[FinA] Since her head injury, Olivia has become less courteo…
Questions
[FinA] Since her heаd injury, Oliviа hаs becоme less cоurteоus and frequently uses profanity, a stark contrast to her previous considerate nature. Her friends have noticed these significant changes. Which type of injury is most likely that Olivia has experienced?
As dоg breeds gо, the Pоmerаniаn is а miniature spitz, bred down over the centuries into lap-size versions of sled dogs. Among the small toy dogs, then, the Pomeranian is doggier than most because they retain some traits of the working dog breed that is their genetic origin. Like most dog owners, I have firsthand familiarity with genetic variations and qualities within a breed, because I have two Pomeranians, both females, both miniature sled dogs. But it is there where the similarity ends. Our first Pomeranian, Annika, is a red or sable colored little dog who looks exactly like a fox with a big bushy tail that curves up, spitz-like, above her back. However, this tail doesn't seem to work because she only wags it on the rare occasions when she is asking to go for a ride in the car. The other little dog, Maya, is white and looks like a baby harp seal. Mayas tail, unlike Annikas, works overtime; all you have to do is look at her and she wags it like a parade watcher waving a flag. Both dogs look like they could pull a miniature sleigh, but only one of the two really has the personality traits for working in a dog pack. Maya would have been an excellent sled dog because she is truly a pack animal. When we go for walks, she only wants to go because the pack is leaving, and while we walk, she never strays from my side, since I am clearly the pack leader. When I try to take a different route than usual, Maya plops down in the middle of the sidewalk and refuses to vary our itinerary. Whenever there are varmints like possums or armadillos in the yard, Maya takes no notice. If she barks at all, it is only because the other dogs are raising a ruckus. She neither sees nor cares that there is game afoot. Annika is not a pack dog. She seems to have been bred to do terrier-like work, ferreting out small creatures from gardens and fields. Annika has no interest in the packs whereabouts. In an army, she would have served as point, the solo seeker who goes out ahead to find the enemy. She does not care if the other pack members follow her or not; the trail of the prey is more dominant in her instincts. At night when the armadillo that lives under the deck comes out, Annika senses its presence and whines to go out on the porch and pace back and forth while the armored beast snorts in the dirt beneath her. Maya will go out and bark only if the other dogs do so; whenever she joins in, she never gives any sign that she knows what they are all barking about. Both dogs are Pomeranians, but with genetic differences. Geneticists must wonder if human life could be improved if people bred for successful personality traits&as dog breeders do. The authors claim that both dogs are Pomeranians, but with genetic differences (last paragraph) is
When yоu think аbоut peоple-wаtching, you usuаlly envision the crowds at a mall or at a park, but most of the strangers you see who parade by you each day are not on foot. They'e in their cars. Although you can guess a lot about other people whom you see walking by from observing their clothes, their behavior, or even their bearing it is by their cars that you can tell the most about people that you've never seen. Economic status can be accurately divined from the expense of the vehicles that people drive. That smooth gliding, huge new Towncar must have someone successful behind the wheel. That sporty utility vehicle, new but inexpensive, most likely is being driven by a college student. And that white, smoke belching, rusted-out jalopy you quickly pass to avoid asphyxiation undoubtedly that driver can ill afford replacing the old junker and will soon have no wheels at all. Political beliefs and community involvement often show up on bumper stickers, as do philosophies and religious affiliations, not to mention attitudes towards free speech and boundaries of good taste. Window decals and rearview mirror danglings denote cultural subgroups, while Baby on Board or Caution: Show Dog signs delineate the drivers personal commitments. Momentary vehicular encounters can provide opportunities for psychoanalyzing drivers. The Type A sort who tailgates you or passes you dangerously close to the double line is either chronically late or running on caffeine or competitive aggression. The oh-so-polite people who wave everyone in ahead of you in bumper-to-bumper traffic must be similarly attentive to the needs of others in their lives. The chatty cell phone drivers must not be able to live very long in isolation without social interaction, gossip, or business dealings. And the oh-so-slow Sunday driver must be functioning on a different plane of meditation than the rest of us who proceed at the usual hasty pace. External attachments can reveal hobbies and leisure interests from bike racks to boat trailer hitches; if the drivers tote equipment, you can gauge how they spend their weekends and their disposable cash. But the easiest clue as to the drivers identity comes in the form of an audio rather than a visual cue. If you're waiting at a stoplight, and you can feel the vibrations of the bass stereo from behind you, the driver is most likely under thirty years of age. Some argue that the automobile has increased our sense of anonymity, our feeling that we are all alike anonymous humanoids driving like robots in identical comfort capsules. Not me. As long as people can use their personal chariots as extensions of themselves and as billboards of self-expression, the driving experiences of our lives can tell us a lot about who else is out there, where they're coming from and even where everyone is going. A conclusion that can be drawn from this passage is that
If sоmeоne cаlls yоu а Luddite, it is probаbly because you have complained, for whatever reason, about the dangers or failures of technology. Perhaps you have denounced the automobile industry because a failed computer chip causes your car to stall in the middle of heavy traffic. Or you threatened to cancel your credit card because it wouldn't work at the pay-at-the-pump gas station. Or you complained loudly when your employer fired you because the computer was more efficient than you. The New Columbia Encyclopedia tells us that Luddites were workers in England who, between 1811 and 1816, destroyed textile machines they felt caused reduced wages and unemployment. They rioted in the name of a mythical figure called Ned Ludd, or King Ludd. Since then, Luddite has come to mean anyone opposed to technological change. Computer hackers, for example, use technology to develop and release viruses whose purpose is to infect and, thus, destroy business and corporate computer files. Most of today's Luddites, however, aren't violent. They don't riot, don't break into factories or warehouses and smash computers or other machinery. Suspecting that technology is more of a threat than a blessing, they secretly, sometimes loudly, denounce technological developments. Their hearts sing when the slide projector jams or repeats the same frame over and over. They cheer when the company computer comes down with a virus. They smirk when they read that pornography is readily available on the Internet and that pederasts and other unsavory types have access to children through computer chat rooms. In short, pointing to the negative byproducts of technology, they purse their lips, nod, and mutter, So what did we expect? Nonviolent Luddites may grudgingly admit that microwaves and automatic washers, dryers, and dishwashers have removed most of the chore from family chores. They concede that technological contributions to medical science provide many people better health and longer life. Although they acknowledge that the automobile expedites their commutes from home to college to work and home again, they emphasize that the proliferation of cars and trucks is responsible for air pollution, traffic jams, road rage, and highway carnage. Although they grant that airplanes allow virtually anyone to tour the world, they point out that they also provide an avenue for drug smugglers and are relatively easy targets for hijackers and assassins. Although they admit to the efficacy of atomic energy, they nevertheless point to the potential mass-destruction in atomic weapons. Luddites bemoan the fact that ATM machines and bank and fast-food drive-throughs eliminate the personal in customer relations. Finally, although agreeing that a cell phone is a handy tool for a driver stranded on a lonely stretch of interstate, the Luddite fears and deplores the cell phones used by drivers who, instead of watching the road, dial their phones as they weave in and out of traffic. According to the passage, most of today's Luddites
If sоmeоne cаlls yоu а Luddite, it is probаbly because you have complained, for whatever reason, about the dangers or failures of technology. Perhaps you have denounced the automobile industry because a failed computer chip causes your car to stall in the middle of heavy traffic. Or you threatened to cancel your credit card because it wouldn't work at the pay-at-the-pump gas station. Or you complained loudly when your employer fired you because the computer was more efficient than you. The New Columbia Encyclopedia tells us that Luddites were workers in England who, between 1811 and 1816, destroyed textile machines they felt caused reduced wages and unemployment. They rioted in the name of a mythical figure called Ned Ludd, or King Ludd. Since then, Luddite has come to mean anyone opposed to technological change. Computer hackers, for example, use technology to develop and release viruses whose purpose is to infect and, thus, destroy business and corporate computer files. Most of today's Luddites, however, aren't violent. They don't riot, don't break into factories or warehouses and smash computers or other machinery. Suspecting that technology is more of a threat than a blessing, they secretly, sometimes loudly, denounce technological developments. Their hearts sing when the slide projector jams or repeats the same frame over and over. They cheer when the company computer comes down with a virus. They smirk when they read that pornography is readily available on the Internet and that pederasts and other unsavory types have access to children through computer chat rooms. In short, pointing to the negative byproducts of technology, they purse their lips, nod, and mutter, So what did we expect? Nonviolent Luddites may grudgingly admit that microwaves and automatic washers, dryers, and dishwashers have removed most of the chore from family chores. They concede that technological contributions to medical science provide many people better health and longer life. Although they acknowledge that the automobile expedites their commutes from home to college to work and home again, they emphasize that the proliferation of cars and trucks is responsible for air pollution, traffic jams, road rage, and highway carnage. Although they grant that airplanes allow virtually anyone to tour the world, they point out that they also provide an avenue for drug smugglers and are relatively easy targets for hijackers and assassins. Although they admit to the efficacy of atomic energy, they nevertheless point to the potential mass-destruction in atomic weapons. Luddites bemoan the fact that ATM machines and bank and fast-food drive-throughs eliminate the personal in customer relations. Finally, although agreeing that a cell phone is a handy tool for a driver stranded on a lonely stretch of interstate, the Luddite fears and deplores the cell phones used by drivers who, instead of watching the road, dial their phones as they weave in and out of traffic. Although they grant that airplanes allow virtually anyone to tour the world, they point out that they also provide an avenue for drug smugglers and are relatively easy targets for hijackers and assassins. The relationship of parts within the sentence above is