Test Prep GED Section 4 Language Arts - Reading Exam Practice Questions (P. 4)
- Full Access (65 questions)
- Six months of Premium Access
- Access to one million comments
- Seamless ChatGPT Integration
- Ability to download PDF files
- Anki Flashcard files for revision
- No Captcha & No AdSense
- Advanced Exam Configuration
Question #16
Whats Wrong with Commercial Television?
Kids who watch much commercial television ought to develop into whizzes at the dialect; you have to keep so much in your mind at once because a series of artificially short attention spans has been created. But this in itself means that the experience of watching the commercial channels is a more informal one, curiously more homely than watching BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation].
This is because the commercial breaks are constant reminders that the medium itself is artificial, isn’t, in fact, "real," even if the gesticulating heads, unlike the giants of the movie screen, are life-size. There is a kind of built-in alienation effect. Everything you see is false, as Tristan Tzara gnomically opined. And the young lady in the St. Bruno tobacco ads who currently concludes her spiel by stating categorically: "And if you believe that, you’ll believe anything," is saying no more than the truth. The long-term effect of habitually watching commercial television is probably an erosion of trust in the television medium itself.
Since joy is the message of all commercials, it is as well they breed skepticism. Every story has a happy ending, gratification is guaranteed by the conventions of the commercial form, which contributes no end to the pervasive unreality of it all. Indeed, it is the chronic bliss of everybody in the commercials that creates their final divorce from effective life as we know it.
Grumpy mum, frowning dad, are soon all smiles again after the ingestion of some pill or potion; minimal concessions are made to mild frustration (as they are, occasionally, to lust), but none at all to despair or consummation. In fact, if the form is reminiscent of the limerick and the presentation of the music-hall, the overall mood in its absolute and unruffled decorum is that of the uplift fables in the Sunday school picture books of my childhood.
Angela Carter, from Shaking a Leg (1997)
Which of the following would the author most likely recommend?
Kids who watch much commercial television ought to develop into whizzes at the dialect; you have to keep so much in your mind at once because a series of artificially short attention spans has been created. But this in itself means that the experience of watching the commercial channels is a more informal one, curiously more homely than watching BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation].
This is because the commercial breaks are constant reminders that the medium itself is artificial, isn’t, in fact, "real," even if the gesticulating heads, unlike the giants of the movie screen, are life-size. There is a kind of built-in alienation effect. Everything you see is false, as Tristan Tzara gnomically opined. And the young lady in the St. Bruno tobacco ads who currently concludes her spiel by stating categorically: "And if you believe that, you’ll believe anything," is saying no more than the truth. The long-term effect of habitually watching commercial television is probably an erosion of trust in the television medium itself.
Since joy is the message of all commercials, it is as well they breed skepticism. Every story has a happy ending, gratification is guaranteed by the conventions of the commercial form, which contributes no end to the pervasive unreality of it all. Indeed, it is the chronic bliss of everybody in the commercials that creates their final divorce from effective life as we know it.
Grumpy mum, frowning dad, are soon all smiles again after the ingestion of some pill or potion; minimal concessions are made to mild frustration (as they are, occasionally, to lust), but none at all to despair or consummation. In fact, if the form is reminiscent of the limerick and the presentation of the music-hall, the overall mood in its absolute and unruffled decorum is that of the uplift fables in the Sunday school picture books of my childhood.
Angela Carter, from Shaking a Leg (1997)
Which of the following would the author most likely recommend?
- ADon’t watch any television at all; read instead.
- BWatch only the BBC.
- CWatch only commercial television.
- DWatch what you like, but don’t believe what commercials claim.
- EWatch what you like, but don’t watch more than an hour a day.
Correct Answer:
D
The author doesnt seem to think watching television whether it is commercial or public is inherently a bad thing, so choice an is incorrect. She doesnt state that we shouldnt watch commercial television and only watch the BBC (choice b); rather, she is emphasizing that we should not (indeed, cant) believe everything we see on commercial TV (choice d). She does not suggest that we do not watch public television, so choice c is incorrect. There is no indication of how much time in front of the television the author would recommend, so choice e is incorrect.
D
The author doesnt seem to think watching television whether it is commercial or public is inherently a bad thing, so choice an is incorrect. She doesnt state that we shouldnt watch commercial television and only watch the BBC (choice b); rather, she is emphasizing that we should not (indeed, cant) believe everything we see on commercial TV (choice d). She does not suggest that we do not watch public television, so choice c is incorrect. There is no indication of how much time in front of the television the author would recommend, so choice e is incorrect.
send
light_mode
delete
Question #17
Whats Wrong with Commercial Television?
Kids who watch much commercial television ought to develop into whizzes at the dialect; you have to keep so much in your mind at once because a series of artificially short attention spans has been created. But this in itself means that the experience of watching the commercial channels is a more informal one, curiously more homely than watching BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation].
This is because the commercial breaks are constant reminders that the medium itself is artificial, isn’t, in fact, "real," even if the gesticulating heads, unlike the giants of the movie screen, are life-size. There is a kind of built-in alienation effect. Everything you see is false, as Tristan Tzara gnomically opined. And the young lady in the St. Bruno tobacco ads who currently concludes her spiel by stating categorically: "And if you believe that, you’ll believe anything," is saying no more than the truth. The long-term effect of habitually watching commercial television is probably an erosion of trust in the television medium itself.
Since joy is the message of all commercials, it is as well they breed skepticism. Every story has a happy ending, gratification is guaranteed by the conventions of the commercial form, which contributes no end to the pervasive unreality of it all. Indeed, it is the chronic bliss of everybody in the commercials that creates their final divorce from effective life as we know it.
Grumpy mum, frowning dad, are soon all smiles again after the ingestion of some pill or potion; minimal concessions are made to mild frustration (as they are, occasionally, to lust), but none at all to despair or consummation. In fact, if the form is reminiscent of the limerick and the presentation of the music-hall, the overall mood in its absolute and unruffled decorum is that of the uplift fables in the Sunday school picture books of my childhood.
Angela Carter, from Shaking a Leg (1997)
According to the author, what is the main thing that makes commercials unrealistic?
Kids who watch much commercial television ought to develop into whizzes at the dialect; you have to keep so much in your mind at once because a series of artificially short attention spans has been created. But this in itself means that the experience of watching the commercial channels is a more informal one, curiously more homely than watching BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation].
This is because the commercial breaks are constant reminders that the medium itself is artificial, isn’t, in fact, "real," even if the gesticulating heads, unlike the giants of the movie screen, are life-size. There is a kind of built-in alienation effect. Everything you see is false, as Tristan Tzara gnomically opined. And the young lady in the St. Bruno tobacco ads who currently concludes her spiel by stating categorically: "And if you believe that, you’ll believe anything," is saying no more than the truth. The long-term effect of habitually watching commercial television is probably an erosion of trust in the television medium itself.
Since joy is the message of all commercials, it is as well they breed skepticism. Every story has a happy ending, gratification is guaranteed by the conventions of the commercial form, which contributes no end to the pervasive unreality of it all. Indeed, it is the chronic bliss of everybody in the commercials that creates their final divorce from effective life as we know it.
Grumpy mum, frowning dad, are soon all smiles again after the ingestion of some pill or potion; minimal concessions are made to mild frustration (as they are, occasionally, to lust), but none at all to despair or consummation. In fact, if the form is reminiscent of the limerick and the presentation of the music-hall, the overall mood in its absolute and unruffled decorum is that of the uplift fables in the Sunday school picture books of my childhood.
Angela Carter, from Shaking a Leg (1997)
According to the author, what is the main thing that makes commercials unrealistic?
- AEveryone in commercials always ends up happy.
- BThe background music is distracting.
- CCommercials are so short.
- DThe people in commercials are always sick.
- EThe claims commercials make are unrealistic.
Correct Answer:
A
The author writes that "Every story has a happy ending . . . which contributes no end to the pervasive unreality of it all" (lines 25–29) and "it is the chronic bliss of everybody in the commercials that creates their final divorce from effective life as we know it" (lines 29–31). There is no mention of background music, so choice b is incorrect. She does not discuss the length of commercials, so choice c can be eliminated. The author notes that anyone who is ill in a commercial ends up feeling better by the end, so choice d is incorrect. She does not discuss specific claims or the merits of those claims, so choice e is also incorrect.
A
The author writes that "Every story has a happy ending . . . which contributes no end to the pervasive unreality of it all" (lines 25–29) and "it is the chronic bliss of everybody in the commercials that creates their final divorce from effective life as we know it" (lines 29–31). There is no mention of background music, so choice b is incorrect. She does not discuss the length of commercials, so choice c can be eliminated. The author notes that anyone who is ill in a commercial ends up feeling better by the end, so choice d is incorrect. She does not discuss specific claims or the merits of those claims, so choice e is also incorrect.
send
light_mode
delete
Question #18
What Happened When He Came to America?
My parents lost friends, lost family ties and patterns of mutual assistance, lost rituals and habits and favorite foods, lost any link to an ongoing social milieu, lost a good part of the sense they had of themselves. We lost a house, several towns, various landscapes. We lost documents and pictures and heirlooms, as well as most of our breakable belongings, smashed in the nine packing cases that we took with us to America. We lost connection to a thing larger than ourselves, and as a family failed to make any significant new connection in exchange, so that we were left aground on a sandbar barely big enough for our feet. I lost friends and relatives and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside and any sense that I was normal. I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue. And I lost a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed.
Hastening on toward some idea of a future, I only half-realized these losses, and when I did realize I didnt disapprove, and sometimes I actively colluded. At some point, though, I was bound to notice that there was a gulf inside me, with a blanketed form on the other side that hadnt been uncovered in decades.My project of self-invention had been successful, so much so that I had become a sort of hydroponic vegetable, growing soil-free. But I had been formed in another world; everything in me that was essential was owed to immersion in that place, and that time, that I had so effectively renounced. [ . . . . ]
Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured in those few years before our clay hardens. Offhand remarks, things glimpsed in passing, jokes and commonplaces, shop displays and climate and flickering light and textures of walls are all consumed by us and become part of our fiber, just as much as the more obvious effects of upbringing and socialization and intimacy and learning. Every human being is an archeological site.
Luc Sante, from The Factory of Facts (1998)
The author came to America when he was
My parents lost friends, lost family ties and patterns of mutual assistance, lost rituals and habits and favorite foods, lost any link to an ongoing social milieu, lost a good part of the sense they had of themselves. We lost a house, several towns, various landscapes. We lost documents and pictures and heirlooms, as well as most of our breakable belongings, smashed in the nine packing cases that we took with us to America. We lost connection to a thing larger than ourselves, and as a family failed to make any significant new connection in exchange, so that we were left aground on a sandbar barely big enough for our feet. I lost friends and relatives and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside and any sense that I was normal. I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue. And I lost a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed.
Hastening on toward some idea of a future, I only half-realized these losses, and when I did realize I didnt disapprove, and sometimes I actively colluded. At some point, though, I was bound to notice that there was a gulf inside me, with a blanketed form on the other side that hadnt been uncovered in decades.My project of self-invention had been successful, so much so that I had become a sort of hydroponic vegetable, growing soil-free. But I had been formed in another world; everything in me that was essential was owed to immersion in that place, and that time, that I had so effectively renounced. [ . . . . ]
Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured in those few years before our clay hardens. Offhand remarks, things glimpsed in passing, jokes and commonplaces, shop displays and climate and flickering light and textures of walls are all consumed by us and become part of our fiber, just as much as the more obvious effects of upbringing and socialization and intimacy and learning. Every human being is an archeological site.
Luc Sante, from The Factory of Facts (1998)
The author came to America when he was
- Aan infant.
- Ba toddler.
- Cin his early teens.
- Din his late teens.
- Ea young adult.
Correct Answer:
C
The author was most likely in his early teens when he came to America. The author states that "I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue" (lines 17–20). This makes it clear that he must have been in the United States several years before he was in his "late teens," making choices d and e incorrect. He was also old enough to have friends "and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside" and "a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed" (lines 15–16 and 20–22), so choices a and b are incorrect.
C
The author was most likely in his early teens when he came to America. The author states that "I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue" (lines 17–20). This makes it clear that he must have been in the United States several years before he was in his "late teens," making choices d and e incorrect. He was also old enough to have friends "and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside" and "a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed" (lines 15–16 and 20–22), so choices a and b are incorrect.
send
light_mode
delete
Question #19
What Happened When He Came to America?
My parents lost friends, lost family ties and patterns of mutual assistance, lost rituals and habits and favorite foods, lost any link to an ongoing social milieu, lost a good part of the sense they had of themselves. We lost a house, several towns, various landscapes. We lost documents and pictures and heirlooms, as well as most of our breakable belongings, smashed in the nine packing cases that we took with us to America. We lost connection to a thing larger than ourselves, and as a family failed to make any significant new connection in exchange, so that we were left aground on a sandbar barely big enough for our feet. I lost friends and relatives and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside and any sense that I was normal. I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue. And I lost a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed.
Hastening on toward some idea of a future, I only half-realized these losses, and when I did realize I didnt disapprove, and sometimes I actively colluded. At some point, though, I was bound to notice that there was a gulf inside me, with a blanketed form on the other side that hadnt been uncovered in decades. My project of self-invention had been successful, so much so that I had become a sort of hydroponic vegetable, growing soil-free. But I had been formed in another world; everything in me that was essential was owed to immersion in that place, and that time, that I had so effectively renounced. [ . . . . ]
Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured in those few years before our clay hardens. Offhand remarks, things glimpsed in passing, jokes and commonplaces, shop displays and climate and flickering light and textures of walls are all consumed by us and become part of our fiber, just as much as the more obvious effects of upbringing and socialization and intimacy and learning. Every human being is an archeological site.
Luc Sante, from The Factory of Facts (1998)
In the first paragraph, the writer lists more than a dozen things that he and his family lost when they immigrated to America. He does this in order to
My parents lost friends, lost family ties and patterns of mutual assistance, lost rituals and habits and favorite foods, lost any link to an ongoing social milieu, lost a good part of the sense they had of themselves. We lost a house, several towns, various landscapes. We lost documents and pictures and heirlooms, as well as most of our breakable belongings, smashed in the nine packing cases that we took with us to America. We lost connection to a thing larger than ourselves, and as a family failed to make any significant new connection in exchange, so that we were left aground on a sandbar barely big enough for our feet. I lost friends and relatives and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside and any sense that I was normal. I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue. And I lost a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed.
Hastening on toward some idea of a future, I only half-realized these losses, and when I did realize I didnt disapprove, and sometimes I actively colluded. At some point, though, I was bound to notice that there was a gulf inside me, with a blanketed form on the other side that hadnt been uncovered in decades. My project of self-invention had been successful, so much so that I had become a sort of hydroponic vegetable, growing soil-free. But I had been formed in another world; everything in me that was essential was owed to immersion in that place, and that time, that I had so effectively renounced. [ . . . . ]
Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured in those few years before our clay hardens. Offhand remarks, things glimpsed in passing, jokes and commonplaces, shop displays and climate and flickering light and textures of walls are all consumed by us and become part of our fiber, just as much as the more obvious effects of upbringing and socialization and intimacy and learning. Every human being is an archeological site.
Luc Sante, from The Factory of Facts (1998)
In the first paragraph, the writer lists more than a dozen things that he and his family lost when they immigrated to America. He does this in order to
- Aconvince others not to immigrate.
- Bshow how careless his family was when packing.
- Cshow how much he missed his homeland.
- Dshow how many intangible and important things were left behind.
- Eprove that you are never too old to change..
Correct Answer:
D
While some of the things the authors family lost were tangible (the house, the heirlooms), most of the list includes intangible things that are very important in establishing our identity and sense of self. He is not trying to convince others not to immigrate (choice a); he is not criticizing America or his experience since he arrived. There is no evidence that the crates were smashed because his family packed carelessly (choice b). In the second paragraph, the author tells us that he did not consciously miss his homeland; he "actively colluded" in the losses they suffered and tried to reinvent himself. Thus, choice c is incorrect. The focus of this passage is how important place is to ones sense of self; it is not trying to show that you are never too old to change (choice e).
D
While some of the things the authors family lost were tangible (the house, the heirlooms), most of the list includes intangible things that are very important in establishing our identity and sense of self. He is not trying to convince others not to immigrate (choice a); he is not criticizing America or his experience since he arrived. There is no evidence that the crates were smashed because his family packed carelessly (choice b). In the second paragraph, the author tells us that he did not consciously miss his homeland; he "actively colluded" in the losses they suffered and tried to reinvent himself. Thus, choice c is incorrect. The focus of this passage is how important place is to ones sense of self; it is not trying to show that you are never too old to change (choice e).
send
light_mode
delete
Question #20
What Happened When He Came to America?
My parents lost friends, lost family ties and patterns of mutual assistance, lost rituals and habits and favorite foods, lost any link to an ongoing social milieu, lost a good part of the sense they had of themselves. We lost a house, several towns, various landscapes. We lost documents and pictures and heirlooms, as well as most of our breakable belongings, smashed in the nine packing cases that we took with us to America. We lost connection to a thing larger than ourselves, and as a family failed to make any significant new connection in exchange, so that we were left aground on a sandbar barely big enough for our feet. I lost friends and relatives and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside and any sense that I was normal. I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue. And I lost a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed.
Hastening on toward some idea of a future, I only half-realized these losses, and when I did realize I didnt disapprove, and sometimes I actively colluded. At some point, though, I was bound to notice that there was a gulf inside me, with a blanketed form on the other side that hadnt been uncovered in decades.My project of self-invention had been successful, so much so that I had become a sort of hydroponic vegetable, growing soil-free. But I had been formed in another world; everything in me that was essential was owed to immersion in that place, and that time, that I had so effectively renounced. [ . . . . ]
Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured in those few years before our clay hardens. Offhand remarks, things glimpsed in passing, jokes and commonplaces, shop displays and climate and flickering light and textures of walls are all consumed by us and become part of our fiber, just as much as the more obvious effects of upbringing and socialization and intimacy and learning. Every human being is an archeological site.
Luc Sante, from The Factory of Facts (1998)
According to the author, our personalities are formed mostly by
My parents lost friends, lost family ties and patterns of mutual assistance, lost rituals and habits and favorite foods, lost any link to an ongoing social milieu, lost a good part of the sense they had of themselves. We lost a house, several towns, various landscapes. We lost documents and pictures and heirlooms, as well as most of our breakable belongings, smashed in the nine packing cases that we took with us to America. We lost connection to a thing larger than ourselves, and as a family failed to make any significant new connection in exchange, so that we were left aground on a sandbar barely big enough for our feet. I lost friends and relatives and stories and familiar comforts and a sense of continuity between home and outside and any sense that I was normal. I lost half a language through want of use and eventually, in my late teens, even lost French as the language of my internal monologue. And I lost a whole network of routes through life that I had just barely glimpsed.
Hastening on toward some idea of a future, I only half-realized these losses, and when I did realize I didnt disapprove, and sometimes I actively colluded. At some point, though, I was bound to notice that there was a gulf inside me, with a blanketed form on the other side that hadnt been uncovered in decades.My project of self-invention had been successful, so much so that I had become a sort of hydroponic vegetable, growing soil-free. But I had been formed in another world; everything in me that was essential was owed to immersion in that place, and that time, that I had so effectively renounced. [ . . . . ]
Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured in those few years before our clay hardens. Offhand remarks, things glimpsed in passing, jokes and commonplaces, shop displays and climate and flickering light and textures of walls are all consumed by us and become part of our fiber, just as much as the more obvious effects of upbringing and socialization and intimacy and learning. Every human being is an archeological site.
Luc Sante, from The Factory of Facts (1998)
According to the author, our personalities are formed mostly by
- Aour genes.
- Bour education.
- Cour environment.
- Dour parents and caregivers.
- Eour peers.
Correct Answer:
C
The author states, "Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured . . . " The entire third paragraph lists things in our environment that contribute to who we are. The first sentence in the paragraph contradicts choices a and d. There is no mention of education (choice b) or peers (choice e).
C
The author states, "Like it or not, each of us is made, less by blood or genes than by a process that is largely accidental, the impact of things seen and heard and smelled and tasted and endured . . . " The entire third paragraph lists things in our environment that contribute to who we are. The first sentence in the paragraph contradicts choices a and d. There is no mention of education (choice b) or peers (choice e).
send
light_mode
delete
All Pages