YÖKDİL Sosyal Okuma Paragrafı Soruları

Question 1

Modern welfare states have started to redefine the relationship between citizens and public institutions since the second half of the twentieth century. Within this framework, governments in developed countries have increasingly provided free healthcare services, arguing that access to medical treatment should not depend on income. A study conducted across a range of European nations found that public investment in preventive medicine, such as vaccines, and in complex interventions, including kidney transplants, significantly increased life expectancy. Despite the high costs of such programs, policymakers point out that the long-term economic benefits, including reduced hospital admissions, outweigh initial expenditures. Others argue that even a small increase in taxation can finance these services sustainably. In this sense, the debate over healthcare financing has come to represent a broader ideological conflict between market-oriented and egalitarian approaches to social policy. When the original question was rephrased to ask whether universal healthcare improves overall productivity, most economists agreed that it does, since healthier populations contribute more effectively to economic growth.

What is the main idea of the passage?

Accepted Answer

The economic and social justification for universal healthcare in developed countries

Answer

The historical evolution of European taxation systems

Answer

The technical details of organ transplantation procedures

Answer

The ideological conflict between capitalism and socialism

Answer

The history of vaccine development in the twentieth century

Question 2

Modern welfare states have started to redefine the relationship between citizens and public institutions since the second half of the twentieth century. Within this framework, governments in developed countries have increasingly provided free healthcare services, arguing that access to medical treatment should not depend on income. A study conducted across a range of European nations found that public investment in preventive medicine, such as vaccines, and in complex interventions, including kidney transplants, significantly increased life expectancy. Despite the high costs of such programs, policymakers point out that the long-term economic benefits, including reduced hospital admissions, outweigh initial expenditures. Others argue that even a small increase in taxation can finance these services sustainably. In this sense, the debate over healthcare financing has come to represent a broader ideological conflict between market-oriented and egalitarian approaches to social policy. When the original question was rephrased to ask whether universal healthcare improves overall productivity, most economists agreed that it does, since healthier populations contribute more effectively to economic growth.

According to the passage, what did the study find regarding preventive medicine and complex interventions like kidney transplants?

Accepted Answer

They significantly increased life expectancy across the surveyed countries.

Answer

They led to a decrease in life expectancy due to high costs.

Answer

They had no measurable effect on public health outcomes.

Answer

They were rejected by most European governments.

Answer

They only benefited wealthy citizens who could afford them.

Question 3

Modern welfare states have started to redefine the relationship between citizens and public institutions since the second half of the twentieth century. Within this framework, governments in developed countries have increasingly provided free healthcare services, arguing that access to medical treatment should not depend on income. A study conducted across a range of European nations found that public investment in preventive medicine, such as vaccines, and in complex interventions, including kidney transplants, significantly increased life expectancy. Despite the high costs of such programs, policymakers point out that the long-term economic benefits, including reduced hospital admissions, outweigh initial expenditures. Others argue that even a small increase in taxation can finance these services sustainably. In this sense, the debate over healthcare financing has come to represent a broader ideological conflict between market-oriented and egalitarian approaches to social policy. When the original question was rephrased to ask whether universal healthcare improves overall productivity, most economists agreed that it does, since healthier populations contribute more effectively to economic growth.

It can be inferred from the passage that...

Accepted Answer

Investing in public health can be economically beneficial in the long run.

Answer

Universal healthcare is universally opposed by economists.

Answer

Kidney transplants are less important than vaccines in public health policy.

Answer

Taxation increases always harm long-term economic growth.

Answer

Market-oriented healthcare systems are more effective than egalitarian ones.

Question 4

Modern welfare states have started to redefine the relationship between citizens and public institutions since the second half of the twentieth century. Within this framework, governments in developed countries have increasingly provided free healthcare services, arguing that access to medical treatment should not depend on income. A study conducted across a range of European nations found that public investment in preventive medicine, such as vaccines, and in complex interventions, including kidney transplants, significantly increased life expectancy. Despite the high costs of such programs, policymakers point out that the long-term economic benefits, including reduced hospital admissions, outweigh initial expenditures. Others argue that even a small increase in taxation can finance these services sustainably. In this sense, the debate over healthcare financing has come to represent a broader ideological conflict between market-oriented and egalitarian approaches to social policy. When the original question was rephrased to ask whether universal healthcare improves overall productivity, most economists agreed that it does, since healthier populations contribute more effectively to economic growth.

In the passage, the phrase 'point out' is closest in meaning to...

Accepted Answer

emphasize

Answer

ignore

Answer

deny

Answer

question

Answer

dismiss

Question 5

Insurance allows people to protect themselves against events that would be too costly to face alone, such as a house fire, a car accident or a serious illness. By paying a regular fee, each policyholder shares the risk with many others, and the losses of the few are covered by the contributions of the many. Economists have pointed out, however, that insurance can make the very losses it protects against more likely. Once people know that they will not bear the full cost of a loss, they may take less care to avoid it. A driver with full cover might park in a less secure place, and a company whose goods are insured might spend less on security. This tendency is known as moral hazard. The term can be misleading, since it does not necessarily imply dishonesty; it describes the ordinary way in which people respond to changed incentives. The problem arises because the insurer cannot observe everything the policyholder does. If it could, it would simply write contracts requiring careful behaviour. Instead, insurers rely on indirect methods. One of the most common is the deductible, which requires the policyholder to pay the first part of any claim, so that the person continues to feel some of the cost of a loss. Another is to offer lower prices to customers who can show that they have reduced their risk, for example by installing smoke alarms. The concept has also been applied well beyond insurance. It is used, for instance, to explain why banks that expect to be rescued by governments in a crisis may be tempted to make riskier loans.

What is the passage mainly about?

Accepted Answer

How insurance can weaken the incentive to avoid losses and how insurers respond

Answer

How insurance allows the losses of a few people to be shared among many policyholders

Answer

Why policyholders tend to make dishonest claims and how insurers try to detect them

Answer

How governments can prevent banks from making risky loans during financial crises

Answer

Why insurers offer lower prices to customers who have installed smoke alarms

Question 6

Insurance allows people to protect themselves against events that would be too costly to face alone, such as a house fire, a car accident or a serious illness. By paying a regular fee, each policyholder shares the risk with many others, and the losses of the few are covered by the contributions of the many. Economists have pointed out, however, that insurance can make the very losses it protects against more likely. Once people know that they will not bear the full cost of a loss, they may take less care to avoid it. A driver with full cover might park in a less secure place, and a company whose goods are insured might spend less on security. This tendency is known as moral hazard. The term can be misleading, since it does not necessarily imply dishonesty; it describes the ordinary way in which people respond to changed incentives. The problem arises because the insurer cannot observe everything the policyholder does. If it could, it would simply write contracts requiring careful behaviour. Instead, insurers rely on indirect methods. One of the most common is the deductible, which requires the policyholder to pay the first part of any claim, so that the person continues to feel some of the cost of a loss. Another is to offer lower prices to customers who can show that they have reduced their risk, for example by installing smoke alarms. The concept has also been applied well beyond insurance. It is used, for instance, to explain why banks that expect to be rescued by governments in a crisis may be tempted to make riskier loans.

According to the passage, a deductible is intended to ----.

Accepted Answer

make policyholders bear part of any loss themselves

Answer

cover the whole cost of any loss that a policyholder suffers

Answer

allow insurers to observe how carefully policyholders behave

Answer

reward customers who have installed devices such as smoke alarms

Answer

discourage banks from making risky loans during a crisis

Question 7

Insurance allows people to protect themselves against events that would be too costly to face alone, such as a house fire, a car accident or a serious illness. By paying a regular fee, each policyholder shares the risk with many others, and the losses of the few are covered by the contributions of the many. Economists have pointed out, however, that insurance can make the very losses it protects against more likely. Once people know that they will not bear the full cost of a loss, they may take less care to avoid it. A driver with full cover might park in a less secure place, and a company whose goods are insured might spend less on security. This tendency is known as moral hazard. The term can be misleading, since it does not necessarily imply dishonesty; it describes the ordinary way in which people respond to changed incentives. The problem arises because the insurer cannot observe everything the policyholder does. If it could, it would simply write contracts requiring careful behaviour. Instead, insurers rely on indirect methods. One of the most common is the deductible, which requires the policyholder to pay the first part of any claim, so that the person continues to feel some of the cost of a loss. Another is to offer lower prices to customers who can show that they have reduced their risk, for example by installing smoke alarms. The concept has also been applied well beyond insurance. It is used, for instance, to explain why banks that expect to be rescued by governments in a crisis may be tempted to make riskier loans.

It can be inferred from the passage that a policyholder who must pay a large deductible ----.

Accepted Answer

has more reason to avoid losses than one without a deductible

Answer

is more likely than other customers to make a dishonest claim

Answer

will be charged a lower price only if smoke alarms are installed

Answer

is observed more closely by the insurer than other customers

Answer

is protected against the full cost of every loss that occurs

Question 8

Oral history is the practice of collecting and studying people's spoken memories of the events they have lived through. Historians have always relied to some extent on eyewitness accounts, but the approach gained new importance with the spread of portable recording equipment, which made it possible to preserve interviews in the speaker's own voice. One of its main attractions is that it gives a voice to groups who left few written records, such as factory workers, migrants or women whose daily labour at home was rarely documented. Official archives, which typically reflect the concerns of the governments, businesses and other powerful institutions that produced them, can say little about how ordinary people experienced the changes of their time. Oral history has, however, been criticised on the grounds that memory is unreliable. People forget details, confuse the order of events and may unconsciously reshape their recollections in the light of what happened later or of stories they have heard from others. Supporters of the method accept that interviews cannot always be taken as accurate records of facts, but they argue that this weakness can also be a source of insight. The way people remember an event, what they emphasise, what they leave out and how their accounts change over time, reveals how the past is understood and given meaning. For this reason, many oral historians treat interviews not simply as sources of information but as evidence of memory itself. They also compare spoken accounts with documents wherever possible, using each type of source to test the other.

What is the main idea of the passage?

Accepted Answer

Although memories are imperfect, oral history provides valuable evidence both about ordinary people's lives and about how the past is remembered.

Answer

Oral history should replace official archives because written documents are always biased.

Answer

Because memory is unreliable, spoken accounts are of no value to historians.

Answer

Portable recording equipment has made it possible to record every historical event.

Answer

Historians have only recently begun to make use of eyewitness accounts.

Question 9

Oral history is the practice of collecting and studying people's spoken memories of the events they have lived through. Historians have always relied to some extent on eyewitness accounts, but the approach gained new importance with the spread of portable recording equipment, which made it possible to preserve interviews in the speaker's own voice. One of its main attractions is that it gives a voice to groups who left few written records, such as factory workers, migrants or women whose daily labour at home was rarely documented. Official archives, which typically reflect the concerns of the governments, businesses and other powerful institutions that produced them, can say little about how ordinary people experienced the changes of their time. Oral history has, however, been criticised on the grounds that memory is unreliable. People forget details, confuse the order of events and may unconsciously reshape their recollections in the light of what happened later or of stories they have heard from others. Supporters of the method accept that interviews cannot always be taken as accurate records of facts, but they argue that this weakness can also be a source of insight. The way people remember an event, what they emphasise, what they leave out and how their accounts change over time, reveals how the past is understood and given meaning. For this reason, many oral historians treat interviews not simply as sources of information but as evidence of memory itself. They also compare spoken accounts with documents wherever possible, using each type of source to test the other.

According to the passage, official archives ----.

Accepted Answer

tend to reflect the concerns of the institutions that produced them

Answer

cannot be compared with spoken accounts

Answer

are less reliable than any spoken memory

Answer

contain detailed accounts of the daily lives of factory workers

Answer

were created mainly by migrants and by women working at home

Question 10

Oral history is the practice of collecting and studying people's spoken memories of the events they have lived through. Historians have always relied to some extent on eyewitness accounts, but the approach gained new importance with the spread of portable recording equipment, which made it possible to preserve interviews in the speaker's own voice. One of its main attractions is that it gives a voice to groups who left few written records, such as factory workers, migrants or women whose daily labour at home was rarely documented. Official archives, which typically reflect the concerns of the governments, businesses and other powerful institutions that produced them, can say little about how ordinary people experienced the changes of their time. Oral history has, however, been criticised on the grounds that memory is unreliable. People forget details, confuse the order of events and may unconsciously reshape their recollections in the light of what happened later or of stories they have heard from others. Supporters of the method accept that interviews cannot always be taken as accurate records of facts, but they argue that this weakness can also be a source of insight. The way people remember an event, what they emphasise, what they leave out and how their accounts change over time, reveals how the past is understood and given meaning. For this reason, many oral historians treat interviews not simply as sources of information but as evidence of memory itself. They also compare spoken accounts with documents wherever possible, using each type of source to test the other.

It can be inferred from the passage that, for many oral historians, a change in the way someone tells the same story over the years ----.

Accepted Answer

is itself a meaningful piece of evidence rather than simply an error

Answer

can be corrected by recording the interview more carefully

Answer

is rare, because people remember important events perfectly

Answer

is a clear sign that the interview should be discarded

Answer

shows that the event described never really took place

Question 11

Oral history is the practice of collecting and studying people's spoken memories of the events they have lived through. Historians have always relied to some extent on eyewitness accounts, but the approach gained new importance with the spread of portable recording equipment, which made it possible to preserve interviews in the speaker's own voice. One of its main attractions is that it gives a voice to groups who left few written records, such as factory workers, migrants or women whose daily labour at home was rarely documented. Official archives, which typically reflect the concerns of the governments, businesses and other powerful institutions that produced them, can say little about how ordinary people experienced the changes of their time. Oral history has, however, been criticised on the grounds that memory is unreliable. People forget details, confuse the order of events and may unconsciously reshape their recollections in the light of what happened later or of stories they have heard from others. Supporters of the method accept that interviews cannot always be taken as accurate records of facts, but they argue that this weakness can also be a source of insight. The way people remember an event, what they emphasise, what they leave out and how their accounts change over time, reveals how the past is understood and given meaning. For this reason, many oral historians treat interviews not simply as sources of information but as evidence of memory itself. They also compare spoken accounts with documents wherever possible, using each type of source to test the other.

The phrase 'this weakness' in the passage refers to ----.

Accepted Answer

the unreliability of people's memories

Answer

the difficulty of comparing interviews with documents

Answer

the lack of written records left by some groups

Answer

the cost of portable recording equipment

Answer

the bias of official archives towards powerful institutions

Question 12

When people look for a new job, it seems natural to assume that their closest friends and relatives will be the most helpful. These are the people who know them best and who are most willing to help. Sociological research on how people actually find work, however, has produced a surprising result. Many people learn about the jobs they eventually obtain not from close friends but from acquaintances: former colleagues, people they meet only occasionally or friends of friends. Sociologists describe these relationships as weak ties, in contrast to the strong ties that link people to family members and close friends. The explanation lies in the structure of social networks. Close friends tend to know one another and to move in the same circles, so the information they possess largely overlaps with what a person already knows. Acquaintances, by contrast, belong to different groups and have access to different sources of information. They therefore act as bridges between otherwise separate parts of a network, carrying news of opportunities that would not otherwise reach a person. This idea has been applied well beyond the job market, for example to explain how new ideas and practices spread across communities. It does not mean that strong ties are unimportant. When people face a crisis, it is usually family members and close friends who offer emotional support and practical help, and they may also be more willing to recommend someone they know well. Some later studies suggest that the value of each kind of tie depends on the situation, including the type of job and the way people search for it. Nevertheless, the finding has encouraged many people to look beyond their closest circle.

Which of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?

Accepted Answer

Acquaintances can be valuable sources of news about jobs because they link people to groups outside their own circle.

Answer

Close friends help more than acquaintances in a job search because they are more willing to recommend people.

Answer

People who want to find work should spend less time with close friends and more time with acquaintances.

Answer

Strong ties matter more than weak ties because family and close friends offer support in a crisis.

Answer

The value of any social tie depends entirely on the type of job that a person is looking for.

Question 13

When people look for a new job, it seems natural to assume that their closest friends and relatives will be the most helpful. These are the people who know them best and who are most willing to help. Sociological research on how people actually find work, however, has produced a surprising result. Many people learn about the jobs they eventually obtain not from close friends but from acquaintances: former colleagues, people they meet only occasionally or friends of friends. Sociologists describe these relationships as weak ties, in contrast to the strong ties that link people to family members and close friends. The explanation lies in the structure of social networks. Close friends tend to know one another and to move in the same circles, so the information they possess largely overlaps with what a person already knows. Acquaintances, by contrast, belong to different groups and have access to different sources of information. They therefore act as bridges between otherwise separate parts of a network, carrying news of opportunities that would not otherwise reach a person. This idea has been applied well beyond the job market, for example to explain how new ideas and practices spread across communities. It does not mean that strong ties are unimportant. When people face a crisis, it is usually family members and close friends who offer emotional support and practical help, and they may also be more willing to recommend someone they know well. Some later studies suggest that the value of each kind of tie depends on the situation, including the type of job and the way people search for it. Nevertheless, the finding has encouraged many people to look beyond their closest circle.

According to the passage, the information held by close friends is often less useful to a job seeker because ----.

Accepted Answer

close friends usually share the job seeker's sources of information

Answer

close friends are rarely in a position to offer anyone a job

Answer

close friends are reluctant to recommend people they know well

Answer

close friends tend to belong to many different social groups

Answer

close friends mainly provide emotional rather than practical support

Question 14

When people look for a new job, it seems natural to assume that their closest friends and relatives will be the most helpful. These are the people who know them best and who are most willing to help. Sociological research on how people actually find work, however, has produced a surprising result. Many people learn about the jobs they eventually obtain not from close friends but from acquaintances: former colleagues, people they meet only occasionally or friends of friends. Sociologists describe these relationships as weak ties, in contrast to the strong ties that link people to family members and close friends. The explanation lies in the structure of social networks. Close friends tend to know one another and to move in the same circles, so the information they possess largely overlaps with what a person already knows. Acquaintances, by contrast, belong to different groups and have access to different sources of information. They therefore act as bridges between otherwise separate parts of a network, carrying news of opportunities that would not otherwise reach a person. This idea has been applied well beyond the job market, for example to explain how new ideas and practices spread across communities. It does not mean that strong ties are unimportant. When people face a crisis, it is usually family members and close friends who offer emotional support and practical help, and they may also be more willing to recommend someone they know well. Some later studies suggest that the value of each kind of tie depends on the situation, including the type of job and the way people search for it. Nevertheless, the finding has encouraged many people to look beyond their closest circle.

The word 'It' in the sentence 'It does not mean that strong ties are unimportant' refers to ----.

Accepted Answer

the idea that weak ties often carry useful information

Answer

the job market

Answer

the spread of new ideas and practices across different communities

Answer

a close friendship between two people

Answer

the structure of a social network

Question 15

Rapid urbanization and ageing populations are transforming societies across the world today. In numerous cities, the shift from agricultural to industrial production has changed both economic structures and human emotions toward work and community life. It is now possible to observe how technological advances, once mainly military in origin, have reshaped civilian industry along with everyday routines. However, this rapid change also brings feelings of uncertainty, and it is often impossible to prevent the social tension arising from unequal access to resources. Records once kept in a simple notebook have been replaced by digital databases that track agricultural yields, animal populations, and industrial output with remarkable precision. Despite these advances, researchers warn that the situation in many rapidly ageing societies remains fragile, since fewer young workers must support growing numbers of elderly citizens. Preventing social and economic collapse in such circumstances requires coordinated policies that address housing, healthcare, and employment simultaneously. The main challenge, therefore, lies not merely in technological innovation but in ensuring that all segments of society share fairly in its benefits.

What is the main idea of the passage?

Accepted Answer

Modern societies must balance rapid technological and demographic changes with equitable distribution of benefits.

Answer

Military technology is the primary cause of urbanization in modern societies.

Answer

Digital databases have completely replaced agricultural production methods.

Answer

Ageing populations are the sole reason for economic collapse in industrial nations.

Answer

Cities have become less important than rural areas due to industrialization.

Question 16

Rapid urbanization and ageing populations are transforming societies across the world today. In numerous cities, the shift from agricultural to industrial production has changed both economic structures and human emotions toward work and community life. It is now possible to observe how technological advances, once mainly military in origin, have reshaped civilian industry along with everyday routines. However, this rapid change also brings feelings of uncertainty, and it is often impossible to prevent the social tension arising from unequal access to resources. Records once kept in a simple notebook have been replaced by digital databases that track agricultural yields, animal populations, and industrial output with remarkable precision. Despite these advances, researchers warn that the situation in many rapidly ageing societies remains fragile, since fewer young workers must support growing numbers of elderly citizens. Preventing social and economic collapse in such circumstances requires coordinated policies that address housing, healthcare, and employment simultaneously. The main challenge, therefore, lies not merely in technological innovation but in ensuring that all segments of society share fairly in its benefits.

According to the passage, which of the following has replaced traditional records once kept in a notebook?

Accepted Answer

Digital databases tracking agricultural and industrial data

Answer

Military logs maintained by government officials

Answer

Printed agricultural almanacs distributed to farmers

Answer

Handwritten community journals kept by local historians

Answer

Oral records passed down through generations

Question 17

Rapid urbanization and ageing populations are transforming societies across the world today. In numerous cities, the shift from agricultural to industrial production has changed both economic structures and human emotions toward work and community life. It is now possible to observe how technological advances, once mainly military in origin, have reshaped civilian industry along with everyday routines. However, this rapid change also brings feelings of uncertainty, and it is often impossible to prevent the social tension arising from unequal access to resources. Records once kept in a simple notebook have been replaced by digital databases that track agricultural yields, animal populations, and industrial output with remarkable precision. Despite these advances, researchers warn that the situation in many rapidly ageing societies remains fragile, since fewer young workers must support growing numbers of elderly citizens. Preventing social and economic collapse in such circumstances requires coordinated policies that address housing, healthcare, and employment simultaneously. The main challenge, therefore, lies not merely in technological innovation but in ensuring that all segments of society share fairly in its benefits.

It can be inferred from the passage that

Accepted Answer

societies with ageing populations may face economic strain due to a shrinking workforce.

Answer

technological innovation guarantees fair distribution of resources automatically.

Answer

urbanization has eliminated the need for coordinated government policies.

Answer

military applications remain the only use for modern technology.

Answer

agricultural societies are less affected by demographic change than industrial ones.

Question 18

Rapid urbanization and ageing populations are transforming societies across the world today. In numerous cities, the shift from agricultural to industrial production has changed both economic structures and human emotions toward work and community life. It is now possible to observe how technological advances, once mainly military in origin, have reshaped civilian industry along with everyday routines. However, this rapid change also brings feelings of uncertainty, and it is often impossible to prevent the social tension arising from unequal access to resources. Records once kept in a simple notebook have been replaced by digital databases that track agricultural yields, animal populations, and industrial output with remarkable precision. Despite these advances, researchers warn that the situation in many rapidly ageing societies remains fragile, since fewer young workers must support growing numbers of elderly citizens. Preventing social and economic collapse in such circumstances requires coordinated policies that address housing, healthcare, and employment simultaneously. The main challenge, therefore, lies not merely in technological innovation but in ensuring that all segments of society share fairly in its benefits.

In the context of the passage, the word 'fragile' is closest in meaning to

Accepted Answer

vulnerable

Answer

permanent

Answer

prosperous

Answer

expanding

Answer

irrelevant

Question 19

Languages differ considerably in the way they divide the spectrum of colour. Some have only a handful of basic colour terms, while others have a dozen or more. Russian, for example, has two separate basic words for the lighter and darker shades that English speakers group together as 'blue', and many languages use a single term to cover both green and blue. Such differences have long attracted the attention of researchers interested in a broader question: does the language we speak influence the way we perceive and think about the world? For much of the twentieth century, opinion swung between two positions. One held that colour vocabulary is largely arbitrary and that each culture carves up the spectrum in its own way. The other pointed to striking regularities: across a large number of languages, the best examples of basic colour terms tend to cluster around similar points, and new terms appear to be added in a fairly predictable order as languages develop. More recent experiments have suggested that both views contain some truth. Speakers whose language distinguishes two shades with separate words are, on average, slightly faster at telling those shades apart than speakers whose language uses a single word, even when no words are spoken during the task. Interestingly, this advantage tends to disappear when participants are asked to perform a demanding verbal task at the same time, which suggests that language is involved in the process as it happens. Nevertheless, the effect is small, and speakers of all languages can distinguish between shades for which they have no names. Language, it seems, may sharpen certain distinctions, but it does not determine what people are able to see.

Which of the following best summarises the passage?

Accepted Answer

The colour words in a language may slightly affect how quickly speakers tell shades apart, but they do not limit what people can see.

Answer

Colour vocabulary is entirely arbitrary and follows no pattern across languages.

Answer

People cannot distinguish between colours for which their language has no separate words.

Answer

Speakers of Russian can see more colours than speakers of any other language.

Answer

Research has shown that language has no connection with colour perception at all.

Question 20

Languages differ considerably in the way they divide the spectrum of colour. Some have only a handful of basic colour terms, while others have a dozen or more. Russian, for example, has two separate basic words for the lighter and darker shades that English speakers group together as 'blue', and many languages use a single term to cover both green and blue. Such differences have long attracted the attention of researchers interested in a broader question: does the language we speak influence the way we perceive and think about the world? For much of the twentieth century, opinion swung between two positions. One held that colour vocabulary is largely arbitrary and that each culture carves up the spectrum in its own way. The other pointed to striking regularities: across a large number of languages, the best examples of basic colour terms tend to cluster around similar points, and new terms appear to be added in a fairly predictable order as languages develop. More recent experiments have suggested that both views contain some truth. Speakers whose language distinguishes two shades with separate words are, on average, slightly faster at telling those shades apart than speakers whose language uses a single word, even when no words are spoken during the task. Interestingly, this advantage tends to disappear when participants are asked to perform a demanding verbal task at the same time, which suggests that language is involved in the process as it happens. Nevertheless, the effect is small, and speakers of all languages can distinguish between shades for which they have no names. Language, it seems, may sharpen certain distinctions, but it does not determine what people are able to see.

According to the passage, the advantage shown by speakers who have separate words for two shades ----.

Accepted Answer

tends to disappear when they carry out a demanding verbal task at the same time

Answer

has been found only among speakers of Russian

Answer

allows them to see shades that other people are unable to see

Answer

was first observed at the beginning of the twentieth century

Answer

becomes much larger when they are asked to name the colours aloud

Question 21

Languages differ considerably in the way they divide the spectrum of colour. Some have only a handful of basic colour terms, while others have a dozen or more. Russian, for example, has two separate basic words for the lighter and darker shades that English speakers group together as 'blue', and many languages use a single term to cover both green and blue. Such differences have long attracted the attention of researchers interested in a broader question: does the language we speak influence the way we perceive and think about the world? For much of the twentieth century, opinion swung between two positions. One held that colour vocabulary is largely arbitrary and that each culture carves up the spectrum in its own way. The other pointed to striking regularities: across a large number of languages, the best examples of basic colour terms tend to cluster around similar points, and new terms appear to be added in a fairly predictable order as languages develop. More recent experiments have suggested that both views contain some truth. Speakers whose language distinguishes two shades with separate words are, on average, slightly faster at telling those shades apart than speakers whose language uses a single word, even when no words are spoken during the task. Interestingly, this advantage tends to disappear when participants are asked to perform a demanding verbal task at the same time, which suggests that language is involved in the process as it happens. Nevertheless, the effect is small, and speakers of all languages can distinguish between shades for which they have no names. Language, it seems, may sharpen certain distinctions, but it does not determine what people are able to see.

It can be inferred from the passage that the regularities found across languages ----.

Accepted Answer

were used to challenge the view that each culture divides the spectrum in an entirely arbitrary way

Answer

were discovered only after the recent experiments with Russian speakers

Answer

are the main reason why some languages use one word for green and blue

Answer

prove that all languages have the same number of basic colour terms

Answer

show that new colour terms are added in a random order

Question 22

Languages differ considerably in the way they divide the spectrum of colour. Some have only a handful of basic colour terms, while others have a dozen or more. Russian, for example, has two separate basic words for the lighter and darker shades that English speakers group together as 'blue', and many languages use a single term to cover both green and blue. Such differences have long attracted the attention of researchers interested in a broader question: does the language we speak influence the way we perceive and think about the world? For much of the twentieth century, opinion swung between two positions. One held that colour vocabulary is largely arbitrary and that each culture carves up the spectrum in its own way. The other pointed to striking regularities: across a large number of languages, the best examples of basic colour terms tend to cluster around similar points, and new terms appear to be added in a fairly predictable order as languages develop. More recent experiments have suggested that both views contain some truth. Speakers whose language distinguishes two shades with separate words are, on average, slightly faster at telling those shades apart than speakers whose language uses a single word, even when no words are spoken during the task. Interestingly, this advantage tends to disappear when participants are asked to perform a demanding verbal task at the same time, which suggests that language is involved in the process as it happens. Nevertheless, the effect is small, and speakers of all languages can distinguish between shades for which they have no names. Language, it seems, may sharpen certain distinctions, but it does not determine what people are able to see.

The word 'striking' in the passage is closest in meaning to ----.

Accepted Answer

remarkable

Answer

confusing

Answer

aggressive

Answer

minor

Answer

violent

YÖKDİL Sosyal Okuma Paragrafı Soruları

Sosyal örnek soruları

İlgili sayfalar