7
Read each word, its part of speech and its meaning. Say the word aloud, then read the example sentence. The Chinese is a quick support only.
Write the word that matches each meaning. Do not look back at the word cards.
These words come from earlier lessons. Use what you remember - the meanings are not repeated here.
Choose the word that best completes each sentence. Fill in one box for each question.
All four words are close in meaning. Choose the one that fits the situation most precisely.
Choose the word that is closest in meaning to the word in capital letters.
Read the passage carefully. You may underline words you recognise from this lesson and earlier lessons.
Riverton's school board had to decide whether to replace an aging science building or renovate it. The issue seemed simple at first, but an exhaustive engineering report revealed several complications. Some classrooms had only minor damage, while one wing showed an anomaly: cracks far larger than those found elsewhere. Engineers warned that the cumulative effect of years of moisture had weakened part of the structure.
A proponent of renovation argued that the building could still be viable if the damaged wing were reinforced. To substantiate that claim, she cited empirical test results showing that most of the foundation remained strong enough to withstand additional stress. Another board member expressed dissent and invoked a previous safety case as precedent for replacing buildings with similar problems. He argued that the magnitude of the risk warranted a more cautious approach.
The board commissioned two concurrent studies. One examined construction costs, while the other tested whether damage correlated with soil movement beneath the property. The findings were not immediately conclusive. One report used equivocal language, and several assumptions remained implicit. Rather than rush the decision, the board required a more rigorous analysis that would aggregate data from every inspection and synthesize the results into one final recommendation.
The new analysis changed the debate. It showed that the predominant problem was limited to one section and that an autonomous drainage system could prevent future moisture buildup. Replacement would still be safer in some respects, but renovation was financially viable and did not require the school to relinquish the building for two full years. After reviewing the evidence, even several original critics agreed that the revised plan could transcend the earlier disagreement. The board approved renovation, but only with stringent safety checks and an unprecedented schedule of follow-up inspections. It also required annual reviews so future structural problems could be detected before they became severe.
Answer the questions using the passage. For the written questions, reply in complete sentences on the lines provided.
Close the workbook to the previous sections. Write the word for each meaning from memory.