GRADE 10

Ivan Dmitritch pictured to himself autumn with its rains, its cold evenings, and its St. Martin's
summer. At that season he would have to take longer walks about the garden and beside the
river, so as to get thoroughly chilled, and then drink a big glass of vodka and eat a salted

mushroom or a soused cucumber, and then--drink another. . . . The children would come running
from the kitchen -garden, bringing a carrot and a radish smelling of fresh earth. . . . And then, he
would lie stretched full length on the sofa, and in leisurely fashion turn over the pages of some
illustrated magazine, or, covering his face with it and unbuttoning his waistcoat, give himself up
to slumber.

The S t. Martin's summer is followed by cloudy, gloomy weather. It rains day and night, the bare
trees weep, the wind is damp and cold. The dogs, the horses, the fowls--all are wet, depressed,
downcast. There is nowhere to walk; one can't go out for days together; one has to pace up and
down the room, looking despondently at the grey window. It is dreary! Ivan Dmitritch stopped and
looked at his wife.
"I should go abroad, you know, Masha," he said.
And he began thinking how nice it would be in late autumn to go a broad somewhere to the
South of France ... to Italy ... to India!

"I should certainly go abroad too," his wife said. "But look at the number of the ticket!"
"Wait, wait! ..."
He walked about the room and went on thinking. It occurred to him: what if his wife really did go
abroad? It is pleasant to travel alone, or in the society of light, careless women who live in the
present, and not such as think and talk all the journey about nothing but their children, sigh, and
tremble with dismay over every farthing. Ivan Dmitritch imagined his wife in the train with a
multitude of parcels, baskets, and bags; she would be sighing over something, complaining that
the train made her head ache, that she had spent so much money.... At the stations he would
continually be having to run for boiling water, bread and butter. ...She wouldn't have dinner
because of its being too dear....

"She would begrudge me every farthing," he thought, with a glance at his wife. "The lottery ticket
is hers, not mine! Besides, what is the use of her going abroad? What does she want there? She
would shut herself up in the hotel, and not let me out of her sight.... I know!"

Excerpt from the story, The Lottery Ticket by Anton Chekov

1. Which of the following sayings reflect the main problem of the story?

A. Don’t count your chickens before they hatch.

B. Love for money is the root of evil.
C. No wife can endure a gambling husband; unless he is a steady winner.
D. Shallow men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect.
 2. What change in the trait of the two characters can be observed in the story?

A. ambitious – stingy
B. considerate – quarrelsome
C. contented – selfish
D. loving - unkind

3. What does the lottery ticket symbolize based on the behavior of the two
characters?

A. ambition
B. dreams
C. greed
D. success

4. What is the overall feeling created in the story?

A. cold
B. desperate
C. embarrassed
D. ominous

5. How is the woman perceived by the other character in the story?

A. burdened and boring

B. old and ugly
C. sentimental and reserved
D. introvert and weak

6. What is the main lesson that one can learn from the passage?

A. Desire for money can potentially ruin one’ relationship with other people.
B. People should not completely rely on game of chances.
C. Taking risk is not worth it after all.
D. Be mature enough to be responsible in one’s relationship.

So, I'll be speaking to you using language ... because I can. This is one these magical abilities that we
humans have. We can transmit really complicated thoughts to one another. So what I'm doing right
now is, I'm making sounds with my mouth as I'm exhaling. I'm making tones and hisses and puffs, and
those are creating air vibrations in the air. Those air vibrations are traveling to you, they'r e hitting your
eardrums, and then your brain takes those vibrations from your eardrums and transforms them into
thoughts. I hope.

I hope that's happening. So because of this ability, we humans are able to transmit our ideas across
vast reaches of space and time. We're able to transmit knowledge across minds. I can put a bizarre
new idea in your mind right now. I could say, "Imagine a jellyfish waltzing in a library while thinking
about quantum mechanics."
Now of course, there isn't just one language in the world, there are about 7,000 languages spoken
around the world. And all the languages differ from one another in all kinds of ways. Some languages
have different sounds, they have different vocabularies, and they also have different structures
-- very importantly, different structures. That begs the question: Does the language we speak
shape the way we think? Now, this is an ancient question. People have been speculating about this
question forever. Charlemagne, Holy Roman emperor, said, "To have a second l anguage is to have
a second soul" -- strong statement that language crafts reality. But on the other hand, Shakespeare
has Juliet say, "What's in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Well,

that suggests that maybe language doesn't craft reality.

These arguments have gone back and forth for thousands of years. But until recently, there hasn't
been any data to help us decide either way. Recently, in my lab and other labs around the world, we've
started doing research, and now we have actual scientific data to weigh in on this question.

So let me tell you about some of my favorite examples. I'll start with an example from an Aboriginal
community in Australia that I had the chance to work with. These are the Kuuk Thaayorre people. They
live in Pormpuraaw at the very west edge of Cape York. What's cool about Kuuk Thaayorre is, in Kuuk
Thaayorre, they don't use words like "left" and "right," and instead, everything is in cardinal directions:
north, south, east and west. And when I say everything, I really mean everything. You would say
something like, "Oh, there's an ant on your southwest leg." Or, "Move your cup to the north-northeast
a little bit." In fact, the way that you say "hello" in Kuuk Thaayorre is you say, "Which way are you
going?" An d the answer should be, "North-northeast in the far distance. How about you?"

[…]

There are also really big differences in how people think about time. So here I have pictures of my
grandfather at different ages. And if I ask an English speaker to organize time, they might lay it out
this way, from left to right. This has to do with writing direction. If you were a speaker of Hebrew or
Arabic, you might do it going in the opposite direction, from right to left.

But how would the Kuuk Thaayorre, this Aboriginal group I just told you about, do it? They don't use
words like "left" and "right." Let me give you hint. When we sat people facing south, they organized
time from left to right. When we sat them facing north, they organized time from right to left. When we
sat them facing east, time came towards the body. What's the pattern? East to west, right? So for
them, time doesn't actually get locked on the body at all, it gets locked on the landscape. So for me, if
I'm facing this way, then time goes this way, a nd if I'm facing this way, then time goes this way. I'm
facing this way, time goes this way -- very egocentric of me to have the direction of time chase me
around every time I turn my body. For the Kuuk Thaayorre, time is locked on the landscape. It's a
dramatically different way of thinking about time.

[…]

I want to leave you with this final thought. I've told you about how speakers of different languages think
differently, but of course, that's not about how people elsewhere think. It's about how you thin k. It's
how the language that you speak shapes the way that you think. And that gives you the opportunity to
ask, "Why do I think the way that I do?" "How could I think differently?" And also, "What thoughts do I
wish to create?"
Excerpt from the TED Talk, How Language Shapes the Way We Think by Lera Boroditsky

7. Which of the following best describes the main idea of the article?

A. Language shapes our realities.

B. Language is a powerful tool to communicate ideas.
C. Language varies depending on geographical location.
D. There are about 7,000 languages spoken around the world.

8. How did the speaker prove her argument?

A. She showed pictures of her grandfather at different ages.

B. She cited an estimated total number of languages spoken in the world.
C. She specifically identified the location of her sample group.
D. She explained her research about a particular Aboriginal community.

9. How did the speaker develop the main idea?

A. Narratives
B. Cause and effect
C. Problem-solution
D. Enumeration and examples

10. What kind of arguments did the speaker use in presenting her ideas?

A. Expert opinion
B. Research
C. Testimonial
D. Secondary information

11. Why did the speaker show the pictures of her grandfather?

A. To prove that blood related don’t necessarily speak the same language
B. To point out that her grandfather came from the same lineage of the aboriginal
community
C. To show that concept of time differs depending on the age of the person
D. To further explain that people perceive time differently.
 12. What might be the best reason in using rhetorical questions in concluding
her speech?

A. To leave a lasting impression

B. To refute her stand
C. To challenge audience to reflect on the topic
D. To please the audience

The passengers who had left Rome by the night express had had to stop until dawn at the small
station of Fabriano in order to continue their journey by the small old-fashioned local joining the
main line with Sulmona.
At dawn, in a stuf fy and smoky second-class carriage in which five people had already spent the
night, a bulky woman in deep mourning was hosted in—almost like a shapeless bundle. Behind
her—puffing and moaning, followed her husband —a tiny man; thin and weakly, his face death-
white, his eyes small and bright and looking shy and uneasy.

Having at last taken a seat he politely thanked the passengers who had helped his wife and who
had made room for her; then he turned round to the woman trying to pull down the collar of her coat
and politely inquired:
"Are you all right, dear?" The wife, instead of answering, pulled up her collar
again to her eyes, so as to hide her face.
"Nasty world," muttered the husband with a sad smile
And he felt it his duty to explain to his traveling companions that the poor woman was to be
pitied for the war was taking away from her her only son, a boy of twenty to whom both had devoted
their entire life, even breaking up their home at Sulmona to follow him to Rome, where he had to
go as a student, then allowing him to volunteer for war with an assurance, however, that at least
six months he would not be sent to the front and now, all of a sudden, receiving a wire saying that
he was due to leave in three days' time and asking them to go and see him off The woman
under the big coat was twisting and wriggling, at times growling like a wild animal, feeling certain
that all those explanations would not have aroused even a shadow of sympathy from those people
who—most likely— were in the same plight as herself. One of them, who had been listening with
particular attention, said: "You should thank God that your son is only leaving now for the front.
Mine has been sent there the first day of the war. He has already come back twice wounded and
been sent back again to the front."

"What about me? I have two sons and three nephews at the front," said another passenger.

"Maybe, but in our case it is our only son," ventured the husband.
"What difference can it make? Y ou may spoil your only son by excessive attentions, but you
cannot love him more than you would all your other children if you had any. Parental love is not like
bread that can be broken to pieces and split amongst the children in equal s hares. A father
gives all his love to each one of his children without discrimination, whether it be one or ten, and if
I am suffering now for my two sons, I am not suffering half for each of them but double..."
"True...true..." sighed the embarrassed husband, "but suppose (of course we all hope it will never
be your case) a father has two sons at the front and he loses one of them, there is still one left to
console him...while..." "Yes," answered the other, getting cross, "a son left to console him but also
a son left for whom he must survive, while in the case of the father of an only son if the son dies
the father can die too and put an end to his distress. Which of the two positions is worse? Don't
you see how my case would be worse than yours?"

"Nonsense," interrupted another traveler, a fat, red-faced man with bloodshot eyes of the palest
gray. He was panting. From his bulging eyes seemed to spurt inner violence of an uncontrolled
vitality which his weakened body could hardly contain. "Nonsense,Q "he repeated, trying to cover
his mouth with his hand so as to hide the two missing front teeth. "Nonsense. Do we give life to
our own children for our own benefit?" The other travelers stared at him in distress. The one who
had had his son at the front since the first day of the war sighed: "You are right. Our children do
not belong to us, they belong to the country..."

Excerpt from the story, War by Luigi Pirandello

13. What is the story all about?

A. couples who argue about the future of their families in the midst of crisis
B. group of parents who have conflicting feelings regarding the condition of their
sons in times of war
C. people who display strong opposition against government
D. rebellious sons who are against the decision of their parents

14. What historical event might have influenced the writer in developing the
story?

A. Bubonic plague
B. Cold war between Russia and US
C. Economic depression
D. World war

15. Which of the following lines favor the decision of the government?

A. Maybe, but in our case it is our only son," ventured the husband.
B. Nasty world," muttered the husband with a sad smile.
C. Nonsense. Do we give life to our own children for our own benefit?"
D. You should thank God that your son is only leaving now for the front.
In our time we have come to live with the moments of great crisis. Our lives have been
marked with debate about great issues -- issues of war and peace, issues of prosperity and
depression. But rarely in any time does an issue lay bare the secret heart of America itself.
Rarely are we met with a challenge, not to our growth or abundance, or our welfare or our
security, but rather to the values, and the purposes, and the meaning of our beloved nation.

The issue of equal rights for American Negroes is such an issue.

And should we defeat every enemy, and should we double our wealth and conquer the stars,
and still be unequal to this issue, then we will have failed as a people and as a nation. For
with a country as with a person, "What is a man profited, if he shall gain the
whole world, and lose his own soul?"

There is no Negro problem. There is no Southern problem. There is no Northern problem.

There is only an American problem. And we are met here tonight as Americans -- not as
Democrats or Republicans. We are met here as Americans to solve that problem.

This was the first nation in the history of the world to be founded with a purpose. The great
phrases of that purpose still sound in every American heart, North and South: "All men are
created equal," "government by consent of the governed," "give me liberty or give me death."
Well, those are not just clever words, or those are not just empty theories. In their name
Americans have fought and died for two centuries, and tonight around the world they stand
there as guardians of our liberty, risking their lives.

Those words are a promise to every citizen that he shall share in the dignity of man. This
dignity cannot be found in a man's possessions; it cannot be found in his power, or in his
position. It really rests on his right to be treated as a man equal in opportunity to all others.
It says that he shall share in freedom, he shall choose his leaders, educate his children,
provide for his family according to his ability and his merits as a human being. To apply any
other test -- to deny a man his hopes because of his color, or race, or his religion, or the
place of his birth is not only to do injustice, it is to deny America and to dishonor the dead
who gave their lives for American freedom.

Our fathers believed that if this noble view of the rights of man was to flourish, it must be
rooted in democracy. The most basic right of all was the right to choose your own leaders.
The history of this country, in large measure, is the history of the expansion of that right to
all of our people. Many of the issues of civil rights are very complex and most difficult. But
about this there can and should be no argument.
Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote.

There is no reason which can excuse the denial of that right. There is no duty which weighs
more heavily on us than the duty we have to ensure that right.

Excerpt from the speech, We Shall Overcome, by Lyndon Baines Johnson

 16. All of the following are realities depicted in the story except …

A. There is no a real winner in times of war.

B. Pain of parents who lost a child is incomparable.
C. Life becomes noble when one offers it for his country.
D. The highest honor that a child can give to his parents is by putting his life for others
before his own family.

17. How did the speaker describe the situation of Negros in his speech?

A. They do not have permanent homes.

B. They do not receive government support.
C. They suffer injustice and inequality.
D. They experience discrimination.

18. How did the speaker make a valid support on his claim?

A. citing the success and tragic stories in the past

B. comparing US with other countries
C. describing the horrendous condition of Negros
D. making reference to the historical foundation of the state

19. At the beginning of the speech, the speaker seems to be biased against …

A. Americans
B. African American
C. Negroes
D. Native American

20. The speaker mentioned that, Americans have fought and died for two
centuries, and tonight around the world they stand there as guardians of our
liberty, risking their lives. What can you infer about the author’s bias based
on the aforementioned lines?

A. asserts the democracy that Americans fought for

B. believes on what the Americans can do
C. dislikes America for creating social injustice
D. thinks that Americans are great

~End of Test ~