Комментарии к очному туру

Part 1 Transcript

1
Part 1 Commentated Answers

1B Susan says that the one thing I do despise (intensely dislike) is the politician who tries to
have things all ways (in this context, this means 'hold every opinion that everyone could
want them to have, rather than giving a single opinion'). Such a politician, she says, isn't
someone who says they haven't made their mind up about something, it is a politician whose
attitude is 'actually, I think this' (this is my actual opinion), but this opinion is unpopular
with voters so I'm going to dress it up (hide the real nature of it by making it appear
different from what it really is) and present it in a different way to the electorate (voters).
Her point is that she intensely dislikes politicians who make their opinions appear different
from what they really are when they are addressing voters, because they know that their real
opinions would not be popular with voters.

A: Her point here is not that she intensely dislikes politicians who say they have strong beliefs but
in fact do not have them, but that she intensely dislikes politicians who are not honest about their real
opinions.

С: She says that she doesn't intensely dislike politicians who say / haven't made my mind up yet
(decided what I believe about something) because occasionally we (by this she means
politicians in general) don't make our minds up. She is therefore saying that it is acceptable
in her view for politicians to say they aren'tsure what they think about something.

D: The politicians she says she intensely dislikes are not those who show quite clearly to voters
that they have a low opinion of them and do not respect them, but those who pretend to hold
views they don't really hold so that they will not be unpopular with voters. Such politicians
are tricking voters by giving them a false impression, not openly revealing that they consider
them fools.

2A The interviewer says that the disagreement may have resulted in her political future being
closed off (it may have meant the end of her political career). She says that she felt this
situation was the time of trial for her (a situation in which her qualities as a person and her
beliefs were being tested). She says that if she had allowed her own political future to weigh
with me (influence me, be a very important factor in my decisions) with regard to an issue
she regarded as extremely important, it really wouldn't be worth having as a political future -
she felt there would be no point in her continuing as a politician if her concern for her own
career strongly influenced her regarding a very important issue. She says that to look at self-
advancement (personal progress or success in a career) in its own right (as a separate,
individual thing), it isn't worth a damn (it is of no value at all) - in other words, there Is no
value in succeeding in your career simply in order to be successful, you should care about
other things too. Her point therefore is that the disagreement led her to conclude that she
cared more about issues she had strong beliefs about than about becoming more successful
as a politician.

B: Her feeling was not that she had failed but that her beliefs about issues mattered more than
her own career. She didn't conclude that she was a failure, she felt that if her political career
ended, this would not matter because it wasn't the most important thing to her.

2
C: When she says I'm aware that this will be open to misinterpretation, she is saying that what
she is about to say now may be misunderstood by people hearing it, not that her point of
view at the time when she had the disagreement with her colleague was misunderstood.

D: She says that the end of her political career was a price that I knew that I would have to pay
right from the start (as soon as the disagreement happened, she knew that it might result in
the end of her political career). She doesn't say that she regretted this, she says only that she
was ready for it and expecting it. In fact, she didn't mind it.

3D She says that, although she agrees with the interviewer that colleagues supported her
privately but not publicly, one or two did support her publicly. However, she told them not
to because she wanted to act alone in this situation without embroiling (involving in a
difficult situation) other people. She says that politics doesn't always involve getting other
people involved in such situations, and that this was an occasion when it wasn't necessary or
desirable. She says that, instead of involving colleagues, she made my doubts and
reservations known and it was then up to my colleagues (it was my colleagues' decision,
they could choose) whether or not to take her views into consideration. She therefore didn't
ask colleagues to support her, she told them what she thought and let them make up their
own minds whether or not they agreed with her.

A: She doesn't say that she thought they probably wouldn't agree with her, she says that she let
them make up their own minds and that she felt that, by stating her views and leaving others
to decide what they thought, she had done her duty and didn't have to go any further (do
anything more).

C: She didn't want to involve them because she felt this was an occasion when she was doing
something personal to her. She makes no reference to doubting whether she was right and it
is clear that she felt she was right. The references to 'doubts' and 'reservations' are references
to opinions she expressed which caused the disagreement, not to her own doubts about her
own views.

B: She doesn't say that involving colleagues would have made the situation worse, she says that
it was an occasion when she felt it was not appropriate to do so unless they chose to get
involved themselves.

4C She says that when you take a stand on something (express a strong view on something,
resulting in disagreement), your opinion of your colleagues is bound to be coloured
(influenced) by whether they support you, oppose you or remain neutral. However, she says
that politics is a kaleidoscope (a constant and quickly changing pattern) of changing
alliances (situations In which people join together in agreement with each other), and so
people you are strongly opposed to on one occasion can be people you are allied with
(joined with in agreement) on another occasion. She is therefore sure that in the future there
will be situations when some of those colleagues and will swap (exchange) positions -
instead of them not supporting her, she won't support them. Her point therefore is that
because of the nature of politics, in the future there will be times when she does not support
the same people who did not support her at that time.

3
A: She isn't saying that she wouldn't do the same thing again, she is saying that in the future
there will be situations when someone else does what she did and she will not support them.

B: She says that some colleagues thought she was mad and others supported her but only did so
sotto voce (speaking quietly so that nobody else would hear) and behind closed doors
(privately rather than publicly). She doesn't however, says that she preferred either of these
groups of people.

D: She says that it is inevitable that politicians' opinions of their colleagues will be influenced by
whether or not they support them, but she does not say that politicians pay too much
attention to their personal feelings about each other rather than issues.

5C She says that she is not at all surprised that some colleagues thought she was bonkers (mad,
crazy), because there are some politicians who think that you (by this she means politicians
in general) should never rock the boat (do something that causes problems because it upsets
the established situation or way of doing things), and should always put yourself first
(consider your own interests more important than anything else), and she had done the
opposite of both those things. She is therefore saying that she was considered mad because
she had not conformed withcommon notions of what politicians should do.

A: Her point Is not that she was considered to have done something that was not typical of her,
but that she had done something that was not in accordance with what politicians expected
of other politicians.

B: She doesn't suggest that other politicians saw her as a threat to them or were frightened of
her, the thinks that they thought she had done something very untypical of politicians in
general.

D: She does say that they thought she was mad because she hadn't put herself first and therefore
had been unselfish, but she does not suggest that this made them feel ashamed of their own
selfishness.

4
Part 2 Commentated answers

Variant 1
Howard's Career as a Palaeontologist
Howard became a palaeontologist because of a rise in interest rates when he was six years old. His father, a
cautious man with a large mortgage and thoughts focussed merely on how the economic situation would
affect him, announced that the projected holiday to Spain was no longer feasible. A chalet was rented on
the English coast instead and thus, on a dank August afternoon, Howard picked up a coiled fossil shell,
called an ammonite, on the beach.
He knew for a long time that he wanted to become a palaeontologist, and towards the end of his time
at university he became clear as to what sort of palaeontologist he wanted to be. He found the focus of his
interest reaching further and further back in time. The more spectacular areas were not for him, he realised,
turning his back on the Jurassic, on dinosaurs. He was drawn particularly to the beginnings, to that ultimate
antiquity where everything is decided, from which, against all odds, we derive . So he studied delicate
creatures revealed on the surface of grey rocks.
Work on his doctoral thesis came to an end, and, he knew, possibly a bitter one. Would he get a job?
Would he get a job in the sort of institution he sought? He was far from being without self-esteem and
knew that his potential was good. But he knew that those who deserve do not always get, and that while the
objectives of science may be pure and uncompromising, the process of appointment to an academic
position is not. When the Assistant Lectureship at Tavistock College in London came up, he applied at
once, though without high hopes.
On the morning of Howard's interview, the professor who would chair the panel had a row with his
wife. As a consequence he left home in a state of irritation and inattention, drove his car violently into a
gatepost and ended up in the Casualty Department of the local hospital. The interview took place without
him and without the support he had intended to give to a candidate who had been a student of his.
The professor who replaced him on the panel was a hated colleague, whose main concern was to
oppose the appointment of his enemy's protégé; he was able to engineer without much difficulty that
Howard got the job. Howard, surprised at the evident favouritism from a man he did not know, was
fervently grateful until, months later, a colleague kindly enlightened him as to the correct interpretation of
events. Howard was only slightly chagrined. It would have been nice to think that he was the obvious
candidate, or that he had captivated those present with his ability and personality. But by then the only
thing that really mattered was that he had the job and that he could support himself by doing the sort of
work he wanted to do.
He often found himself contrasting the orderly nature of his professional life – where the pursuit of
scientific truth was concerned, it was possible to plan a course of action and carry it out – with the anarchy
of private concerns. The world teems with people who can determine the quality of your existence, and on
occasion some total stranger can reach in and manipulate the entire narrative, as Howard was to find when
his briefcase, containing the notes for a lecture he was about to give, was stolen at an Underground station.
Fuming, Howard returned to the college. He made an explanatory phone call and postponed the
lecture. He reported the theft to the appropriate authorities and then went for a restorative coffee. He joined
a colleague who was entertaining a visiting curator from the Natural History Museum in Nairobi. And thus
it was that Howard learnt of the recently acquired collection of fossils, as yet uncatalogued and
unidentified, the study of which would provide him with his greatest challenge and ensure his professional
future. But for the theft, but for that now benevolent stranger... Within half an hour he had dismantled and
reassembled his plans. He would not go to a conference in Stockholm. He would not spend a fortnight
taking students on a field trip to Scotland. He would pull out every stop and somehow scramble together
the funds for a visit to the museum in Nairobi.

6 What is suggested about Howard's father in the first paragraph?

A He'd foreseen a change in the economic climate.
B He acted in character when cancelling the holiday.
C He'd never been in favour of holidays abroad.
5
 D He tended to make decisions spontaneously.

7 What area of palaeontology did Howard develop a special interest in at university?

A the earliest life forms
B the dating of pieces of evidence
C the scale of pre-historic creatures
D the fragile beauty of many fossils
8 What concerned Howard about the chances of getting a job?
A his lack of work experience
B his uncertainty of his own worth
C that jobs were not always awarded on merit
D that jobs in his field were always in short supply

9 The result of Howard's job interview depended on

A a change of heart by a member of the panel.
B the relative strengths of the candidates.
C the performance of a favoured candidate.
D the conflict between two members of staff.

10 How did Howard feel when he learnt the truth about his appointment?
A pleased he would be so well paid
B unconcerned about why he got the job
C dismayed at not being the best candidate
D gratified to think he'd made a good impression

11 Over the text as a whole, the writer suggests that the course of Howard's career was determined to a large
extent by
A a series of random coincidences.
B an interest developed in childhood.
C a belief in scientific certainties.
D a mix of hard work and academic success.

Variant 2
John Paul Stapp: The Science of Aviation
Captain John Paul Stapp, already a medical doctor, began his scientific career in the 1940s studying the
negative effects of high-altitude flight, issues absolutely critical to the future of aviation. How could men
survive these conditions? The problem of the bends, the deadly formation of bubbles in the bloodstream, proved
the toughest, but after 65 hours in the air, Stapp found an answer. If a pilot breathed pure oxygen for 30 minutes
prior to take-off, symptoms could be avoided entirely. This was an enormous breakthrough. The sky now truly
was the limit. The discovery pushed Stapp to the forefront of the Aero Med Lab and he abandoned his plans to
become a paediatrician, instead deciding to dedicate his life to research. The Lab’s mandate, to study medical
and safety issues in aviation, was a perfect match for his talents. It was the premiere facility in the world for the
new science of biomechanics.
Stapp was assigned the Lab’s most important research project: human deceleration. This was the study of
the human body’s ability to withstand G forces, the force of gravity, when bailing out of an aircraft. In April
1947, Stapp travelled to Los Angeles to view ‘human decelerator’, a rocket sled designed to run along a special
track and then come to a halt with the aid of normal hydraulic brakes, which slowed it from 150 miles per hour
to half of that speed in one fifth of a second. When it did, G forces would be produced equivalent to those
experienced in an airplane crash. The sled was called the ‘Gee Whiz’. Built out of welded tubes, it was designed
to withstand 100 Gs of force, way beyond the 18 Gs that theory of the time thought survivable. Early tests were
conducted using a dummy, but Stapp soon insisted that conditions were right to use himself as a human guinea
pig.

6
 Exercising a modicum of caution on the first ride in December 1947, Stapp used only one rocket. The
Gee Whiz barely reached 90 miles an hour, and the deceleration was only about 10 Gs. So Stapp began to
increase the number of rockets, and by August 1948, he had completed 16 runs, surviving not just 18 Gs but a
bone-jarring 35 Gs. Battered though he was by the tests, Stapp was reluctant to allow anyone else to ride the
Gee Whiz. He feared that if certain people, especially test pilots, were used, their hot-headedness might produce
a disaster. Volunteers made some runs, but whenever a new approach was developed, Stapp was his own one
and only choice as test subject. There was one obvious benefit: Stapp could write extremely accurate
physiological and psychological reports concerning the effects of his experiments.
Yet while the Gee Whiz allowed Stapp to answer the existing deceleration questions, new ones emerged.
What could be done to help pilots ejecting from supersonic aircraft to survive? Stapp set out to find the answer
on a new sled called Sonic Wind No. 1, which could travel at upwards of 750 miles per hour, and withstand an
astonishing 150 Gs. In January 1954, Stapp embarked on a series of runs leading to his 29th and final ride,
which took him to above the speed of sound, protected only by a helmet and visor. And when the sled stopped,
in a mere 1.4 seconds, Stapp was subjected to more Gs than anyone had ever willingly endured. He wasn’t just
out to prove that people could survive a high-speed ejection, he was trying to find the actual boundaries of
human survivability to G force.
Stapp had long realised that his research was just as applicable to cars as it was to airplanes. At every
opportunity, Stapp urged the car industry to examine his crash data, and to design their cars with safety in mind.
He lobbied hard for the installation of seat belts and improvements such as collapsing steering wheels. ‘I’m
leading a crusade for the prevention of needless deaths,’ he told Time magazine in 1955.
Stapp’s work in aeronautics and automobiles continued right up until his death in 1999 at age 89. He had
received numerous awards and honours. But the best was the knowledge that his work had helped to save many
lives, not just in aviation, but on highways around the world.
6 What does the writer mean by saying ‘The sky now truly was the limit’ in the first paragraph?
A Stapp had set an unbeatable scientific record.
B All previous restrictions on flight had been removed.
C Pilots could now be trained to fly at greater altitude.
D A new design was needed for high-altitude planes.

7 What assessment of Stapp’s skills does the writer make in the first paragraph?
A He was a better scientist than his contemporaries.
B He was able to solve scientific problems at great speed.
C He was able to prove a theory set out by others.
D He was ideally suited to employment at Aero Med Lab.

8 What was surprising about the construction of Gee Whiz?

A It incorporated a revolutionary new kind of brakes.
B It was initially designed to function without a passenger.
C It could tolerate exceptionally high G forces.
D It was not built of conventional materials.

9 Why did Stapp usually insist on doing test runs on Gee Whiz himself?
A He felt his powers of observation were superior to those of other people.
B He was aware that some people were psychologically unsuited to the tests.
C He had little faith in the overall safety of the equipment.
D He thought it was unethical to recruit people for a dangerous task.

10 What was the significance of the experiments on Sonic Wind No. 1?

A They broke all previous speed records.
B They gradually improved deceleration times.
C They set new limits to human potential.
D They proved that most people would survive high speeds.

7
11 In this text, the writer implies that Stapp’s main motivation was
A a desire to minimise loss of life.
B a spirit of adventure.
C a quest for expertise.
D a wish to be remembered after his death.

Part 3 Commentated answers

Variant 1
Japanese swords

Historians have long recognized the Japanese sword as one of the finest cutting weapons ever created.
But to consider the sword that is synonymous with the samurai as merely a weapon is to ignore what makes
it so special. The Japanese sword has always been considered a splendid weapon and even a spiritual entity.
The traditional Japanese saying "The sword is the soul of the samurai" not only reflects the sword's
importance to its wielder but also is indicative of its importance to its creator, the master smith.
Master smiths may not have been considered artists in the classical sense, but every one of them took
great care in how he created a sword, and no sword was created in exactly the same way. The forging
process of the blade itself took hundreds of hours as two types of steel were heated, hammered and folded
together many times. This created a blade consisting of thousands of very thin layers that had an extremely
sharp and durable cutting edge; at the same time, the blade was flexible and therefore less likely to break. It
was common, though optional, for a master smith to place a physical signature on a blade; in addition, every
master smith had a "structural signature" due to his own secret forging process. Each master smith brought a
high level of devotion, skill, and attention to detail to the sword-making process, and the sword itself was a
reflection of his personal honour and ability. This effort made each blade as unique as the samurai who
wielded it; today the Japanese sword is recognized as much for its artistic merit as for its historical
significance.

12 The primary purpose of the passage is to

A challenge the observation that the Japanese sword is highly admired by historians – historians’
admiration is not called into question
B introduce new information about the forging of Japanese swords – paragraph two discusses forging
techniques but none of them is presented as new. Moreover, they are not the focus of the passage
C identify how the Japanese sword is now perceived as much for its artistic qualities as its military
ones – the artistic merit of the sword is identified in the last sentence of paragraph two, but it is not
the primary focus of the passage. Much of the passage discusses the physical properties, not the
perception of artistic qualities
D argue that Japanese sword makers were as much artists as they were motivated by honour – the
passage describes some similarities between a master smith and an artist but only in the second
paragraph, not throughout the passage. Much of the passage discusses the sword’s physical
properties and reasons for its importance
E explain the value attributed to the Japanese sword - the passage describes the value of the sword to
both the samurai and the smith. “The sword is the soul of the samurai” in paragraph one indicates
this importance. Paragraph two details the tremendous effort put into each sword.

13 Each of the following is mentioned in the passage EXCEPT

A Every Japanese sword has a unique structure that can be traced back to a special forging process. –
“Unique structure” is referred to as “structural signature”
B Master smiths kept their forging techniques secret. – “every master smith … due to his own secret
forging process”
C The Japanese sword was considered by some to have a spiritual quality. – “The Japanese sword has
always been considered a splendid weapon and even a spiritual entity”
8
 D Master smiths are now considered artists by most major historians. – The time and effort master
smiths devote to making swords is discussed, and the passage indicates that the sword is considered
a unique work of art and of artistic merit. However, the passage does not state that most major
historians consider master smiths themselves to be artists. “Major” historians are not referenced at
all. Also: “Master smiths may not have been considered artists in the classical sense”
E The Japanese sword is considered both a work of art and a historical artefact. – “the Japanese sword
is recognized as much for its artistic merit as for its historical significance”

14 The author is most likely to agree with which of the following observations?
A The Japanese sword is the most important handheld weapon in history. – The passage mentions
“Historians have long recognized the Japanese sword as one of the finest cutting weapons ever
created”. However, there is no indication that the sword is the most important handheld weapon in
history
B The skill of the samurai is what made the Japanese sword so special. – The passage does not discuss
the skill of the samurai warrior
C If a sword had a physical signature, other swords could be attributed to that sword's creator. –
Paragraph two says that every master smith had a structural signature due to his own forging
process. Therefore, if a physical signature is present on a blade, this blade’s structural signature
could then be associated with a master smith, whose master status implies the creation of numerous
swords
D Master smiths were more concerned about the artistic merit of their blades than about the blades’
practical qualities. – The passage mentions that “the sword itself was a reflection of [the creator’s]
personal honour and ability”. However, there is no claim that master smiths emphasised their
swords’ artistic merit at the expense of practical qualities
E The Japanese sword has more historical importance than artistic importance. – The passage
acknowledges that the sword is important both historically and artistically, but the author does not
stress its historical importance over its artistry

15 Which of the following can be inferred about the term “structural signature” in this passage?
A It indicates the inscription that the smith places on the blade during the forging process. – Such an
inscription is referred to as a “physical signature”, not a “structural signature”
B It implies the particular characteristics of a blade created by a smith's unique forging process. –
“Every master smith had a “structural signature” due to his own secret forging process” indicates
that each smith had his own process and the “structural signature” was unique to each smith (not
necessarily to each individual blade)
C It suggests that each blade can be traced back to a known master smith. – The passage does not say
whether all master smiths are currently “known”. Certain swords with a structural signature may
be of unknown origin
D It reflects the soul of the samurai who wielded the sword. – We are not told that the structural
signature was the aspect of the sword reflecting the soul of the samurai who wielded it.
E It refers to the actual curved shape of the blade. – The passage does not discuss the shape of the
blade

16 One function of the second paragraph of the passage is to

A present an explanation for a change in perception – the paragraph mentions that the swords are now
appreciated more for their artistic merit, but no explanation is provided
B determine the historical significance of Japanese swords – the term “historical significance” closes
the paragraph, but no information is given to explain or outline this significance
C explain why each Japanese sword is unique – the uniqueness is underscored in several places: “no
sword was created the same way”; “every master smith had a “structural signature””; “this effort
made each blade as unique as the samurai who wielded it”

9
 D compare Japanese master smiths to classical artists – the parallel between the creation of the sword
and classical artistry is implicitly drawn. However, the passage does not actually describe or
discuss classical artists. This answer choice goes far beyond the passage
E review the complete process of making a Japanese sword – elements of forging process are
discussed, but the whole or complete process (for example, making the handle, polishing the blade,
etc) is not discussed

Variant 2
Television’s Invention

In the early years of television, Vladimir Zworykin was, at least in the public sphere, recognised as its
inventor. His loudest champion was his boss, David Sarnoff, then president of RCA and a man that we
regard even today as "the father of television." Current historians agree, however, that Philo Farnsworth, a
self-educated prodigy who was the first to transmit live images, was television’s true inventor.
In his own time, Farnsworth’s contributions went largely unnoticed, in large part because he was
excluded from the process of introducing the invention to a national audience. Sarnoff put televisions into
living rooms, and Sarnoff was responsible for a dominant paradigm of the television industry that continues
to be relevant today: advertisers pay for the programming so that they can have a receptive audience for their
products. Sarnoff had already utilized this construct to develop the radio industry, and it had, within ten
years, become ubiquitous. Farnsworth thought the television should be used as an educational tool, but he
had little understanding of the business world, and was never able to implement his ideas.
Perhaps one can argue that Sarnoff simply adapted the business model for radio and television from
the newspaper industry, replacing the revenue from subscriptions and purchases of individual newspapers
with that of selling the television sets themselves, but Sarnoff promoted himself as nothing less than a
visionary. Some television critics argue that the construct Sarnoff implemented has played a negative role in
determining the content of the programmes themselves, while others contend that it merely created a
democratic platform from which the audience can determine the types of programming it wants.

12 The primary purpose of the passage is to

A correct public misconception about Farnsworth’s role in developing early television programs –
Farnsworh’s influence on the development of television itself is only mentioned in paragraphs one
and two, but not in paragraph three. His role in developing programs is never mentioned, not is the
correction of a public misconception the focus of the passage
B debate the influence of television on popular culture – not discussed until the last paragraph and
even here the influence of television on popular culture is not addressed
C challenge the current public perception of Vladimir Zworykin – he is only mentioned briefly in
paragraph one, we know only about the initial public perception, not the current one
D chronicle the events that led up to the invention of the television – no mention of the events that led
up to the invention, only the events after it
E describe Sarnoff’s influence on the public perception of television’s inception, and debate the
impact of Sarnoff’s paradigm – this answer includes the main element of all three paragraphs

13 It can be inferred from the third paragraph of the passage that

A television shows produced by David Sarnoff and Vladimir Zworykin tended to earn negative
reviews – no mention of them producing any shows
B educational programmes cannot draw as large an audience as sports programmes – it is implied that
ratings for educational programmes are, in general, not strong, but that does not mean that any
particular educational programme cannot have higher ratings than one particular sports
programme, absolute “cannot” prevents from choosing this option
C a number of critics feel that Sarnoff’s initial decision to earn television revenue through advertising
has had a positive or neutral impact on content – “Some television critics argue that the construct

10
 Sarnoff implemented has played a negative role in determining the content of the programmes”
from which it must be true that others feel it has played either a positive or a neutral role
D educational programs that are aired in prime time, the hours during which the greatest number of
viewers are watching television, are less likely to earn a profit than those that are aired during the
daytime hours – the passage does not differentiate programming based on what time television
shows air, nor does it mention profitability
E in matters of programming, the audience’s preferences should be more influential than those of the
advertisers – the word “should” implies moral judgement, and the answer is beyond the scope of
the passage. Also paragraph three does not indicate a belief as to who should properly influence
programming choices

14 Which of the following best illustrates the relationship between the second and third paragraphs?
A The second paragraph dissects the evolution of a contemporary controversy; the third paragraph
presents differing viewpoints on that controversy. – The differences between Sarnoff and
Farnsworth mentioned in paragraph two do not represent controversy nor are they contemporary.
Paragraph three presents differing points of view about the impact of Sarnoff’s paradigm and they
are not related to the material of the second paragraph
B The second paragraph explores the antithetical intentions of two men involved in the infancy of an
industry; the third paragraph details the eventual deterioration of that industry. – They had different
but not antithetical visions. Also there is no evidence presented in paragraph three that alludes to
the deterioration of the television industry
C The second paragraph presents differing views of a historical event; the third paragraph represents
the author’s personal opinion about that event. – We are given differing visions of what could be,
not the differing opinions of something that has already happened. The author refrains from
presenting his/her opinion on the debate
D The second paragraph provides details that are necessary to support the author’s opinion, which is
presented in the third paragraph. - The author refrains from presenting his/her opinion on the
debate
E The second paragraph presents divergent visions about the possible uses of a technological device;
the third paragraph initiates a debate about the ramifications of one of those perspectives. –
Paragraph two expresses two different visions of how to use the television; the third one explores
the impact of the adoption of Sarnoff’s vision

15 According to the passage, the television industry, at its inception, earned revenue from
A advertising only – revenue generated from selling TV sets is not accounted for
B advertising and the sale of television sets -
C advertising and subscriptions – subscriptions are mentioned as a method for newspapers to earn
revenue; the last paragraph clearly states that television replaced this revenue with that earned by
selling the sets themselves
D subscriptions and the sale of television sets – advertising revenue is not mentioned in the answer,
while subscription revenue is incorrectly mentioned
E advertising, subscriptions, and the sale of television sets - subscription revenue is incorrectly
mentioned in this answer

16 The passage suggests that Farnsworth might have earned greater public notoriety for his invention if
A Vladimir Zworykin had been less vocal about his own contributions to the television – no mention
of this in the passage. Furthermore, the passage hints at no connection between Zworykin’s self-
promotion and Farnsworth’s lack of notoriety
B Farnsworth had been able to develop and air his own educational programs - We have been told
that Farnsworth wanted to use television as an educational tool, but not that he wanted to develop
television shows himself. Also it is debatable whether the development of such programmes would
have significantly contributed to his notoriety.

11
C Farnsworth had involved Sarnoff in his plans to develop, manufacture, or distribute the television –
Farnsworth was the one who was excluded not the one who prevented others from getting involved
D Sarnoff had involved Farnsworth in his plans to develop, manufacture, or distribute the television –
It is stated that Farnsworth’s contributions sent unnoticed partly because he was excluded from the
process of introducing the invention to the audience. If he had been involved in developing,
manufacturing or distributing he would have been involved in the introduction process which, it
logically follows, could have led to greater notoriety
E Farnsworth had a better understanding of the type of programming the audience wanted to watch
most – The passage does not connect Farnsworth’s lack of notoriety with a lack of understanding
about the television audience, nor does it state in any way his opinions about the audience

12
Part 6 Commentated answers

Variant 1

The rhythm of life

28 B – just what the doctor ordered is an idiom. Decree (A) has a meaning of ‘to officially decide something’;
require (C) means ‘to need something or make it necessary’ and is often used in passive; specify (D) is
usually followed by a relative clause.

29 A – to make use of smth is a set phrase. Made (B), had (C) and found (D) are not possible here.

30 C – in the hands of someone is an idiom. Two people can go arm in arm; the only idiom with tongue (C)
not using a verb is ‘tongue in cheek’ used to describe someone who intends a joke while looking serious, and
the noun is singular in that case.

31 A – to serve means here to be used this way. Assist (B) takes a preposition in and an ing form; aid (C) has a
meaning of ‘help’; promote (D) calls on the idea of encouraging.

32 D – issue here is more than subject/topic or case, it also has the idea of something of importance requiring a
decision

33 C – to turn out is a phrasal verb that means ‘to result’; some hidden information may come out (A); to set
out (B) is to start some activity with a certain aim; stand out (D) means ‘to be noticeable’.

The need for aged buildings

34 B – badly often collocates with need and means ‘very much’; greatly (C) in the same meaning is used
especially to show how much you feel or experience something; exceedingly (D), meaning ‘to a great extent’
mainly collocates with adjectives; the meaning of seriously (A) is ‘badly or severely’ or “extremely’.

35 С – a state of repair is a fixed phrase

36 A – although here is a parenthesis; let alone (B) is used after a negative statement to emphasize how unlikely
a situation is because something much more likely has never happened; we use the conjunction whereas (C)
to indicate a contrast between two facts or ideas; seeing as (D) means ‘considering or accepting the fact that’.

37 C – rundown is an adjective that means ‘in a very bad condition’; overrun (A) is a past participle form of the
corresponding verb used to speak about the quick spread of something (usually unwanted or bad) across the
area; downturned (B) is just ‘turned downwards’; upheld (D) is also a verb in past participle meaning
‘maintained’ or ‘supported’.

38 A – limited takes a preposition to; curbed (B) and hampered (D) both need no preposition; checked (C)
calls on the idea of stopping something.

39 B – worn out is a phrasal verb meaning ‘to become useless’; let through (A) may mean ‘let
somebody/something pass’; a vehicle can be pulled up (C); a form or a job position can be filled in (D).

13
 Variant 2

Pigin and Creol

28 B – contact is correct. Approximation (A) – is used for a piece of guesswork; link (C) is also used with
between but in the sense of two things having something in common; acquaintance (D) is for a person who
you only know slightly

29 D – arise is correct. Issue (A), stem (B) and spring (C) all call on the idea of ‘come from’. An idea can stem
or spring from. A declaration is issued.

30 A – based is correct. Derived (B) takes the preposition from and built (C) and hinged (D) don’t collocate
with the idea of language.

31 D – heavily is correct. Only it can collocate with rely on.

32 C – once is correct. Once here has the meaning of when.

33 B – expand is correct. A language may expand; feet swell when they are hot; you can enlarge a photograph
and increase is a general word which can’t be used here

Merchant@Florence

34 B – represented is an example of semantic precision here; you describe (C) something in words usually;
substitute (A) requires the use of a preposition for and two objects; and you can express (D) an idea, opinion
or fact.

35 A – instance means example here in the form of a particular situation; remark (B) can mean an expression of
an opinion or a fact and is mostly used with prepositions on/about; you can see a notice (C) on a wall and an
illustration (d) in a book. Illustration can also mean an example that proves or explains something.

36 C – to unearth is literally to find buried underground. But it can also be used figuratively meaning ‘to
discover something which is hidden well’; exposed (A) can mean ‘made seen’ or ‘made public’ and then calls
on the idea of disclosing something bad or dishonest; unwrapped (C) if ‘freed from coverings’ (usually of
paper); located (D) means situated or found in general sense.

37 D – Apparently is a comment adverb here, giving the idea of ‘this is what I have been told’; outwardly (A)
calls on the idea of contrast between the outer and inner essence of a thing or a person; actually (B) means ‘in
fact’ or ‘really’; logically (C) means ‘using reason’.

38 B – to take on is a phrasal verb, here meaning ‘to acquire’. Put on (A) is used with a object before the
particle; set on (C) is ‘to attack’; come on (D) may mean ‘to start to happen’

39 A – to enhance gives the idea of to increase in quality or power and collocates with prestige much more
often than elevate (C) with the meaning ‘to make something more important or improve something’;
strengthen (D) and lift (B) are too narrow in this case.

14