaac. His historical sense is even less realistic than that of Chaucer who just a few years before had done for his own time ''costume romances,'' such as The Knight's Tele, Troilus and Cressida, etc. Furthermore, used highly romantic materials, which could excuse his taking liberties with history.

Question 1: Of the following statements, which is not true of Wakefield Master?

1. He and Chaucer were contemporaries.
2. Wakefield Master is remembered as having written five or six realistic plays.
3. His plays realistically portray the plight of the country folk of his day
4. His writing was similar to that of John Steinbeck.
5. He was an accomplished artist.

Question 2: The word 'patristic' in the first paragraph is used to mean:

1. patriotic
2. superstitious
3. folk
4. relating to the Christian Fathers
5. realistic

Question 3: The statement about the ''secularization of the medieval drama'' (opening sentence of the second paragraph) refers to the

1. Introduction of religious themes in the early days
2. Presentation of erudite material
3. Use of contemporary materials
4. Return to early innocent reverence at the end of the play
5. Introduction of mundane matters in religious plays

Question 4: From the following what would the writer be expected to do in the subsequent paragraphs

1. Make a justification for his comparison with Steinbeck
2. Put forth a view point, which would take up the thought of the second paragraph
3. Point out the anachronisms in the play
4. Discuss the works of Chaucer
5. Talk about the lack of realism in the works of the Wakefield Master.

Passage 11:The establishment of the third Reich influenced events in American history by starting a chain of events which culminated in war between Germany and the United States. The complete destruction of democracy, the persecution of laws, the war on religion, the cruelty and barrbarism of the Nazis and especially, the plans of Germany and her allies, Italy and Japan, for world conquest caused great indignation in this country and brought on fear of another world war. While speaking out against Hitler's atrocities, the American profile generally favored isolationist policies, and neutrality. The neutrality acts of 1935 and 1936 prohibited trade with any belligerents or loans to them. In 1937 the president was empowered to declare an arms embargo in wars between nations at his discretion American opinion began to change somewhat after President Roosevelt's quarantine the aggvessor speech at Chicago (1937) in which he severely criticized Hitler's policies. Germany's seizure of Austria and Munich pact for the partition of Czechoslovakia (1938) also around the American people. The conquest of Czechoslovakia in March 1939 was another rude awakening to the menace of the third Reich. In August, 1939, came the shock of the Nazi - Soviet pact and in September the attack on Poland and the outbreak of European war. The United States attempt to maintain neutrality in spite of sympathy for the democracies arranged against the Third Reich. The Neutrality act of 1939 repeated the arms embargo and permitted 'cash' and 'carry' exports of arms to belligerent nations. A strong national defense program was begun. A draft act was passed (1940) to strengthen the military services. A Lend - Lease Act (1940) authorized the president to sell, exchange or lend materials to any county deemed necessary by him for the defense of the United States. Help was given to Britain territory in the western Hemisphere. In August 1941, President Roosevelt and prime minister Churchill met and issued the Atlantic Charter which proclaimed the kind of a world which should be established after the war. In December 1941, Japan launched the unprovoked attack on the United States at Pearl harbor, immediately thereafter Germany declared war on the united states.

Question 1: USA entered the war against Germany

1. because Pearl Harbor was attacked
2. after peaceful efforts had failed
3. because Germany declare war against it
4. because Japan was an ally of Germany
5. after Germany had signed the Nazi - Soviet pact

Question 2: The Neutrality Act of 1939 favored Great Britain because

1. the British had command of the sea
2. the law permitted U.S.A. to trade only with the allies.
3. it antagonized Japan
4. it led to the Land - Lease Act
5. it agreed with the British on the principle of the Atlantic Charter

Question 3: An event that did not occur in 1939 was the

1. invasion of Poland
2. invasion of Czechoslovakia
3. passing of the Neutrality Act
4. passing of the Land - Lease act
5. outbreak of the war in Europe

Question 4: One item occurring 1937 that the author does not mention in the list of actions that alienated the American Public was

1. The persecution of religious groups
2. Nazi barbarism
3. The pacts with Italy
4. German plans for conquest of the world
5. The burning of the Reich tag

Question 5: The Land - Lease Act has designed to

1. Strengthen USA's national defense
2. Provide battle shit to the Allies
3. Help the British
4. the Atlantic Charter
5. Avenge Pearl Harbor

Question 6: The Neutrality Act of 1939

1. restated America's isolationist policies
2. proclaimed American neutrality
3. permitted the selling of arms to belligerent nation
4. was cause of USA's entrances in to WORLD WAR II
5. started USA's national defense programs

Question 7: During the years 1933-36, American policy may be described as having been

1. watchful
2. isolationist
3. pacific
4. incorrect
5. discretionary

Passage 12:There was in increase of about 10 % in the investment in the public sector, like electricity, irrigation quarrying, public services and transport; even though the emphasis leaned towards transport and away from the other sectors mentioned. A 16-17% growth in investment, including a 30% increase in investment in business premises has been recorded in trade and services. Although there continued to be a decline in the share of agriculture in total gross investment in the economy, investment grew by 9% in absolute terms, largely spurred on by a 23% expansion of investment in agriculture equipment. Housing construction had 12% more invested in it in 1964, not so much owing to increase demand, as to fears of impending new taxes and limitation of building. There was a rise of close to 11% in the total consumption in real terms during 1964 and per capita personal consumption by under 7%, as in 1963. The undesirable trend towards a rapid rise in consumption, evident in previous years, remains unaltered. Since at current prices consumption rose by 16% and disposable income by 13%, there was evidently a fall in the rate of saving in the private sector of the economy. Once again a swift advance in the standard of living was indicated in consumption patterns. Though fruit consumption increased, expenditure on food, especially bread and staple items, declined significantly. There was a continuing increase in the outlay on furniture and household equipment, health, education and recreation. The greatest proof of altered living standards was the rapid expansion of expenditure on transport (including private cars) and personal services of all kinds, which occurred during 1964. The changing composition if purchased durable goods demonstrated the progressive affluence of large sectors of the public. On the one hand increased purchase of automobiles and television sets were registered, a point of saturation was rapidly being approached for items like the first household radio, gas cookers, and electric refrigerators.

Question 1: It is possible to to conclude from this passage, that the people of the country were

1. spending more money than they earn
2. investing and consuming at an accelerated pace
3. saving more money than previously
4. spending their money wisely
5. lacking in necessities

Question 2: According to the author the trend towards a rapid rise in consumption is "undesirable" as:

1. there was an increase in the expenditure on frills and luxuries
2. the people were affluent
3. there was a rise in the standard of living
4. people were eating less
5. people were saving less

Question 3: It is possible to conclude that the United States is not the discussed country as:

1. there was a decline in the expenditures for food
2. From the statement that the saturation point was rapidly being approached for first household radios
3. there is no mention of military expenditures
4. the people were affluent
5. the people were not saving their money

Question 4: The area, which saw the greatest expenditure of investment funds was

1. The public sector
2. Business premises
3. Housing construction
4. Agricultural equipment
5. A field which cannot be determined