uid
stringlengths 4
7
| premise
stringlengths 19
9.21k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 13
488
| label
stringclasses 3
values |
|---|---|---|---|
id_1100 | Attitudes to language It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the 'standard' written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write 'correctly'; deviations from it are said to be 'incorrect! All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to 'improve' the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterised by its reliance on rules' of grammar. Some usages are 'prescribed, ' to be learnt and followed accurately; others are 'proscribed, ' to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestiey, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that 'the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language! Linguistic issues, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | Descriptivism only appeared after the 18th century. | c |
id_1101 | Attitudes to language It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the 'standard' written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write 'correctly'; deviations from it are said to be 'incorrect! All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to 'improve' the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterised by its reliance on rules' of grammar. Some usages are 'prescribed, ' to be learnt and followed accurately; others are 'proscribed, ' to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestiey, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that 'the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language! Linguistic issues, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | People feel more strongly about language education than about small differences in language usage. | c |
id_1102 | Attitudes to language It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the 'standard' written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write 'correctly'; deviations from it are said to be 'incorrect! All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to 'improve' the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterised by its reliance on rules' of grammar. Some usages are 'prescribed, ' to be learnt and followed accurately; others are 'proscribed, ' to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestiey, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that 'the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language! Linguistic issues, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | There are understandable reasons why arguments occur about language. | e |
id_1103 | Attitudes to language It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the 'standard' written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write 'correctly'; deviations from it are said to be 'incorrect! All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to 'improve' the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterised by its reliance on rules' of grammar. Some usages are 'prescribed, ' to be learnt and followed accurately; others are 'proscribed, ' to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestiey, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that 'the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language! Linguistic issues, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | According to descriptivists it is pointless to try to stop language change. | e |
id_1104 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | There are understandable reasons why arguments occur about language. | e |
id_1105 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | People feel more strongly about language education than about small differences in language usage. | c |
id_1106 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | Prescriptive grammar books cost a lot of money to buy in the 18th century. | n |
id_1107 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | Our assessment of a persons intelligence is affected by the way he or she uses language. | e |
id_1108 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | Both descriptivists and prescriptivists have been misrepresented. | e |
id_1109 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | Descriptivism only appeared after the 18th century. | c |
id_1110 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | According to descriptivists it is pointless to try to stop language change. | e |
id_1111 | Attitudes to language. It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education. Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked. In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the standard written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write correctly; deviations from it are said to be incorrect. All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to improve the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterized by its reliance on rules of grammar. Some usages are prescribed, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are proscribed, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them. These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarized in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Linguistic issue, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis. In our own time, the opposition between descriptivists and prescriptivists has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism. | Prescriptivism still exists today. | e |
id_1112 | Australias economic growth slows down in second quarter, say economists. Annual economic growth in Australia has begun to slow as demand for natural resources slows around the world. Decreased growth in key developing countries such as china and India has taken its toll on the Australian economic, which is heavily based on the mining sector. Similarly commodity prices such as iron ore have also fallen in recent months, negatively effecting Australian mining company profits. A knock on effect of this is decreased investment in the Australian mining sector, hurting investment in the country. It is believed that this decline in demand for natural resources will continue throughout the year, and Australian economic growth is not likely to increase for some time. | Australian mining company profits have been negatively effected | e |
id_1113 | Australias economic growth slows down in second quarter, say economists. Annual economic growth in Australia has begun to slow as demand for natural resources slows around the world. Decreased growth in key developing countries such as china and India has taken its toll on the Australian economic, which is heavily based on the mining sector. Similarly commodity prices such as iron ore have also fallen in recent months, negatively effecting Australian mining company profits. A knock on effect of this is decreased investment in the Australian mining sector, hurting investment in the country. It is believed that this decline in demand for natural resources will continue throughout the year, and Australian economic growth is not likely to increase for some time. | The price of Iron ore has fallen | e |
id_1114 | Australias economic growth slows down in second quarter, say economists. Annual economic growth in Australia has begun to slow as demand for natural resources slows around the world. Decreased growth in key developing countries such as china and India has taken its toll on the Australian economic, which is heavily based on the mining sector. Similarly commodity prices such as iron ore have also fallen in recent months, negatively effecting Australian mining company profits. A knock on effect of this is decreased investment in the Australian mining sector, hurting investment in the country. It is believed that this decline in demand for natural resources will continue throughout the year, and Australian economic growth is not likely to increase for some time. | Increased growth in developing countries is to blame. | c |
id_1115 | Australias economic growth slows down in second quarter, say economists. Annual economic growth in Australia has begun to slow as demand for natural resources slows around the world. Decreased growth in key developing countries such as china and India has taken its toll on the Australian economic, which is heavily based on the mining sector. Similarly commodity prices such as iron ore have also fallen in recent months, negatively effecting Australian mining company profits. A knock on effect of this is decreased investment in the Australian mining sector, hurting investment in the country. It is believed that this decline in demand for natural resources will continue throughout the year, and Australian economic growth is not likely to increase for some time. | Investment into Australia has been hurt. | e |
id_1116 | Autumn leaves Canadian writer Jay Ingram investigates the mystery of why leaves turn red in the fall One of the most captivating natural events of the year in many areas throughout North America is the turning of the leaves in the fall. The colours are magnificent, but the question of exactly why some trees turn yellow or orange, and others red or purple, is something which has long puzzled scientists. Summer leaves are green because they are full of chlorophyll, the molecule that captures sunlight converts that energy into new building materials for the tree. As fall approaches in the northern hemisphere, the amount of solar energy available declines considerably. For many trees evergreen conifers being an exception the best strategy is to abandon photosynthesis* until the spring. So rather than maintaining the now redundant leaves throughout the winter, the tree saves its precious resources and discards them. But before letting its leaves go, the tree dismantles their chlorophyll molecules and ships their valuable nitrogen back into the twigs. As chlorophyll is depleted, other colours that have been dominated by it throughout the summer begin to be revealed. This unmasking explains the autumn colours of yellow and orange, but not the brilliant reds and purples of trees such as the maple or sumac. The source of the red is widely known: it is created by anthocyanins, water-soluble plant pigments reflecting the red to blue range of the visible spectrum. They belong to a class of sugar-based chemical compounds also known as flavonoids. Whats puzzling is that anthocyanins are actually newly minted, made in the leaves at the same time as the tree is preparing to drop them. But it is hard to make sense of the manufacture of anthocyanins why should a tree bother making new chemicals in its leaves when its already scrambling to withdraw and preserve the ones already there? Some theories about anthocyanins have argued that they might act as a chemical defence against attacks by insects or fungi, or that they might attract fruit-eating birds or increase a leafs tolerance to freezing. However there are problems with each of these theories, including the fact that leaves are red for such a relatively short period that the expense of energy needed to manufacture the anthocyanins would outweigh any anti-fungal or anti-herbivore activity achieved. * photosynthesis: the production of new material from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. It has also been proposed that trees may produce vivid red colours to convince herbivorous insects that they are healthy and robust and would be easily able to mount chemical defences against infestation. If insects paid attention to such advertisements, they might be prompted to lay their eggs on a duller, and presumably less resistant host. The flaw in this theory lies in the lack of proof to support it. No one has as yet ascertained whether more robust trees sport the brightest leaves, or whether insects make choices according to colour intensity. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion as to why leaves would go to the trouble of making anthocyanins when theyre busy packing up for the winter is the theory known as the light screen hypothesis. It sounds paradoxical, because the idea behind this hypothesis is that the red pigment is made in autumn leaves to protect chlorophyll, the light-absorbing chemical, from too much light. Why does chlorophyll need protection when it is the natural worlds supreme light absorber? Why protect chlorophyll at a time when the tree is breaking it down to salvage as much of it as possible? Chlorophyll, although exquisitely evolved to capture the energy of sunlight, can sometimes be overwhelmed by it, especially in situations of drought, low temperatures, or nutrient deficiency. Moreover, the problem of oversensitivity to light is even more acute in the fall, when the leaf is busy preparing for winter by dismantling 56its internal machinery. The energy absorbed by the chlorophyll molecules of the unstable autumn leaf is not immediately channelled into useful products and processes, as it would be in an intact summer leaf. The weakened fall leaf then becomes vulnerable to the highly destructive effects of the oxygen created by the excited chlorophyll molecules. Even if you had never suspected that this is what was going on when leaves turn red, there are clues out there. One is straightforward: on many trees, the leaves that are the reddest are those on the side of the tree which gets most sun. Not only that, but the red is brighter on the upper side of the leaf. It has also been recognised for decades that the best conditions for intense red colours are dry, sunny days and coo nights, conditions that nicely match those that make leaves susceptible to excess light. And finally, trees such as maples usually get much redder the more north you travel in the northern hemisphere. Its colder there, theyre more stressed, their chlorophyll is more sensitive and it needs more sunblock. What is still not fully understood, however, is why some trees resort to producing red pigments while others dont bother, and simply reveal their orange or yellow hues. Do these trees have other means at their disposal to prevent overexposure to light in autumn? Their story, though not as spectacular to the eye, will surely turn out to be as subtle and as complex. | The light screen hypothesis would initially seem to contradict what is known about chlorophyll. | e |
id_1117 | Autumn leaves Canadian writer Jay Ingram investigates the mystery of why leaves turn red in the fall One of the most captivating natural events of the year in many areas throughout North America is the turning of the leaves in the fall. The colours are magnificent, but the question of exactly why some trees turn yellow or orange, and others red or purple, is something which has long puzzled scientists. Summer leaves are green because they are full of chlorophyll, the molecule that captures sunlight converts that energy into new building materials for the tree. As fall approaches in the northern hemisphere, the amount of solar energy available declines considerably. For many trees evergreen conifers being an exception the best strategy is to abandon photosynthesis* until the spring. So rather than maintaining the now redundant leaves throughout the winter, the tree saves its precious resources and discards them. But before letting its leaves go, the tree dismantles their chlorophyll molecules and ships their valuable nitrogen back into the twigs. As chlorophyll is depleted, other colours that have been dominated by it throughout the summer begin to be revealed. This unmasking explains the autumn colours of yellow and orange, but not the brilliant reds and purples of trees such as the maple or sumac. The source of the red is widely known: it is created by anthocyanins, water-soluble plant pigments reflecting the red to blue range of the visible spectrum. They belong to a class of sugar-based chemical compounds also known as flavonoids. Whats puzzling is that anthocyanins are actually newly minted, made in the leaves at the same time as the tree is preparing to drop them. But it is hard to make sense of the manufacture of anthocyanins why should a tree bother making new chemicals in its leaves when its already scrambling to withdraw and preserve the ones already there? Some theories about anthocyanins have argued that they might act as a chemical defence against attacks by insects or fungi, or that they might attract fruit-eating birds or increase a leafs tolerance to freezing. However there are problems with each of these theories, including the fact that leaves are red for such a relatively short period that the expense of energy needed to manufacture the anthocyanins would outweigh any anti-fungal or anti-herbivore activity achieved. * photosynthesis: the production of new material from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. It has also been proposed that trees may produce vivid red colours to convince herbivorous insects that they are healthy and robust and would be easily able to mount chemical defences against infestation. If insects paid attention to such advertisements, they might be prompted to lay their eggs on a duller, and presumably less resistant host. The flaw in this theory lies in the lack of proof to support it. No one has as yet ascertained whether more robust trees sport the brightest leaves, or whether insects make choices according to colour intensity. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion as to why leaves would go to the trouble of making anthocyanins when theyre busy packing up for the winter is the theory known as the light screen hypothesis. It sounds paradoxical, because the idea behind this hypothesis is that the red pigment is made in autumn leaves to protect chlorophyll, the light-absorbing chemical, from too much light. Why does chlorophyll need protection when it is the natural worlds supreme light absorber? Why protect chlorophyll at a time when the tree is breaking it down to salvage as much of it as possible? Chlorophyll, although exquisitely evolved to capture the energy of sunlight, can sometimes be overwhelmed by it, especially in situations of drought, low temperatures, or nutrient deficiency. Moreover, the problem of oversensitivity to light is even more acute in the fall, when the leaf is busy preparing for winter by dismantling 56its internal machinery. The energy absorbed by the chlorophyll molecules of the unstable autumn leaf is not immediately channelled into useful products and processes, as it would be in an intact summer leaf. The weakened fall leaf then becomes vulnerable to the highly destructive effects of the oxygen created by the excited chlorophyll molecules. Even if you had never suspected that this is what was going on when leaves turn red, there are clues out there. One is straightforward: on many trees, the leaves that are the reddest are those on the side of the tree which gets most sun. Not only that, but the red is brighter on the upper side of the leaf. It has also been recognised for decades that the best conditions for intense red colours are dry, sunny days and coo nights, conditions that nicely match those that make leaves susceptible to excess light. And finally, trees such as maples usually get much redder the more north you travel in the northern hemisphere. Its colder there, theyre more stressed, their chlorophyll is more sensitive and it needs more sunblock. What is still not fully understood, however, is why some trees resort to producing red pigments while others dont bother, and simply reveal their orange or yellow hues. Do these trees have other means at their disposal to prevent overexposure to light in autumn? Their story, though not as spectacular to the eye, will surely turn out to be as subtle and as complex. | It is likely that the red pigments help to protect the leaf from freezing temperatures. | c |
id_1118 | Autumn leaves Canadian writer Jay Ingram investigates the mystery of why leaves turn red in the fall One of the most captivating natural events of the year in many areas throughout North America is the turning of the leaves in the fall. The colours are magnificent, but the question of exactly why some trees turn yellow or orange, and others red or purple, is something which has long puzzled scientists. Summer leaves are green because they are full of chlorophyll, the molecule that captures sunlight converts that energy into new building materials for the tree. As fall approaches in the northern hemisphere, the amount of solar energy available declines considerably. For many trees evergreen conifers being an exception the best strategy is to abandon photosynthesis* until the spring. So rather than maintaining the now redundant leaves throughout the winter, the tree saves its precious resources and discards them. But before letting its leaves go, the tree dismantles their chlorophyll molecules and ships their valuable nitrogen back into the twigs. As chlorophyll is depleted, other colours that have been dominated by it throughout the summer begin to be revealed. This unmasking explains the autumn colours of yellow and orange, but not the brilliant reds and purples of trees such as the maple or sumac. The source of the red is widely known: it is created by anthocyanins, water-soluble plant pigments reflecting the red to blue range of the visible spectrum. They belong to a class of sugar-based chemical compounds also known as flavonoids. Whats puzzling is that anthocyanins are actually newly minted, made in the leaves at the same time as the tree is preparing to drop them. But it is hard to make sense of the manufacture of anthocyanins why should a tree bother making new chemicals in its leaves when its already scrambling to withdraw and preserve the ones already there? Some theories about anthocyanins have argued that they might act as a chemical defence against attacks by insects or fungi, or that they might attract fruit-eating birds or increase a leafs tolerance to freezing. However there are problems with each of these theories, including the fact that leaves are red for such a relatively short period that the expense of energy needed to manufacture the anthocyanins would outweigh any anti-fungal or anti-herbivore activity achieved. * photosynthesis: the production of new material from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. It has also been proposed that trees may produce vivid red colours to convince herbivorous insects that they are healthy and robust and would be easily able to mount chemical defences against infestation. If insects paid attention to such advertisements, they might be prompted to lay their eggs on a duller, and presumably less resistant host. The flaw in this theory lies in the lack of proof to support it. No one has as yet ascertained whether more robust trees sport the brightest leaves, or whether insects make choices according to colour intensity. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion as to why leaves would go to the trouble of making anthocyanins when theyre busy packing up for the winter is the theory known as the light screen hypothesis. It sounds paradoxical, because the idea behind this hypothesis is that the red pigment is made in autumn leaves to protect chlorophyll, the light-absorbing chemical, from too much light. Why does chlorophyll need protection when it is the natural worlds supreme light absorber? Why protect chlorophyll at a time when the tree is breaking it down to salvage as much of it as possible? Chlorophyll, although exquisitely evolved to capture the energy of sunlight, can sometimes be overwhelmed by it, especially in situations of drought, low temperatures, or nutrient deficiency. Moreover, the problem of oversensitivity to light is even more acute in the fall, when the leaf is busy preparing for winter by dismantling 56its internal machinery. The energy absorbed by the chlorophyll molecules of the unstable autumn leaf is not immediately channelled into useful products and processes, as it would be in an intact summer leaf. The weakened fall leaf then becomes vulnerable to the highly destructive effects of the oxygen created by the excited chlorophyll molecules. Even if you had never suspected that this is what was going on when leaves turn red, there are clues out there. One is straightforward: on many trees, the leaves that are the reddest are those on the side of the tree which gets most sun. Not only that, but the red is brighter on the upper side of the leaf. It has also been recognised for decades that the best conditions for intense red colours are dry, sunny days and coo nights, conditions that nicely match those that make leaves susceptible to excess light. And finally, trees such as maples usually get much redder the more north you travel in the northern hemisphere. Its colder there, theyre more stressed, their chlorophyll is more sensitive and it needs more sunblock. What is still not fully understood, however, is why some trees resort to producing red pigments while others dont bother, and simply reveal their orange or yellow hues. Do these trees have other means at their disposal to prevent overexposure to light in autumn? Their story, though not as spectacular to the eye, will surely turn out to be as subtle and as complex. | Leaves which turn colours other than red are more likely to be damaged by sunlight. | n |
id_1119 | Autumn leaves. Canadian writer Jay Ingram investigates the mystery of why leaves turn red in the fall One of the most captivating natural events of the year in many areas throughout North America is the turning of the leaves in the fall. The colours are magnificent, but the question of exactly why some trees turn yellow or orange, and others red or purple, is something which has long puzzled scientists. Summer leaves are green because they are full of chlorophyll, the molecule that captures sunlight and converts that energy into new building materials for the tree. As fall approaches in the northern hemisphere, the amount of solar energy available declines considerably. For many trees evergreen conifers being an exception the best strategy is to abandon photosynthesis* until the spring. So rather than maintaining the now redundant leaves throughout the winter, the tree saves its precious resources and discards them. But before letting its leaves go, the tree dismantles their chlorophyll molecules and ships their valuable nitrogen back into the twigs. As chlorophyll is depleted, other colours that have been dominated by it throughout the summer begin to be revealed. This unmasking explains the autumn colours of yellow and orange, but not the brilliant reds and purples of trees such as the maple or sumac. The source of the red is widely known: it is created by anthocyanins, water-soluble plant pigments reflecting the red to blue range of the visible spectrum. They belong to a class of sugar-based chemical compounds also known as flavonoids. Whats puzzling is that anthocyanins are actually newly minted, made in the leaves at the same time as the tree is preparing to drop them. But it is hard to make sense of the manufacture of anthocyanins why should a tree bother making new chemicals in its leaves when its already scrambling to withdraw and preserve the ones already there? Some theories about anthocyanins have argued that they might act as a chemical defence against attacks by insects or fungi, or that they might attract fruit-eating birds or increase a leafs tolerance to freezing. However there are problems with each of these theories, including the fact that leaves are red for such a relatively short period that the expense of energy needed to manufacture the anthocyanins would outweigh any anti-fungal or anti-herbivore activity achieved. * photosynthesis: the production of new material from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide It has also been proposed that trees may produce vivid red colours to convince herbivorous insects that they are healthy and robust and would be easily able to mount chemical defences against infestation. If insects paid attention to such advertisements, they might be prompted to lay their eggs on a duller, and presumably less resistant host. The flaw in this theory lies in the lack of proof to support it. No one has as yet ascertained whether more robust trees sport the brightest leaves, or whether insects make choices according to colour intensity. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion as to why leaves would go to the trouble of making anthocyanins when theyre busy packing up for the winter is the theory known as the light screen hypothesis. It sounds paradoxical, because the idea behind this hypothesis is that the red pigment is made in autumn leaves to protect chlorophyll, the light-absorbing chemical, from too much light. Why does chlorophyll need protection when it is the natural worlds supreme light absorber? Why protect chlorophyll at a time when the tree is breaking it down to salvage as much of it as possible? Chlorophyll, although exquisitely evolved to capture the energy of sunlight, can sometimes be overwhelmed by it, especially in situations of drought, low temperatures, or nutrient deficiency. Moreover, the problem of oversensitivity to light is even more acute in the fall, when the leaf is busy preparing for winter by dismantling its internal machinery. The energy absorbed by the chlorophyll molecules of the unstable autumn leaf is not immediately channelled into useful products and processes, as it would be in an intact summer leaf. The weakened fall leaf then becomes vulnerable to the highly destructive effects of the oxygen created by the excited chlorophyll molecules. H Even if you had never suspected that this is what was going on when leaves turn red, there are clues out there. One is straightforward: on many trees, the leaves that are the reddest are those on the side of the tree which gets most sun. Not only that, but the red is brighter on the upper side of the leaf. It has also been recognised for decades that the best conditions for intense red colours are dry, sunny days and cool nights, conditions that nicely match those that make leaves susceptible to excess light. And finally, trees such as maples usually get much redder the more north you travel in the northern hemisphere. Its colder there, theyre more stressed, their chlorophyll is more sensitive and it needs more sunblock. I What is still not fully understood, however, is why some trees resort to producing red pigments while others dont bother, and simply reveal their orange or yellow hues. Do these trees have other means at their disposal to prevent overexposure to light in autumn? Their story, though not as spectacular to the eye, will surely turn out to be as subtle and as complex. | Leaves which turn colours other than red are more likely to be damaged by sunlight. | n |
id_1120 | Autumn leaves. Canadian writer Jay Ingram investigates the mystery of why leaves turn red in the fall One of the most captivating natural events of the year in many areas throughout North America is the turning of the leaves in the fall. The colours are magnificent, but the question of exactly why some trees turn yellow or orange, and others red or purple, is something which has long puzzled scientists. Summer leaves are green because they are full of chlorophyll, the molecule that captures sunlight and converts that energy into new building materials for the tree. As fall approaches in the northern hemisphere, the amount of solar energy available declines considerably. For many trees evergreen conifers being an exception the best strategy is to abandon photosynthesis* until the spring. So rather than maintaining the now redundant leaves throughout the winter, the tree saves its precious resources and discards them. But before letting its leaves go, the tree dismantles their chlorophyll molecules and ships their valuable nitrogen back into the twigs. As chlorophyll is depleted, other colours that have been dominated by it throughout the summer begin to be revealed. This unmasking explains the autumn colours of yellow and orange, but not the brilliant reds and purples of trees such as the maple or sumac. The source of the red is widely known: it is created by anthocyanins, water-soluble plant pigments reflecting the red to blue range of the visible spectrum. They belong to a class of sugar-based chemical compounds also known as flavonoids. Whats puzzling is that anthocyanins are actually newly minted, made in the leaves at the same time as the tree is preparing to drop them. But it is hard to make sense of the manufacture of anthocyanins why should a tree bother making new chemicals in its leaves when its already scrambling to withdraw and preserve the ones already there? Some theories about anthocyanins have argued that they might act as a chemical defence against attacks by insects or fungi, or that they might attract fruit-eating birds or increase a leafs tolerance to freezing. However there are problems with each of these theories, including the fact that leaves are red for such a relatively short period that the expense of energy needed to manufacture the anthocyanins would outweigh any anti-fungal or anti-herbivore activity achieved. * photosynthesis: the production of new material from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide It has also been proposed that trees may produce vivid red colours to convince herbivorous insects that they are healthy and robust and would be easily able to mount chemical defences against infestation. If insects paid attention to such advertisements, they might be prompted to lay their eggs on a duller, and presumably less resistant host. The flaw in this theory lies in the lack of proof to support it. No one has as yet ascertained whether more robust trees sport the brightest leaves, or whether insects make choices according to colour intensity. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion as to why leaves would go to the trouble of making anthocyanins when theyre busy packing up for the winter is the theory known as the light screen hypothesis. It sounds paradoxical, because the idea behind this hypothesis is that the red pigment is made in autumn leaves to protect chlorophyll, the light-absorbing chemical, from too much light. Why does chlorophyll need protection when it is the natural worlds supreme light absorber? Why protect chlorophyll at a time when the tree is breaking it down to salvage as much of it as possible? Chlorophyll, although exquisitely evolved to capture the energy of sunlight, can sometimes be overwhelmed by it, especially in situations of drought, low temperatures, or nutrient deficiency. Moreover, the problem of oversensitivity to light is even more acute in the fall, when the leaf is busy preparing for winter by dismantling its internal machinery. The energy absorbed by the chlorophyll molecules of the unstable autumn leaf is not immediately channelled into useful products and processes, as it would be in an intact summer leaf. The weakened fall leaf then becomes vulnerable to the highly destructive effects of the oxygen created by the excited chlorophyll molecules. H Even if you had never suspected that this is what was going on when leaves turn red, there are clues out there. One is straightforward: on many trees, the leaves that are the reddest are those on the side of the tree which gets most sun. Not only that, but the red is brighter on the upper side of the leaf. It has also been recognised for decades that the best conditions for intense red colours are dry, sunny days and cool nights, conditions that nicely match those that make leaves susceptible to excess light. And finally, trees such as maples usually get much redder the more north you travel in the northern hemisphere. Its colder there, theyre more stressed, their chlorophyll is more sensitive and it needs more sunblock. I What is still not fully understood, however, is why some trees resort to producing red pigments while others dont bother, and simply reveal their orange or yellow hues. Do these trees have other means at their disposal to prevent overexposure to light in autumn? Their story, though not as spectacular to the eye, will surely turn out to be as subtle and as complex. | The light screen hypothesis would initially seem to contradict what is known about chlorophyll. | e |
id_1121 | Autumn leaves. Canadian writer Jay Ingram investigates the mystery of why leaves turn red in the fall One of the most captivating natural events of the year in many areas throughout North America is the turning of the leaves in the fall. The colours are magnificent, but the question of exactly why some trees turn yellow or orange, and others red or purple, is something which has long puzzled scientists. Summer leaves are green because they are full of chlorophyll, the molecule that captures sunlight and converts that energy into new building materials for the tree. As fall approaches in the northern hemisphere, the amount of solar energy available declines considerably. For many trees evergreen conifers being an exception the best strategy is to abandon photosynthesis* until the spring. So rather than maintaining the now redundant leaves throughout the winter, the tree saves its precious resources and discards them. But before letting its leaves go, the tree dismantles their chlorophyll molecules and ships their valuable nitrogen back into the twigs. As chlorophyll is depleted, other colours that have been dominated by it throughout the summer begin to be revealed. This unmasking explains the autumn colours of yellow and orange, but not the brilliant reds and purples of trees such as the maple or sumac. The source of the red is widely known: it is created by anthocyanins, water-soluble plant pigments reflecting the red to blue range of the visible spectrum. They belong to a class of sugar-based chemical compounds also known as flavonoids. Whats puzzling is that anthocyanins are actually newly minted, made in the leaves at the same time as the tree is preparing to drop them. But it is hard to make sense of the manufacture of anthocyanins why should a tree bother making new chemicals in its leaves when its already scrambling to withdraw and preserve the ones already there? Some theories about anthocyanins have argued that they might act as a chemical defence against attacks by insects or fungi, or that they might attract fruit-eating birds or increase a leafs tolerance to freezing. However there are problems with each of these theories, including the fact that leaves are red for such a relatively short period that the expense of energy needed to manufacture the anthocyanins would outweigh any anti-fungal or anti-herbivore activity achieved. * photosynthesis: the production of new material from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide It has also been proposed that trees may produce vivid red colours to convince herbivorous insects that they are healthy and robust and would be easily able to mount chemical defences against infestation. If insects paid attention to such advertisements, they might be prompted to lay their eggs on a duller, and presumably less resistant host. The flaw in this theory lies in the lack of proof to support it. No one has as yet ascertained whether more robust trees sport the brightest leaves, or whether insects make choices according to colour intensity. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion as to why leaves would go to the trouble of making anthocyanins when theyre busy packing up for the winter is the theory known as the light screen hypothesis. It sounds paradoxical, because the idea behind this hypothesis is that the red pigment is made in autumn leaves to protect chlorophyll, the light-absorbing chemical, from too much light. Why does chlorophyll need protection when it is the natural worlds supreme light absorber? Why protect chlorophyll at a time when the tree is breaking it down to salvage as much of it as possible? Chlorophyll, although exquisitely evolved to capture the energy of sunlight, can sometimes be overwhelmed by it, especially in situations of drought, low temperatures, or nutrient deficiency. Moreover, the problem of oversensitivity to light is even more acute in the fall, when the leaf is busy preparing for winter by dismantling its internal machinery. The energy absorbed by the chlorophyll molecules of the unstable autumn leaf is not immediately channelled into useful products and processes, as it would be in an intact summer leaf. The weakened fall leaf then becomes vulnerable to the highly destructive effects of the oxygen created by the excited chlorophyll molecules. H Even if you had never suspected that this is what was going on when leaves turn red, there are clues out there. One is straightforward: on many trees, the leaves that are the reddest are those on the side of the tree which gets most sun. Not only that, but the red is brighter on the upper side of the leaf. It has also been recognised for decades that the best conditions for intense red colours are dry, sunny days and cool nights, conditions that nicely match those that make leaves susceptible to excess light. And finally, trees such as maples usually get much redder the more north you travel in the northern hemisphere. Its colder there, theyre more stressed, their chlorophyll is more sensitive and it needs more sunblock. I What is still not fully understood, however, is why some trees resort to producing red pigments while others dont bother, and simply reveal their orange or yellow hues. Do these trees have other means at their disposal to prevent overexposure to light in autumn? Their story, though not as spectacular to the eye, will surely turn out to be as subtle and as complex. | It is likely that the red pigments help to protect the leaf from freezing temperatures. | c |
id_1122 | BIG ROCK CLIMBING CENTRE Big Rock Climbing Center is modern, friendly professionally run centre offering over 1,200 square metres of fantastic indoor climbing. We use trained and experienced instructors to give you the opportunity to learn and develop climbing skills, keep fit and have fun. Master our 11 m-high climbing walls using a rope harness, for an unbeatable sense of achievement. Or experience the thrills of climbing without any harness in our special low-level arena, which has foam mats on the floor is cushion any fall safety. Who is Big Rock for? Almost anyone can enjoy Big Rock. Previous climbing experience and specialist equipment are not required. You can come on your own or with friends and family comes as a fun alternative to the gym or for a special day out with the kids. If you are visiting the friends or family but not climbing, or just fancy coming to look, please feel free to relax in our excellent cafe overlooking the climbing areas. Mobile Climbing Wall Available on a day hire basis at any location, the big Rock mobile Climbing Wall is the perfect way to enhance any show festival or event. The mobile wall can be used indoors or outdoors and features four unique 7.3 m-high climbing faces designed to allow four people to climb simultaneously. Quick to set up and pack up, the mobile climbing wall is staffed by qualified and experienced climbing instructors, providing the opportunity to climb the wall in a controlled and safe environment. when considering what to wear, we have found that trousers and t-shirts are ideal. We will however, ask people to remove scarves. Most flat shoes are suitable as long as they are enclosed and support the foot. The mobile wall is very adaptable and can be operated in light rain and winds up to 50 kph. There are however, particular measures that we take in such conditions. What about hiring the mobile climbing wall for my school or college? As climbing is different from the usual team games practiced at schools, we have found that some students who dont usually like participating in sports are willing to have a go on the mobile climbing wall. If you are connected that some children may not want to take part because they feel nervous if they climb, then please be assured that our instructors will support then up to a level which they are comfortable with. They will still benefit greatly from the experience. | It is inadvisable for children who are afraid of heights to use the mobile climbing Wall. | c |
id_1123 | BIG ROCK CLIMBING CENTRE Big Rock Climbing Center is modern, friendly professionally run centre offering over 1,200 square metres of fantastic indoor climbing. We use trained and experienced instructors to give you the opportunity to learn and develop climbing skills, keep fit and have fun. Master our 11 m-high climbing walls using a rope harness, for an unbeatable sense of achievement. Or experience the thrills of climbing without any harness in our special low-level arena, which has foam mats on the floor is cushion any fall safety. Who is Big Rock for? Almost anyone can enjoy Big Rock. Previous climbing experience and specialist equipment are not required. You can come on your own or with friends and family comes as a fun alternative to the gym or for a special day out with the kids. If you are visiting the friends or family but not climbing, or just fancy coming to look, please feel free to relax in our excellent cafe overlooking the climbing areas. Mobile Climbing Wall Available on a day hire basis at any location, the big Rock mobile Climbing Wall is the perfect way to enhance any show festival or event. The mobile wall can be used indoors or outdoors and features four unique 7.3 m-high climbing faces designed to allow four people to climb simultaneously. Quick to set up and pack up, the mobile climbing wall is staffed by qualified and experienced climbing instructors, providing the opportunity to climb the wall in a controlled and safe environment. when considering what to wear, we have found that trousers and t-shirts are ideal. We will however, ask people to remove scarves. Most flat shoes are suitable as long as they are enclosed and support the foot. The mobile wall is very adaptable and can be operated in light rain and winds up to 50 kph. There are however, particular measures that we take in such conditions. What about hiring the mobile climbing wall for my school or college? As climbing is different from the usual team games practiced at schools, we have found that some students who dont usually like participating in sports are willing to have a go on the mobile climbing wall. If you are connected that some children may not want to take part because they feel nervous if they climb, then please be assured that our instructors will support then up to a level which they are comfortable with. They will still benefit greatly from the experience. | The mobile Climbing wall can only be used in dry, calm weather. | c |
id_1124 | BIG ROCK CLIMBING CENTRE Big Rock Climbing Center is modern, friendly professionally run centre offering over 1,200 square metres of fantastic indoor climbing. We use trained and experienced instructors to give you the opportunity to learn and develop climbing skills, keep fit and have fun. Master our 11 m-high climbing walls using a rope harness, for an unbeatable sense of achievement. Or experience the thrills of climbing without any harness in our special low-level arena, which has foam mats on the floor is cushion any fall safety. Who is Big Rock for? Almost anyone can enjoy Big Rock. Previous climbing experience and specialist equipment are not required. You can come on your own or with friends and family comes as a fun alternative to the gym or for a special day out with the kids. If you are visiting the friends or family but not climbing, or just fancy coming to look, please feel free to relax in our excellent cafe overlooking the climbing areas. Mobile Climbing Wall Available on a day hire basis at any location, the big Rock mobile Climbing Wall is the perfect way to enhance any show festival or event. The mobile wall can be used indoors or outdoors and features four unique 7.3 m-high climbing faces designed to allow four people to climb simultaneously. Quick to set up and pack up, the mobile climbing wall is staffed by qualified and experienced climbing instructors, providing the opportunity to climb the wall in a controlled and safe environment. when considering what to wear, we have found that trousers and t-shirts are ideal. We will however, ask people to remove scarves. Most flat shoes are suitable as long as they are enclosed and support the foot. The mobile wall is very adaptable and can be operated in light rain and winds up to 50 kph. There are however, particular measures that we take in such conditions. What about hiring the mobile climbing wall for my school or college? As climbing is different from the usual team games practiced at schools, we have found that some students who dont usually like participating in sports are willing to have a go on the mobile climbing wall. If you are connected that some children may not want to take part because they feel nervous if they climb, then please be assured that our instructors will support then up to a level which they are comfortable with. They will still benefit greatly from the experience. | When climbing at the big Rock Centre, it is compulsory to be attached by a rope. | c |
id_1125 | BIG ROCK CLIMBING CENTRE Big Rock Climbing Center is modern, friendly professionally run centre offering over 1,200 square metres of fantastic indoor climbing. We use trained and experienced instructors to give you the opportunity to learn and develop climbing skills, keep fit and have fun. Master our 11 m-high climbing walls using a rope harness, for an unbeatable sense of achievement. Or experience the thrills of climbing without any harness in our special low-level arena, which has foam mats on the floor is cushion any fall safety. Who is Big Rock for? Almost anyone can enjoy Big Rock. Previous climbing experience and specialist equipment are not required. You can come on your own or with friends and family comes as a fun alternative to the gym or for a special day out with the kids. If you are visiting the friends or family but not climbing, or just fancy coming to look, please feel free to relax in our excellent cafe overlooking the climbing areas. Mobile Climbing Wall Available on a day hire basis at any location, the big Rock mobile Climbing Wall is the perfect way to enhance any show festival or event. The mobile wall can be used indoors or outdoors and features four unique 7.3 m-high climbing faces designed to allow four people to climb simultaneously. Quick to set up and pack up, the mobile climbing wall is staffed by qualified and experienced climbing instructors, providing the opportunity to climb the wall in a controlled and safe environment. when considering what to wear, we have found that trousers and t-shirts are ideal. We will however, ask people to remove scarves. Most flat shoes are suitable as long as they are enclosed and support the foot. The mobile wall is very adaptable and can be operated in light rain and winds up to 50 kph. There are however, particular measures that we take in such conditions. What about hiring the mobile climbing wall for my school or college? As climbing is different from the usual team games practiced at schools, we have found that some students who dont usually like participating in sports are willing to have a go on the mobile climbing wall. If you are connected that some children may not want to take part because they feel nervous if they climb, then please be assured that our instructors will support then up to a level which they are comfortable with. They will still benefit greatly from the experience. | People can arrange to have a climbing session in their own garden if they wish. | e |
id_1126 | BIG ROCK CLIMBING CENTRE Big Rock Climbing Center is modern, friendly professionally run centre offering over 1,200 square metres of fantastic indoor climbing. We use trained and experienced instructors to give you the opportunity to learn and develop climbing skills, keep fit and have fun. Master our 11 m-high climbing walls using a rope harness, for an unbeatable sense of achievement. Or experience the thrills of climbing without any harness in our special low-level arena, which has foam mats on the floor is cushion any fall safety. Who is Big Rock for? Almost anyone can enjoy Big Rock. Previous climbing experience and specialist equipment are not required. You can come on your own or with friends and family comes as a fun alternative to the gym or for a special day out with the kids. If you are visiting the friends or family but not climbing, or just fancy coming to look, please feel free to relax in our excellent cafe overlooking the climbing areas. Mobile Climbing Wall Available on a day hire basis at any location, the big Rock mobile Climbing Wall is the perfect way to enhance any show festival or event. The mobile wall can be used indoors or outdoors and features four unique 7.3 m-high climbing faces designed to allow four people to climb simultaneously. Quick to set up and pack up, the mobile climbing wall is staffed by qualified and experienced climbing instructors, providing the opportunity to climb the wall in a controlled and safe environment. when considering what to wear, we have found that trousers and t-shirts are ideal. We will however, ask people to remove scarves. Most flat shoes are suitable as long as they are enclosed and support the foot. The mobile wall is very adaptable and can be operated in light rain and winds up to 50 kph. There are however, particular measures that we take in such conditions. What about hiring the mobile climbing wall for my school or college? As climbing is different from the usual team games practiced at schools, we have found that some students who dont usually like participating in sports are willing to have a go on the mobile climbing wall. If you are connected that some children may not want to take part because they feel nervous if they climb, then please be assured that our instructors will support then up to a level which they are comfortable with. They will still benefit greatly from the experience. | People who just want to watch the climbing can enter the Centre without paying. | n |
id_1127 | BIG ROCK CLIMBING CENTRE Big Rock Climbing Center is modern, friendly professionally run centre offering over 1,200 square metres of fantastic indoor climbing. We use trained and experienced instructors to give you the opportunity to learn and develop climbing skills, keep fit and have fun. Master our 11 m-high climbing walls using a rope harness, for an unbeatable sense of achievement. Or experience the thrills of climbing without any harness in our special low-level arena, which has foam mats on the floor is cushion any fall safety. Who is Big Rock for? Almost anyone can enjoy Big Rock. Previous climbing experience and specialist equipment are not required. You can come on your own or with friends and family comes as a fun alternative to the gym or for a special day out with the kids. If you are visiting the friends or family but not climbing, or just fancy coming to look, please feel free to relax in our excellent cafe overlooking the climbing areas. Mobile Climbing Wall Available on a day hire basis at any location, the big Rock mobile Climbing Wall is the perfect way to enhance any show festival or event. The mobile wall can be used indoors or outdoors and features four unique 7.3 m-high climbing faces designed to allow four people to climb simultaneously. Quick to set up and pack up, the mobile climbing wall is staffed by qualified and experienced climbing instructors, providing the opportunity to climb the wall in a controlled and safe environment. when considering what to wear, we have found that trousers and t-shirts are ideal. We will however, ask people to remove scarves. Most flat shoes are suitable as long as they are enclosed and support the foot. The mobile wall is very adaptable and can be operated in light rain and winds up to 50 kph. There are however, particular measures that we take in such conditions. What about hiring the mobile climbing wall for my school or college? As climbing is different from the usual team games practiced at schools, we have found that some students who dont usually like participating in sports are willing to have a go on the mobile climbing wall. If you are connected that some children may not want to take part because they feel nervous if they climb, then please be assured that our instructors will support then up to a level which they are comfortable with. They will still benefit greatly from the experience. | A certain item of clothing is forbidden for participants. | e |
id_1128 | BINGHAM REGIONAL COLLEGE International Students Orientation Programme What is it? It is a course which will introduce you to the College and to Bingham. It takes place in the week before term starts, from 24th 28th September inclusive, but you should plan to arrive in Bingham on the 22nd or 23rd September. Why do we think it is important? We want you to have the best possible start to your studies and you need to find out about all the opportunities that college life offers. This programme aims to help you do just that. It will enable you to get to know the College, its facilities and services. You will also have the chance to meet staff and students. How much will it cost? International students (non-European Union students) For those students who do not come from European Union (EU) countries, and who are not used to European culture and customs, the programme is very important and you are strongly advised to attend. Because of this, the cost of the programme, exclusive of accommodation, is built into your tuition fees. EU students EU students are welcome to take part in this programme for a fee of 195, exclusive of accommodation. Fees are not refundable. Accommodation costs (international and EU students) If you have booked accommodation for the year ahead (41 weeks) through the College in one of the College residences (Cambourne House, Hanley House, the Student Village or a College shared house), you do not have to pay extra for accommodation during the Orientation programme. If you have not booked accommodation in the College residences, you can ask us to pre-book accommodation for you for one week only (Orientation Programme week) in a hotel with other international students. The cost of accommodation for one week is approximately 165. Alternatively, you can arrange your own accommodation for that week in a flat, with friends or a local family. What is included during the programme? Meals: lunch and an evening meal are provided as part of the programme, beginning with supper on Sunday 23rd September and finishing with lunch at midday on Friday 28th September. Please note that breakfast is not available. Information sessions: including such topics as accommodation, health, religious matters, welfare, immigration, study skills, careers and other essential information. Social activities: including a welcome buffet and a half-day excursion round Bingham. Transport: between your accommodation and the main College campus, where activities will take place. | The cost of the programme for European Union students, excluding accommodation, is 195. | e |
id_1129 | BINGHAM REGIONAL COLLEGE International Students Orientation Programme What is it? It is a course which will introduce you to the College and to Bingham. It takes place in the week before term starts, from 24th 28th September inclusive, but you should plan to arrive in Bingham on the 22nd or 23rd September. Why do we think it is important? We want you to have the best possible start to your studies and you need to find out about all the opportunities that college life offers. This programme aims to help you do just that. It will enable you to get to know the College, its facilities and services. You will also have the chance to meet staff and students. How much will it cost? International students (non-European Union students) For those students who do not come from European Union (EU) countries, and who are not used to European culture and customs, the programme is very important and you are strongly advised to attend. Because of this, the cost of the programme, exclusive of accommodation, is built into your tuition fees. EU students EU students are welcome to take part in this programme for a fee of 195, exclusive of accommodation. Fees are not refundable. Accommodation costs (international and EU students) If you have booked accommodation for the year ahead (41 weeks) through the College in one of the College residences (Cambourne House, Hanley House, the Student Village or a College shared house), you do not have to pay extra for accommodation during the Orientation programme. If you have not booked accommodation in the College residences, you can ask us to pre-book accommodation for you for one week only (Orientation Programme week) in a hotel with other international students. The cost of accommodation for one week is approximately 165. Alternatively, you can arrange your own accommodation for that week in a flat, with friends or a local family. What is included during the programme? Meals: lunch and an evening meal are provided as part of the programme, beginning with supper on Sunday 23rd September and finishing with lunch at midday on Friday 28th September. Please note that breakfast is not available. Information sessions: including such topics as accommodation, health, religious matters, welfare, immigration, study skills, careers and other essential information. Social activities: including a welcome buffet and a half-day excursion round Bingham. Transport: between your accommodation and the main College campus, where activities will take place. | Some students are not charged extra for accommodation during the programme. | e |
id_1130 | BINGHAM REGIONAL COLLEGE International Students Orientation Programme What is it? It is a course which will introduce you to the College and to Bingham. It takes place in the week before term starts, from 24th 28th September inclusive, but you should plan to arrive in Bingham on the 22nd or 23rd September. Why do we think it is important? We want you to have the best possible start to your studies and you need to find out about all the opportunities that college life offers. This programme aims to help you do just that. It will enable you to get to know the College, its facilities and services. You will also have the chance to meet staff and students. How much will it cost? International students (non-European Union students) For those students who do not come from European Union (EU) countries, and who are not used to European culture and customs, the programme is very important and you are strongly advised to attend. Because of this, the cost of the programme, exclusive of accommodation, is built into your tuition fees. EU students EU students are welcome to take part in this programme for a fee of 195, exclusive of accommodation. Fees are not refundable. Accommodation costs (international and EU students) If you have booked accommodation for the year ahead (41 weeks) through the College in one of the College residences (Cambourne House, Hanley House, the Student Village or a College shared house), you do not have to pay extra for accommodation during the Orientation programme. If you have not booked accommodation in the College residences, you can ask us to pre-book accommodation for you for one week only (Orientation Programme week) in a hotel with other international students. The cost of accommodation for one week is approximately 165. Alternatively, you can arrange your own accommodation for that week in a flat, with friends or a local family. What is included during the programme? Meals: lunch and an evening meal are provided as part of the programme, beginning with supper on Sunday 23rd September and finishing with lunch at midday on Friday 28th September. Please note that breakfast is not available. Information sessions: including such topics as accommodation, health, religious matters, welfare, immigration, study skills, careers and other essential information. Social activities: including a welcome buffet and a half-day excursion round Bingham. Transport: between your accommodation and the main College campus, where activities will take place. | You can obtain breakfast at the College for an extra charge. | c |
id_1131 | BINGHAM REGIONAL COLLEGE International Students Orientation Programme What is it? It is a course which will introduce you to the College and to Bingham. It takes place in the week before term starts, from 24th 28th September inclusive, but you should plan to arrive in Bingham on the 22nd or 23rd September. Why do we think it is important? We want you to have the best possible start to your studies and you need to find out about all the opportunities that college life offers. This programme aims to help you do just that. It will enable you to get to know the College, its facilities and services. You will also have the chance to meet staff and students. How much will it cost? International students (non-European Union students) For those students who do not come from European Union (EU) countries, and who are not used to European culture and customs, the programme is very important and you are strongly advised to attend. Because of this, the cost of the programme, exclusive of accommodation, is built into your tuition fees. EU students EU students are welcome to take part in this programme for a fee of 195, exclusive of accommodation. Fees are not refundable. Accommodation costs (international and EU students) If you have booked accommodation for the year ahead (41 weeks) through the College in one of the College residences (Cambourne House, Hanley House, the Student Village or a College shared house), you do not have to pay extra for accommodation during the Orientation programme. If you have not booked accommodation in the College residences, you can ask us to pre-book accommodation for you for one week only (Orientation Programme week) in a hotel with other international students. The cost of accommodation for one week is approximately 165. Alternatively, you can arrange your own accommodation for that week in a flat, with friends or a local family. What is included during the programme? Meals: lunch and an evening meal are provided as part of the programme, beginning with supper on Sunday 23rd September and finishing with lunch at midday on Friday 28th September. Please note that breakfast is not available. Information sessions: including such topics as accommodation, health, religious matters, welfare, immigration, study skills, careers and other essential information. Social activities: including a welcome buffet and a half-day excursion round Bingham. Transport: between your accommodation and the main College campus, where activities will take place. | Participants are advised to arrive one or two days early. | e |
id_1132 | BINGHAM REGIONAL COLLEGE International Students Orientation Programme What is it? It is a course which will introduce you to the College and to Bingham. It takes place in the week before term starts, from 24th 28th September inclusive, but you should plan to arrive in Bingham on the 22nd or 23rd September. Why do we think it is important? We want you to have the best possible start to your studies and you need to find out about all the opportunities that college life offers. This programme aims to help you do just that. It will enable you to get to know the College, its facilities and services. You will also have the chance to meet staff and students. How much will it cost? International students (non-European Union students) For those students who do not come from European Union (EU) countries, and who are not used to European culture and customs, the programme is very important and you are strongly advised to attend. Because of this, the cost of the programme, exclusive of accommodation, is built into your tuition fees. EU students EU students are welcome to take part in this programme for a fee of 195, exclusive of accommodation. Fees are not refundable. Accommodation costs (international and EU students) If you have booked accommodation for the year ahead (41 weeks) through the College in one of the College residences (Cambourne House, Hanley House, the Student Village or a College shared house), you do not have to pay extra for accommodation during the Orientation programme. If you have not booked accommodation in the College residences, you can ask us to pre-book accommodation for you for one week only (Orientation Programme week) in a hotel with other international students. The cost of accommodation for one week is approximately 165. Alternatively, you can arrange your own accommodation for that week in a flat, with friends or a local family. What is included during the programme? Meals: lunch and an evening meal are provided as part of the programme, beginning with supper on Sunday 23rd September and finishing with lunch at midday on Friday 28th September. Please note that breakfast is not available. Information sessions: including such topics as accommodation, health, religious matters, welfare, immigration, study skills, careers and other essential information. Social activities: including a welcome buffet and a half-day excursion round Bingham. Transport: between your accommodation and the main College campus, where activities will take place. | The College will arrange accommodation with local families. | c |
id_1133 | BINGHAM REGIONAL COLLEGE International Students Orientation Programme What is it? It is a course which will introduce you to the College and to Bingham. It takes place in the week before term starts, from 24th 28th September inclusive, but you should plan to arrive in Bingham on the 22nd or 23rd September. Why do we think it is important? We want you to have the best possible start to your studies and you need to find out about all the opportunities that college life offers. This programme aims to help you do just that. It will enable you to get to know the College, its facilities and services. You will also have the chance to meet staff and students. How much will it cost? International students (non-European Union students) For those students who do not come from European Union (EU) countries, and who are not used to European culture and customs, the programme is very important and you are strongly advised to attend. Because of this, the cost of the programme, exclusive of accommodation, is built into your tuition fees. EU students EU students are welcome to take part in this programme for a fee of 195, exclusive of accommodation. Fees are not refundable. Accommodation costs (international and EU students) If you have booked accommodation for the year ahead (41 weeks) through the College in one of the College residences (Cambourne House, Hanley House, the Student Village or a College shared house), you do not have to pay extra for accommodation during the Orientation programme. If you have not booked accommodation in the College residences, you can ask us to pre-book accommodation for you for one week only (Orientation Programme week) in a hotel with other international students. The cost of accommodation for one week is approximately 165. Alternatively, you can arrange your own accommodation for that week in a flat, with friends or a local family. What is included during the programme? Meals: lunch and an evening meal are provided as part of the programme, beginning with supper on Sunday 23rd September and finishing with lunch at midday on Friday 28th September. Please note that breakfast is not available. Information sessions: including such topics as accommodation, health, religious matters, welfare, immigration, study skills, careers and other essential information. Social activities: including a welcome buffet and a half-day excursion round Bingham. Transport: between your accommodation and the main College campus, where activities will take place. | The number of places available is strictly limited. | n |
id_1134 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | The BPA hostels are managed by independent owners. | c |
id_1135 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | You can find BPA hostels in many different environments. | e |
id_1136 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | BPA hostels have the cheapest accommodation anywhere in the state. | e |
id_1137 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | There is an initial $20 registration fee. | c |
id_1138 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | BPA members who frequently use the hostels pay less than the normal fee. | e |
id_1139 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | Online bookings are more popular than telephone bookings. | n |
id_1140 | BPA The Backpackers Alliance The leading hostel network for independent travellers What is BPA? It is the largest group of backpacker-style accommodation providers in the state these are state-owned and operated so they all meet rigid criteria for health and safety. BPA Accommodation: We have over 200 listings to give you the best chance of finding the most suitable accommodation where you are most likely to enjoy it and that could be in the mountains, by the sea, in the bush, in the centre of a bustling city almost anywhere in the state! BPA prices are always the lowest order your BPA Accommodation Guide now and check it out! Membership: Join BPA and enjoy the benefits of registration. which include access to a variety of popular options: BPA online bookings Secure telephone bookings (you will NOT need to risk giving out your credit card details over the phone) Rating details (one to four stars) on all BPC accommodation You will also receive your BPA Club Card, which gives you Preferential regular-user rates once you have used our service 10 tunes, you become a loyal customer and enjoy an 8% discount on all bookings A $5 rebate on all online bookings (accommodation only) Guaranteed fixed prices (non-members must pay a higher casual rate which can change without notice) Deals and discounts on transport and activities (if booked through our website) Remember: Registration is free there are no hidden fees or commissions. However. there is a $20 processing fee for replacement of a lost or stolen card. Working holiday: BPA can assist you with this. We can advise you on travel, insurance, what to pack and what to expect. We can also help you find work close to the hostel of your choice by setting up interviews with local employers_ Well also arrange for you to attend at least one social event where you can meet fellow travellers and some of the residents from the area. | Local employers prefer to hire casual employees through BPA. | n |
id_1141 | BRIGHT LIGHT! , BUG CITY In the heart of Africa's savannah, there is a city built entirely from natural, biodegradable materials, and it's a model of sustainable development. Its curved walls, graceful arches and towers are rather beautiful too. It's no human city, of course. It's a termite mound. Unlibe termites and other nestbuilding insects, humans pay little attention to mahing buildings fit for their environments. As we wahe up to climate change and resource depletion, though, interest in how insects manage their built environments is growing, and we have a lot to learn. 'The building mechanisms and the design principles that mahe the properties of insect nests possible aren't well understood, ' says Guy Theraulaz of the Research Centre on Animal Cognition in France. That's not for want of trying. Research into termite mounds hiched off in the 1960s, when Swiss entomologist Martin Liischer made groundbreaking studies of nests created by termites of the genus Macrotermes on the plains of southern Africa. It was Liischer who suggested the chaotic-loohing mounds were in fact exquisitely engineered ecoconstructions. Specifically, he proposed an intimate connection between how the mounds are built and what the termites eat. Macrotermes species live on cellulose, a constituent of plant matter that humcn can't digest. In fact, neither can termites. They get round this by cultivating gardens for fungi, which can turn it into digestible nutrients. These areas must be well ventilated, their temperature and humidity closely controlled - no mean feat in the tropical climates in which termites live. In Liischer's theory, heat from the fungi's metabolism and the termites' bodies causes stagnant air, laden with carbon dioxide, to rise up a central chimney. From there it fans out through the porous walls of the mound, while new air is sucked in at the base. This simple and appealing idea spawned at least one artificial imitation: the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, designed by architect Mich Pearce, which boasts a termite-inspired ventilation and cooling system. It turns out, however, that few if any termite mounds worh this way. Scott Turner, a termite expert at The State University of New Vorh, and Rupert Soar of Freeform Engineering in Nottingham, UK, looked into the design principles of Macrotermes mounds in Namibia. They found that the mounds' walls are warmer than the central nest, which rules out the kind of buoyant outward flow of CO^-rich air proposed by Liischer. Indeed, injecting a tracer gas into the mound showed little evidence of steady, convective air circulation. Turner and Soar believe that termite mounds instead tap turbulence in the gusts of wind that hit them. A single breath of wind contains small eddies and currents that vary in speed and direction with different frequencies. The outer walls of the mounds are built to allow only eddies changing with low frequencies to penetrate deep within them. As the range of frequencies in the wind changes from gust to gust, the boundary between the stale air in the nest and the fresh air from outside moves about within the mounds' walls, allowing the two bodies of air to be exchanged. In essence, the mound functions as a giant lung. j This is very different to the way ventilation works in modern human buildings, where fresh air is blown 1 in through vents to flush stale air out. Turner thinks there's something to be gleaned from the termites' j approach. 'We could turn the whole idea of the wall on its head, ' he says. 'We shouldn't think of walls j as barriers to stop the outside getting in, but rather design them as adaptive, porous interfaces that regulate the exchange of heat and air between the inside and outside. Instead of opening a window to let fresh air in, it would be the wall that does it, but carefully filtered and managed the way termite mounds do it. ' Turner's ideas were among many discussed at a workshop on insect architecture organised by Theraulaz in Venice, Italy, last year. It aimed to pool understanding from a range of disciplines, from experts in insect behaviour to practising architects. 'Some real points of contact began to emerge/ says Turner. 'There was a prevailing idea among the biologists that architects could leam much from us. I think the opposite is also true. ' One theme was just how proficient termites are at adapting their buildings to local conditions. Termites in very hot climates, for example, embed their mounds deep in the soil - a hugely effective way of regulating temperature. 'As we come to understand more, it opens up a vast universe of new bio-inspired design principles, ' says Turner. Such approaches are the opposite of modem human ideas of design and control, in which a central blueprint is laid down in advance by an architect and rigidly stuck to. But Turner thinks we could find ourselves adopting a more insect-like approach as technological advances make it feasible. | Pearce's design in Zimbabwe was an attempt to put Liischer's ideas into practice. | e |
id_1142 | BRIGHT LIGHT! , BUG CITY In the heart of Africa's savannah, there is a city built entirely from natural, biodegradable materials, and it's a model of sustainable development. Its curved walls, graceful arches and towers are rather beautiful too. It's no human city, of course. It's a termite mound. Unlibe termites and other nestbuilding insects, humans pay little attention to mahing buildings fit for their environments. As we wahe up to climate change and resource depletion, though, interest in how insects manage their built environments is growing, and we have a lot to learn. 'The building mechanisms and the design principles that mahe the properties of insect nests possible aren't well understood, ' says Guy Theraulaz of the Research Centre on Animal Cognition in France. That's not for want of trying. Research into termite mounds hiched off in the 1960s, when Swiss entomologist Martin Liischer made groundbreaking studies of nests created by termites of the genus Macrotermes on the plains of southern Africa. It was Liischer who suggested the chaotic-loohing mounds were in fact exquisitely engineered ecoconstructions. Specifically, he proposed an intimate connection between how the mounds are built and what the termites eat. Macrotermes species live on cellulose, a constituent of plant matter that humcn can't digest. In fact, neither can termites. They get round this by cultivating gardens for fungi, which can turn it into digestible nutrients. These areas must be well ventilated, their temperature and humidity closely controlled - no mean feat in the tropical climates in which termites live. In Liischer's theory, heat from the fungi's metabolism and the termites' bodies causes stagnant air, laden with carbon dioxide, to rise up a central chimney. From there it fans out through the porous walls of the mound, while new air is sucked in at the base. This simple and appealing idea spawned at least one artificial imitation: the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, designed by architect Mich Pearce, which boasts a termite-inspired ventilation and cooling system. It turns out, however, that few if any termite mounds worh this way. Scott Turner, a termite expert at The State University of New Vorh, and Rupert Soar of Freeform Engineering in Nottingham, UK, looked into the design principles of Macrotermes mounds in Namibia. They found that the mounds' walls are warmer than the central nest, which rules out the kind of buoyant outward flow of CO^-rich air proposed by Liischer. Indeed, injecting a tracer gas into the mound showed little evidence of steady, convective air circulation. Turner and Soar believe that termite mounds instead tap turbulence in the gusts of wind that hit them. A single breath of wind contains small eddies and currents that vary in speed and direction with different frequencies. The outer walls of the mounds are built to allow only eddies changing with low frequencies to penetrate deep within them. As the range of frequencies in the wind changes from gust to gust, the boundary between the stale air in the nest and the fresh air from outside moves about within the mounds' walls, allowing the two bodies of air to be exchanged. In essence, the mound functions as a giant lung. j This is very different to the way ventilation works in modern human buildings, where fresh air is blown 1 in through vents to flush stale air out. Turner thinks there's something to be gleaned from the termites' j approach. 'We could turn the whole idea of the wall on its head, ' he says. 'We shouldn't think of walls j as barriers to stop the outside getting in, but rather design them as adaptive, porous interfaces that regulate the exchange of heat and air between the inside and outside. Instead of opening a window to let fresh air in, it would be the wall that does it, but carefully filtered and managed the way termite mounds do it. ' Turner's ideas were among many discussed at a workshop on insect architecture organised by Theraulaz in Venice, Italy, last year. It aimed to pool understanding from a range of disciplines, from experts in insect behaviour to practising architects. 'Some real points of contact began to emerge/ says Turner. 'There was a prevailing idea among the biologists that architects could leam much from us. I think the opposite is also true. ' One theme was just how proficient termites are at adapting their buildings to local conditions. Termites in very hot climates, for example, embed their mounds deep in the soil - a hugely effective way of regulating temperature. 'As we come to understand more, it opens up a vast universe of new bio-inspired design principles, ' says Turner. Such approaches are the opposite of modem human ideas of design and control, in which a central blueprint is laid down in advance by an architect and rigidly stuck to. But Turner thinks we could find ourselves adopting a more insect-like approach as technological advances make it feasible. | Turner and Soar's research disproved Liischer's theory | e |
id_1143 | BRIGHT LIGHT! , BUG CITY In the heart of Africa's savannah, there is a city built entirely from natural, biodegradable materials, and it's a model of sustainable development. Its curved walls, graceful arches and towers are rather beautiful too. It's no human city, of course. It's a termite mound. Unlibe termites and other nestbuilding insects, humans pay little attention to mahing buildings fit for their environments. As we wahe up to climate change and resource depletion, though, interest in how insects manage their built environments is growing, and we have a lot to learn. 'The building mechanisms and the design principles that mahe the properties of insect nests possible aren't well understood, ' says Guy Theraulaz of the Research Centre on Animal Cognition in France. That's not for want of trying. Research into termite mounds hiched off in the 1960s, when Swiss entomologist Martin Liischer made groundbreaking studies of nests created by termites of the genus Macrotermes on the plains of southern Africa. It was Liischer who suggested the chaotic-loohing mounds were in fact exquisitely engineered ecoconstructions. Specifically, he proposed an intimate connection between how the mounds are built and what the termites eat. Macrotermes species live on cellulose, a constituent of plant matter that humcn can't digest. In fact, neither can termites. They get round this by cultivating gardens for fungi, which can turn it into digestible nutrients. These areas must be well ventilated, their temperature and humidity closely controlled - no mean feat in the tropical climates in which termites live. In Liischer's theory, heat from the fungi's metabolism and the termites' bodies causes stagnant air, laden with carbon dioxide, to rise up a central chimney. From there it fans out through the porous walls of the mound, while new air is sucked in at the base. This simple and appealing idea spawned at least one artificial imitation: the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, designed by architect Mich Pearce, which boasts a termite-inspired ventilation and cooling system. It turns out, however, that few if any termite mounds worh this way. Scott Turner, a termite expert at The State University of New Vorh, and Rupert Soar of Freeform Engineering in Nottingham, UK, looked into the design principles of Macrotermes mounds in Namibia. They found that the mounds' walls are warmer than the central nest, which rules out the kind of buoyant outward flow of CO^-rich air proposed by Liischer. Indeed, injecting a tracer gas into the mound showed little evidence of steady, convective air circulation. Turner and Soar believe that termite mounds instead tap turbulence in the gusts of wind that hit them. A single breath of wind contains small eddies and currents that vary in speed and direction with different frequencies. The outer walls of the mounds are built to allow only eddies changing with low frequencies to penetrate deep within them. As the range of frequencies in the wind changes from gust to gust, the boundary between the stale air in the nest and the fresh air from outside moves about within the mounds' walls, allowing the two bodies of air to be exchanged. In essence, the mound functions as a giant lung. j This is very different to the way ventilation works in modern human buildings, where fresh air is blown 1 in through vents to flush stale air out. Turner thinks there's something to be gleaned from the termites' j approach. 'We could turn the whole idea of the wall on its head, ' he says. 'We shouldn't think of walls j as barriers to stop the outside getting in, but rather design them as adaptive, porous interfaces that regulate the exchange of heat and air between the inside and outside. Instead of opening a window to let fresh air in, it would be the wall that does it, but carefully filtered and managed the way termite mounds do it. ' Turner's ideas were among many discussed at a workshop on insect architecture organised by Theraulaz in Venice, Italy, last year. It aimed to pool understanding from a range of disciplines, from experts in insect behaviour to practising architects. 'Some real points of contact began to emerge/ says Turner. 'There was a prevailing idea among the biologists that architects could leam much from us. I think the opposite is also true. ' One theme was just how proficient termites are at adapting their buildings to local conditions. Termites in very hot climates, for example, embed their mounds deep in the soil - a hugely effective way of regulating temperature. 'As we come to understand more, it opens up a vast universe of new bio-inspired design principles, ' says Turner. Such approaches are the opposite of modem human ideas of design and control, in which a central blueprint is laid down in advance by an architect and rigidly stuck to. But Turner thinks we could find ourselves adopting a more insect-like approach as technological advances make it feasible. | Turner and Soar built a model termite mound to test their ideas. | n |
id_1144 | BRIGHT LIGHT! , BUG CITY In the heart of Africa's savannah, there is a city built entirely from natural, biodegradable materials, and it's a model of sustainable development. Its curved walls, graceful arches and towers are rather beautiful too. It's no human city, of course. It's a termite mound. Unlibe termites and other nestbuilding insects, humans pay little attention to mahing buildings fit for their environments. As we wahe up to climate change and resource depletion, though, interest in how insects manage their built environments is growing, and we have a lot to learn. 'The building mechanisms and the design principles that mahe the properties of insect nests possible aren't well understood, ' says Guy Theraulaz of the Research Centre on Animal Cognition in France. That's not for want of trying. Research into termite mounds hiched off in the 1960s, when Swiss entomologist Martin Liischer made groundbreaking studies of nests created by termites of the genus Macrotermes on the plains of southern Africa. It was Liischer who suggested the chaotic-loohing mounds were in fact exquisitely engineered ecoconstructions. Specifically, he proposed an intimate connection between how the mounds are built and what the termites eat. Macrotermes species live on cellulose, a constituent of plant matter that humcn can't digest. In fact, neither can termites. They get round this by cultivating gardens for fungi, which can turn it into digestible nutrients. These areas must be well ventilated, their temperature and humidity closely controlled - no mean feat in the tropical climates in which termites live. In Liischer's theory, heat from the fungi's metabolism and the termites' bodies causes stagnant air, laden with carbon dioxide, to rise up a central chimney. From there it fans out through the porous walls of the mound, while new air is sucked in at the base. This simple and appealing idea spawned at least one artificial imitation: the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, designed by architect Mich Pearce, which boasts a termite-inspired ventilation and cooling system. It turns out, however, that few if any termite mounds worh this way. Scott Turner, a termite expert at The State University of New Vorh, and Rupert Soar of Freeform Engineering in Nottingham, UK, looked into the design principles of Macrotermes mounds in Namibia. They found that the mounds' walls are warmer than the central nest, which rules out the kind of buoyant outward flow of CO^-rich air proposed by Liischer. Indeed, injecting a tracer gas into the mound showed little evidence of steady, convective air circulation. Turner and Soar believe that termite mounds instead tap turbulence in the gusts of wind that hit them. A single breath of wind contains small eddies and currents that vary in speed and direction with different frequencies. The outer walls of the mounds are built to allow only eddies changing with low frequencies to penetrate deep within them. As the range of frequencies in the wind changes from gust to gust, the boundary between the stale air in the nest and the fresh air from outside moves about within the mounds' walls, allowing the two bodies of air to be exchanged. In essence, the mound functions as a giant lung. j This is very different to the way ventilation works in modern human buildings, where fresh air is blown 1 in through vents to flush stale air out. Turner thinks there's something to be gleaned from the termites' j approach. 'We could turn the whole idea of the wall on its head, ' he says. 'We shouldn't think of walls j as barriers to stop the outside getting in, but rather design them as adaptive, porous interfaces that regulate the exchange of heat and air between the inside and outside. Instead of opening a window to let fresh air in, it would be the wall that does it, but carefully filtered and managed the way termite mounds do it. ' Turner's ideas were among many discussed at a workshop on insect architecture organised by Theraulaz in Venice, Italy, last year. It aimed to pool understanding from a range of disciplines, from experts in insect behaviour to practising architects. 'Some real points of contact began to emerge/ says Turner. 'There was a prevailing idea among the biologists that architects could leam much from us. I think the opposite is also true. ' One theme was just how proficient termites are at adapting their buildings to local conditions. Termites in very hot climates, for example, embed their mounds deep in the soil - a hugely effective way of regulating temperature. 'As we come to understand more, it opens up a vast universe of new bio-inspired design principles, ' says Turner. Such approaches are the opposite of modem human ideas of design and control, in which a central blueprint is laid down in advance by an architect and rigidly stuck to. But Turner thinks we could find ourselves adopting a more insect-like approach as technological advances make it feasible. | Turner lihens the mechanism for changing the air in the mound to an organ in the human body. | e |
id_1145 | BRIGHT LIGHT! , BUG CITY In the heart of Africa's savannah, there is a city built entirely from natural, biodegradable materials, and it's a model of sustainable development. Its curved walls, graceful arches and towers are rather beautiful too. It's no human city, of course. It's a termite mound. Unlibe termites and other nestbuilding insects, humans pay little attention to mahing buildings fit for their environments. As we wahe up to climate change and resource depletion, though, interest in how insects manage their built environments is growing, and we have a lot to learn. 'The building mechanisms and the design principles that mahe the properties of insect nests possible aren't well understood, ' says Guy Theraulaz of the Research Centre on Animal Cognition in France. That's not for want of trying. Research into termite mounds hiched off in the 1960s, when Swiss entomologist Martin Liischer made groundbreaking studies of nests created by termites of the genus Macrotermes on the plains of southern Africa. It was Liischer who suggested the chaotic-loohing mounds were in fact exquisitely engineered ecoconstructions. Specifically, he proposed an intimate connection between how the mounds are built and what the termites eat. Macrotermes species live on cellulose, a constituent of plant matter that humcn can't digest. In fact, neither can termites. They get round this by cultivating gardens for fungi, which can turn it into digestible nutrients. These areas must be well ventilated, their temperature and humidity closely controlled - no mean feat in the tropical climates in which termites live. In Liischer's theory, heat from the fungi's metabolism and the termites' bodies causes stagnant air, laden with carbon dioxide, to rise up a central chimney. From there it fans out through the porous walls of the mound, while new air is sucked in at the base. This simple and appealing idea spawned at least one artificial imitation: the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, designed by architect Mich Pearce, which boasts a termite-inspired ventilation and cooling system. It turns out, however, that few if any termite mounds worh this way. Scott Turner, a termite expert at The State University of New Vorh, and Rupert Soar of Freeform Engineering in Nottingham, UK, looked into the design principles of Macrotermes mounds in Namibia. They found that the mounds' walls are warmer than the central nest, which rules out the kind of buoyant outward flow of CO^-rich air proposed by Liischer. Indeed, injecting a tracer gas into the mound showed little evidence of steady, convective air circulation. Turner and Soar believe that termite mounds instead tap turbulence in the gusts of wind that hit them. A single breath of wind contains small eddies and currents that vary in speed and direction with different frequencies. The outer walls of the mounds are built to allow only eddies changing with low frequencies to penetrate deep within them. As the range of frequencies in the wind changes from gust to gust, the boundary between the stale air in the nest and the fresh air from outside moves about within the mounds' walls, allowing the two bodies of air to be exchanged. In essence, the mound functions as a giant lung. j This is very different to the way ventilation works in modern human buildings, where fresh air is blown 1 in through vents to flush stale air out. Turner thinks there's something to be gleaned from the termites' j approach. 'We could turn the whole idea of the wall on its head, ' he says. 'We shouldn't think of walls j as barriers to stop the outside getting in, but rather design them as adaptive, porous interfaces that regulate the exchange of heat and air between the inside and outside. Instead of opening a window to let fresh air in, it would be the wall that does it, but carefully filtered and managed the way termite mounds do it. ' Turner's ideas were among many discussed at a workshop on insect architecture organised by Theraulaz in Venice, Italy, last year. It aimed to pool understanding from a range of disciplines, from experts in insect behaviour to practising architects. 'Some real points of contact began to emerge/ says Turner. 'There was a prevailing idea among the biologists that architects could leam much from us. I think the opposite is also true. ' One theme was just how proficient termites are at adapting their buildings to local conditions. Termites in very hot climates, for example, embed their mounds deep in the soil - a hugely effective way of regulating temperature. 'As we come to understand more, it opens up a vast universe of new bio-inspired design principles, ' says Turner. Such approaches are the opposite of modem human ideas of design and control, in which a central blueprint is laid down in advance by an architect and rigidly stuck to. But Turner thinks we could find ourselves adopting a more insect-like approach as technological advances make it feasible. | Turner thinhs it unlihely that the termites' way of ventilating their mounds would worh in a human building. | c |
id_1146 | BRIGHT LIGHT! , BUG CITY In the heart of Africa's savannah, there is a city built entirely from natural, biodegradable materials, and it's a model of sustainable development. Its curved walls, graceful arches and towers are rather beautiful too. It's no human city, of course. It's a termite mound. Unlibe termites and other nestbuilding insects, humans pay little attention to mahing buildings fit for their environments. As we wahe up to climate change and resource depletion, though, interest in how insects manage their built environments is growing, and we have a lot to learn. 'The building mechanisms and the design principles that mahe the properties of insect nests possible aren't well understood, ' says Guy Theraulaz of the Research Centre on Animal Cognition in France. That's not for want of trying. Research into termite mounds hiched off in the 1960s, when Swiss entomologist Martin Liischer made groundbreaking studies of nests created by termites of the genus Macrotermes on the plains of southern Africa. It was Liischer who suggested the chaotic-loohing mounds were in fact exquisitely engineered ecoconstructions. Specifically, he proposed an intimate connection between how the mounds are built and what the termites eat. Macrotermes species live on cellulose, a constituent of plant matter that humcn can't digest. In fact, neither can termites. They get round this by cultivating gardens for fungi, which can turn it into digestible nutrients. These areas must be well ventilated, their temperature and humidity closely controlled - no mean feat in the tropical climates in which termites live. In Liischer's theory, heat from the fungi's metabolism and the termites' bodies causes stagnant air, laden with carbon dioxide, to rise up a central chimney. From there it fans out through the porous walls of the mound, while new air is sucked in at the base. This simple and appealing idea spawned at least one artificial imitation: the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, designed by architect Mich Pearce, which boasts a termite-inspired ventilation and cooling system. It turns out, however, that few if any termite mounds worh this way. Scott Turner, a termite expert at The State University of New Vorh, and Rupert Soar of Freeform Engineering in Nottingham, UK, looked into the design principles of Macrotermes mounds in Namibia. They found that the mounds' walls are warmer than the central nest, which rules out the kind of buoyant outward flow of CO^-rich air proposed by Liischer. Indeed, injecting a tracer gas into the mound showed little evidence of steady, convective air circulation. Turner and Soar believe that termite mounds instead tap turbulence in the gusts of wind that hit them. A single breath of wind contains small eddies and currents that vary in speed and direction with different frequencies. The outer walls of the mounds are built to allow only eddies changing with low frequencies to penetrate deep within them. As the range of frequencies in the wind changes from gust to gust, the boundary between the stale air in the nest and the fresh air from outside moves about within the mounds' walls, allowing the two bodies of air to be exchanged. In essence, the mound functions as a giant lung. j This is very different to the way ventilation works in modern human buildings, where fresh air is blown 1 in through vents to flush stale air out. Turner thinks there's something to be gleaned from the termites' j approach. 'We could turn the whole idea of the wall on its head, ' he says. 'We shouldn't think of walls j as barriers to stop the outside getting in, but rather design them as adaptive, porous interfaces that regulate the exchange of heat and air between the inside and outside. Instead of opening a window to let fresh air in, it would be the wall that does it, but carefully filtered and managed the way termite mounds do it. ' Turner's ideas were among many discussed at a workshop on insect architecture organised by Theraulaz in Venice, Italy, last year. It aimed to pool understanding from a range of disciplines, from experts in insect behaviour to practising architects. 'Some real points of contact began to emerge/ says Turner. 'There was a prevailing idea among the biologists that architects could leam much from us. I think the opposite is also true. ' One theme was just how proficient termites are at adapting their buildings to local conditions. Termites in very hot climates, for example, embed their mounds deep in the soil - a hugely effective way of regulating temperature. 'As we come to understand more, it opens up a vast universe of new bio-inspired design principles, ' says Turner. Such approaches are the opposite of modem human ideas of design and control, in which a central blueprint is laid down in advance by an architect and rigidly stuck to. But Turner thinks we could find ourselves adopting a more insect-like approach as technological advances make it feasible. | Turner believes that biologists have little to learn from architects. | c |
id_1147 | BURGHAM COLLEGE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT COURSE The course consists of three modules as described below: Module 1: Business Basics an introduction to the world of business, including an understanding of markets and market economies an understanding of the structures, cultures and functioning of business organisations an understanding of the complex nature of key business functions and processes an understanding of the processes and outcomes of organisational decision-making, that is, how organisational strategies both develop and diversify as well as the nature and role of policies which impact on business a range of important business graduate skills, which you can apply to your work directly Module 2: Business Advanced 1 This is an advanced course focusing on social impact management. In other words, you will study concepts and insights which are absolutely necessary for success in contemporary business management, where public pressure for corporations to address pressing social and environmental concerns is increasingly apparent. Module 2 prepares you to face precisely those challenges. Module 3: Business Advanced 2 Module 3 is a course that puts theory into practice, giving you the skills and knowledge to apply what you learn in your workplace, industry and career. Our programmers are developed with insights from leading industry experts and courses are taught by respected faculty who are active practitioners in the field of Business and Management. For more information on our business and management programmes, tuition fees, financial aid and scholarships, download our brochure or call one of our admissions tutors. | If you do the course, you will gain knowledge critical to success in todays business world. | e |
id_1148 | BURGHAM COLLEGE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT COURSE The course consists of three modules as described below: Module 1: Business Basics an introduction to the world of business, including an understanding of markets and market economies an understanding of the structures, cultures and functioning of business organisations an understanding of the complex nature of key business functions and processes an understanding of the processes and outcomes of organisational decision-making, that is, how organisational strategies both develop and diversify as well as the nature and role of policies which impact on business a range of important business graduate skills, which you can apply to your work directly Module 2: Business Advanced 1 This is an advanced course focusing on social impact management. In other words, you will study concepts and insights which are absolutely necessary for success in contemporary business management, where public pressure for corporations to address pressing social and environmental concerns is increasingly apparent. Module 2 prepares you to face precisely those challenges. Module 3: Business Advanced 2 Module 3 is a course that puts theory into practice, giving you the skills and knowledge to apply what you learn in your workplace, industry and career. Our programmers are developed with insights from leading industry experts and courses are taught by respected faculty who are active practitioners in the field of Business and Management. For more information on our business and management programmes, tuition fees, financial aid and scholarships, download our brochure or call one of our admissions tutors. | In todays business world, large businesses often find themselves increasingly in a position where they have to take a stand on serious ecological issues. | e |
id_1149 | BURGHAM COLLEGE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT COURSE The course consists of three modules as described below: Module 1: Business Basics an introduction to the world of business, including an understanding of markets and market economies an understanding of the structures, cultures and functioning of business organisations an understanding of the complex nature of key business functions and processes an understanding of the processes and outcomes of organisational decision-making, that is, how organisational strategies both develop and diversify as well as the nature and role of policies which impact on business a range of important business graduate skills, which you can apply to your work directly Module 2: Business Advanced 1 This is an advanced course focusing on social impact management. In other words, you will study concepts and insights which are absolutely necessary for success in contemporary business management, where public pressure for corporations to address pressing social and environmental concerns is increasingly apparent. Module 2 prepares you to face precisely those challenges. Module 3: Business Advanced 2 Module 3 is a course that puts theory into practice, giving you the skills and knowledge to apply what you learn in your workplace, industry and career. Our programmers are developed with insights from leading industry experts and courses are taught by respected faculty who are active practitioners in the field of Business and Management. For more information on our business and management programmes, tuition fees, financial aid and scholarships, download our brochure or call one of our admissions tutors. | There are special scholarships for university graduates. | n |
id_1150 | BURGHAM COLLEGE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT COURSE The course consists of three modules as described below: Module 1: Business Basics an introduction to the world of business, including an understanding of markets and market economies an understanding of the structures, cultures and functioning of business organisations an understanding of the complex nature of key business functions and processes an understanding of the processes and outcomes of organisational decision-making, that is, how organisational strategies both develop and diversify as well as the nature and role of policies which impact on business a range of important business graduate skills, which you can apply to your work directly Module 2: Business Advanced 1 This is an advanced course focusing on social impact management. In other words, you will study concepts and insights which are absolutely necessary for success in contemporary business management, where public pressure for corporations to address pressing social and environmental concerns is increasingly apparent. Module 2 prepares you to face precisely those challenges. Module 3: Business Advanced 2 Module 3 is a course that puts theory into practice, giving you the skills and knowledge to apply what you learn in your workplace, industry and career. Our programmers are developed with insights from leading industry experts and courses are taught by respected faculty who are active practitioners in the field of Business and Management. For more information on our business and management programmes, tuition fees, financial aid and scholarships, download our brochure or call one of our admissions tutors. | The course is entirely theoretical and does not offer work experience. | c |
id_1151 | BURGHAM COLLEGE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT COURSE The course consists of three modules as described below: Module 1: Business Basics an introduction to the world of business, including an understanding of markets and market economies an understanding of the structures, cultures and functioning of business organisations an understanding of the complex nature of key business functions and processes an understanding of the processes and outcomes of organisational decision-making, that is, how organisational strategies both develop and diversify as well as the nature and role of policies which impact on business a range of important business graduate skills, which you can apply to your work directly Module 2: Business Advanced 1 This is an advanced course focusing on social impact management. In other words, you will study concepts and insights which are absolutely necessary for success in contemporary business management, where public pressure for corporations to address pressing social and environmental concerns is increasingly apparent. Module 2 prepares you to face precisely those challenges. Module 3: Business Advanced 2 Module 3 is a course that puts theory into practice, giving you the skills and knowledge to apply what you learn in your workplace, industry and career. Our programmers are developed with insights from leading industry experts and courses are taught by respected faculty who are active practitioners in the field of Business and Management. For more information on our business and management programmes, tuition fees, financial aid and scholarships, download our brochure or call one of our admissions tutors. | The brochure includes information about on-campus accommodation. | n |
id_1152 | Bank A has announced reduction of half percentage on the interest rate on retail lending with immediate effect. | Other banks may also reduce the retail lending rates to be in competition. | n |
id_1153 | Bank A has announced reduction of half percentage on the interest rate on retail lending with immediate effect. | Bank A may be able to attract more customers for availing retail loans. | e |
id_1154 | Bank should always check financial status before lending money to a client. | Checking before lending would give a true picture of the client financial status | e |
id_1155 | Bank should always check financial status before lending money to a client. | Client sometimes may not present the correct picture of their ability to repay loan amount to the bank. Syndicate Bank (PO) | n |
id_1156 | Battery X lasts longer than Battery Y. Battery Y doesn't last as long as Battery Z. | Battery Z lasts longer than Battery X. | n |
id_1157 | Because the British government has never undertaken a large-scale campaign to 'put a Briton on the moon', few people know much about the British space programme. Unlike many other national space initiatives, the British space programme's official focus was always on unmanned satellite launches, and, in fact, the UK has banned human space flight since 1986. All British astronauts who have travelled in outer space during the ban have done so with funding from non-governmental sources, either as 'space tourists' or by acquiring American citizenship and joining the NASA programme. Interest in a British space programme, though, began much earlier. The British Interplanetary Society, founded in 1933, instigated early research in the field and developed the UK's military interest in a space programme. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the UK launched a number of satellites and rockets: some on the Isle of Wight, some in Woomera, Australia, where a joint Australia-UK weapons- and aerospace-testing facility was located. More than 6,000 rockets were launched from Woomera, including the hypersonic rocket Falstaff and the satellite-launching rocket Black Arrow. The Ariel programme saw the UK develop and launch six satellites from 1962 to 1979, in collaboration with NASA; the final four spacecraft in this series were designed and built in the UK. In this same era, the UK did not playa role in the 'Space Race' between the world's two military superpowers that led to the first men setting foot on the moon, in a series of American-commanded missions that captured the world's imagination from 1969 to 1972. Since the rise of manned space flight, both the USA and the Soviet Union (and, later, Russia) have included astronauts from Europe and other parts of the world on space missions. The official programme of UK satellite launches was cancelled in the early 1980s, but in 1985 the British National Space Centre was founded to coordinate UK space activities. Today, the UK Space Agency, founded in Wiltshire in 2010, has replaced the British National Space Centre and assumed responsibility for government policy and budgets for space exploration. In the next 20 years, the agency aims to increase the size of the UK space industry from 6 billion to 40 billion, creating over 30,000 jobs. Central to this plan is the new 40 million International Space Innovation Centre in Oxfordshire, which will investigate climate change and space system security. | Most UK rockets have been launched in Australia. | n |
id_1158 | Because the British government has never undertaken a large-scale campaign to 'put a Briton on the moon', few people know much about the British space programme. Unlike many other national space initiatives, the British space programme's official focus was always on unmanned satellite launches, and, in fact, the UK has banned human space flight since 1986. All British astronauts who have travelled in outer space during the ban have done so with funding from non-governmental sources, either as 'space tourists' or by acquiring American citizenship and joining the NASA programme. Interest in a British space programme, though, began much earlier. The British Interplanetary Society, founded in 1933, instigated early research in the field and developed the UK's military interest in a space programme. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the UK launched a number of satellites and rockets: some on the Isle of Wight, some in Woomera, Australia, where a joint Australia-UK weapons- and aerospace-testing facility was located. More than 6,000 rockets were launched from Woomera, including the hypersonic rocket Falstaff and the satellite-launching rocket Black Arrow. The Ariel programme saw the UK develop and launch six satellites from 1962 to 1979, in collaboration with NASA; the final four spacecraft in this series were designed and built in the UK. In this same era, the UK did not playa role in the 'Space Race' between the world's two military superpowers that led to the first men setting foot on the moon, in a series of American-commanded missions that captured the world's imagination from 1969 to 1972. Since the rise of manned space flight, both the USA and the Soviet Union (and, later, Russia) have included astronauts from Europe and other parts of the world on space missions. The official programme of UK satellite launches was cancelled in the early 1980s, but in 1985 the British National Space Centre was founded to coordinate UK space activities. Today, the UK Space Agency, founded in Wiltshire in 2010, has replaced the British National Space Centre and assumed responsibility for government policy and budgets for space exploration. In the next 20 years, the agency aims to increase the size of the UK space industry from 6 billion to 40 billion, creating over 30,000 jobs. Central to this plan is the new 40 million International Space Innovation Centre in Oxfordshire, which will investigate climate change and space system security. | The UK did not compete in the 'Space Race'. | e |
id_1159 | Because the British government has never undertaken a large-scale campaign to 'put a Briton on the moon', few people know much about the British space programme. Unlike many other national space initiatives, the British space programme's official focus was always on unmanned satellite launches, and, in fact, the UK has banned human space flight since 1986. All British astronauts who have travelled in outer space during the ban have done so with funding from non-governmental sources, either as 'space tourists' or by acquiring American citizenship and joining the NASA programme. Interest in a British space programme, though, began much earlier. The British Interplanetary Society, founded in 1933, instigated early research in the field and developed the UK's military interest in a space programme. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the UK launched a number of satellites and rockets: some on the Isle of Wight, some in Woomera, Australia, where a joint Australia-UK weapons- and aerospace-testing facility was located. More than 6,000 rockets were launched from Woomera, including the hypersonic rocket Falstaff and the satellite-launching rocket Black Arrow. The Ariel programme saw the UK develop and launch six satellites from 1962 to 1979, in collaboration with NASA; the final four spacecraft in this series were designed and built in the UK. In this same era, the UK did not playa role in the 'Space Race' between the world's two military superpowers that led to the first men setting foot on the moon, in a series of American-commanded missions that captured the world's imagination from 1969 to 1972. Since the rise of manned space flight, both the USA and the Soviet Union (and, later, Russia) have included astronauts from Europe and other parts of the world on space missions. The official programme of UK satellite launches was cancelled in the early 1980s, but in 1985 the British National Space Centre was founded to coordinate UK space activities. Today, the UK Space Agency, founded in Wiltshire in 2010, has replaced the British National Space Centre and assumed responsibility for government policy and budgets for space exploration. In the next 20 years, the agency aims to increase the size of the UK space industry from 6 billion to 40 billion, creating over 30,000 jobs. Central to this plan is the new 40 million International Space Innovation Centre in Oxfordshire, which will investigate climate change and space system security. | No Briton has set foot on the moon. | n |
id_1160 | Because the British government has never undertaken a large-scale campaign to 'put a Briton on the moon', few people know much about the British space programme. Unlike many other national space initiatives, the British space programme's official focus was always on unmanned satellite launches, and, in fact, the UK has banned human space flight since 1986. All British astronauts who have travelled in outer space during the ban have done so with funding from non-governmental sources, either as 'space tourists' or by acquiring American citizenship and joining the NASA programme. Interest in a British space programme, though, began much earlier. The British Interplanetary Society, founded in 1933, instigated early research in the field and developed the UK's military interest in a space programme. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the UK launched a number of satellites and rockets: some on the Isle of Wight, some in Woomera, Australia, where a joint Australia-UK weapons- and aerospace-testing facility was located. More than 6,000 rockets were launched from Woomera, including the hypersonic rocket Falstaff and the satellite-launching rocket Black Arrow. The Ariel programme saw the UK develop and launch six satellites from 1962 to 1979, in collaboration with NASA; the final four spacecraft in this series were designed and built in the UK. In this same era, the UK did not playa role in the 'Space Race' between the world's two military superpowers that led to the first men setting foot on the moon, in a series of American-commanded missions that captured the world's imagination from 1969 to 1972. Since the rise of manned space flight, both the USA and the Soviet Union (and, later, Russia) have included astronauts from Europe and other parts of the world on space missions. The official programme of UK satellite launches was cancelled in the early 1980s, but in 1985 the British National Space Centre was founded to coordinate UK space activities. Today, the UK Space Agency, founded in Wiltshire in 2010, has replaced the British National Space Centre and assumed responsibility for government policy and budgets for space exploration. In the next 20 years, the agency aims to increase the size of the UK space industry from 6 billion to 40 billion, creating over 30,000 jobs. Central to this plan is the new 40 million International Space Innovation Centre in Oxfordshire, which will investigate climate change and space system security. | Manned space flights will now launch from Oxfordshire. | c |
id_1161 | Bees knees Honey is making a comeback as a wound care product. The use of honey for medicinal purposes dates back to Egyptian times when it was used both topically and internally to treat a wide range of health problems ranging from skin infection to gaping wounds and stomach ulcers. However, modern civilisations have regarded honey more as foodstuff than as medicine. Today, medical-grade manuka honey from New Zealand is healing wounds where more conventional treatments have failed. It can be used on partial or full thickness wounds including pressure sores, leg ulcers, surgical wounds, burns and graft sites. The honey is applied directly to the wound bed followed by an occlusive dressing, or as top-up to a honey-impregnated wound dressing. Honey is able to clean wounds because the high sugar content provides an osmotic potential that draws moisture into the skin. Moisture management is a key feature of wound healing; the benefits of maintaining a warm, moist environment are widely accepted. Infection control is fundamental to wound care, and the high acidity or low pH of honey makes it bactericidal. Consequently, honey may be able to control wound infection where antibiotics have failed. Honey has anti-inflammatory properties and it reduces wound exudate, which if not contained can macerate the surrounding skin to increase the risk of infection. Honey treatments are generally well received by patients, who view them as a natural cure, although body temperature makes honey very runny, creating a sticky mess that may require more frequent dressing changes. The only contraindication to using honey is a known allergy to bee venom. Some patients may experience an increase in pain due to its osmotic action. Whilst eating honey is not an option for patients with diabetes, there are no reports of topical honey increasing blood glucose levels, though the manufacturers advise that these levels are closely monitored. | In ancient times honey was used more as a medicine than a foodstuff. | n |
id_1162 | Bees knees Honey is making a comeback as a wound care product. The use of honey for medicinal purposes dates back to Egyptian times when it was used both topically and internally to treat a wide range of health problems ranging from skin infection to gaping wounds and stomach ulcers. However, modern civilisations have regarded honey more as foodstuff than as medicine. Today, medical-grade manuka honey from New Zealand is healing wounds where more conventional treatments have failed. It can be used on partial or full thickness wounds including pressure sores, leg ulcers, surgical wounds, burns and graft sites. The honey is applied directly to the wound bed followed by an occlusive dressing, or as top-up to a honey-impregnated wound dressing. Honey is able to clean wounds because the high sugar content provides an osmotic potential that draws moisture into the skin. Moisture management is a key feature of wound healing; the benefits of maintaining a warm, moist environment are widely accepted. Infection control is fundamental to wound care, and the high acidity or low pH of honey makes it bactericidal. Consequently, honey may be able to control wound infection where antibiotics have failed. Honey has anti-inflammatory properties and it reduces wound exudate, which if not contained can macerate the surrounding skin to increase the risk of infection. Honey treatments are generally well received by patients, who view them as a natural cure, although body temperature makes honey very runny, creating a sticky mess that may require more frequent dressing changes. The only contraindication to using honey is a known allergy to bee venom. Some patients may experience an increase in pain due to its osmotic action. Whilst eating honey is not an option for patients with diabetes, there are no reports of topical honey increasing blood glucose levels, though the manufacturers advise that these levels are closely monitored. | The application of medical-grade manuka honey to a wound could render it sterile. | e |
id_1163 | Bees knees Honey is making a comeback as a wound care product. The use of honey for medicinal purposes dates back to Egyptian times when it was used both topically and internally to treat a wide range of health problems ranging from skin infection to gaping wounds and stomach ulcers. However, modern civilisations have regarded honey more as foodstuff than as medicine. Today, medical-grade manuka honey from New Zealand is healing wounds where more conventional treatments have failed. It can be used on partial or full thickness wounds including pressure sores, leg ulcers, surgical wounds, burns and graft sites. The honey is applied directly to the wound bed followed by an occlusive dressing, or as top-up to a honey-impregnated wound dressing. Honey is able to clean wounds because the high sugar content provides an osmotic potential that draws moisture into the skin. Moisture management is a key feature of wound healing; the benefits of maintaining a warm, moist environment are widely accepted. Infection control is fundamental to wound care, and the high acidity or low pH of honey makes it bactericidal. Consequently, honey may be able to control wound infection where antibiotics have failed. Honey has anti-inflammatory properties and it reduces wound exudate, which if not contained can macerate the surrounding skin to increase the risk of infection. Honey treatments are generally well received by patients, who view them as a natural cure, although body temperature makes honey very runny, creating a sticky mess that may require more frequent dressing changes. The only contraindication to using honey is a known allergy to bee venom. Some patients may experience an increase in pain due to its osmotic action. Whilst eating honey is not an option for patients with diabetes, there are no reports of topical honey increasing blood glucose levels, though the manufacturers advise that these levels are closely monitored. | Controlling moisture is the main aim of wound care. | c |
id_1164 | Bees knees Honey is making a comeback as a wound care product. The use of honey for medicinal purposes dates back to Egyptian times when it was used both topically and internally to treat a wide range of health problems ranging from skin infection to gaping wounds and stomach ulcers. However, modern civilisations have regarded honey more as foodstuff than as medicine. Today, medical-grade manuka honey from New Zealand is healing wounds where more conventional treatments have failed. It can be used on partial or full thickness wounds including pressure sores, leg ulcers, surgical wounds, burns and graft sites. The honey is applied directly to the wound bed followed by an occlusive dressing, or as top-up to a honey-impregnated wound dressing. Honey is able to clean wounds because the high sugar content provides an osmotic potential that draws moisture into the skin. Moisture management is a key feature of wound healing; the benefits of maintaining a warm, moist environment are widely accepted. Infection control is fundamental to wound care, and the high acidity or low pH of honey makes it bactericidal. Consequently, honey may be able to control wound infection where antibiotics have failed. Honey has anti-inflammatory properties and it reduces wound exudate, which if not contained can macerate the surrounding skin to increase the risk of infection. Honey treatments are generally well received by patients, who view them as a natural cure, although body temperature makes honey very runny, creating a sticky mess that may require more frequent dressing changes. The only contraindication to using honey is a known allergy to bee venom. Some patients may experience an increase in pain due to its osmotic action. Whilst eating honey is not an option for patients with diabetes, there are no reports of topical honey increasing blood glucose levels, though the manufacturers advise that these levels are closely monitored. | The possibility of a topical honey dressing increasing the blood sugar level in a patient with diabetes cannot be ruled out. | e |
id_1165 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | Rutherford had the help of other scientists to put forward his theory. | c |
id_1166 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The foundation of nuclear fission was built from the gold leaf experiment. | n |
id_1167 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The experiments of the previous scientist led to the development and guidance of the other. | c |
id_1168 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The Rutherford Atomic Model cannot be further improved. | c |
id_1169 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The deflection of the cathode ray by magnetism was the phenomenon that led JJ Thompson to develop the Plum Pudding model. | e |
id_1170 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The direction of particle deflection was determined using the cloud chamber. | e |
id_1171 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | James Chadwick named the neutron. | e |
id_1172 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | Most of the atom is empty space. | e |
id_1173 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | Previous to Leucippus and Democritus, no one had thought of the idea of the atom. | n |
id_1174 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | Rutherford is the father of nuclear physics. | c |
id_1175 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The gold leaf experiment was key in discovering the atomic nucleus. | e |
id_1176 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The positron also exists. | c |
id_1177 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | He never carried out his own experiments without assistance from others. | n |
id_1178 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | The experimental data from the gold leaf experiment led to the development of the Geiger counter. | n |
id_1179 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | Earnest Rutherford is from New Zealand. | n |
id_1180 | Before the 20 th century, relatively little was known about the atom. The concept that objects were made of smaller particles that could not become any smaller was theorised by two Greek philosophers; Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that if you keep cutting an object consistently, there will come a point where it will not be able to be cut any further. Therefore, the theory of the atom was established but it was not possible to explore it further. In 1897, JJ Thompson discovered the electron. He subjected a hot metal coil into an electric field, thereby producing the first cathode ray. Importantly, he noticed that the cathode ray could be deflected by a magnetic field, when viewed under a cloud chamber, and realised that it was negatively charged. As the atom is neutral, he proposed that there must be positively charged particles that give the atom an overall neutrality. JJ Thompson put forward the plumpudding model theory of the atom; that positively charged particles and negatively charged particles are mixed together in an infinitely small region of space. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford carried out the gold leaf experiment. He fired alpha particles at a gold leaf and found that although most of the alpha particles went through, some were deflected. Occasionally, he also saw a small spark upon collision. From this, he theorised that the atom cannot be a mixture of negatively and positively charged particles, but rather has a dense core of positively charged particles. He called these particles protons. He also realised that most of the atom is empty space. In 1932, James Chadwick performed an experiment that discovered the final component of the atom. On observation of alpha decay, he noticed that one of the particles being emitted was not deflected by a magnetic field, hence being neutrally charged. He called this particle the neutron. Thus, the Rutherford Model of the Atom was born; the protons and neutrons form the nucleus of the atom, which electrons in spinning in orbit. | He discovered that most of the atom is empty space. | e |
id_1181 | Beijing is the capital city of China. Formerly known as Peking, Beijing is one of the most populated cities in the world, with an estimated population of 19,612,368 people. Beijings Capital International Airport is the second busiest in the world. In addition the city is home to forty one of the Fortune Global 500 companies and over 100 of the largest companies in China, generating an average of 128.6 billion dollars a year. As one of the fastest developing super powers in the world, it is increasingly important for businesses to understand the cultural background existing in the Chinese business world. This allows for companies to promote their working relationship and increase profitability. | Beijing is home to the second largest airport in the world. | n |
id_1182 | Beijing is the capital city of China. Formerly known as Peking, Beijing is one of the most populated cities in the world, with an estimated population of 19,612,368 people. Beijings Capital International Airport is the second busiest in the world. In addition the city is home to forty one of the Fortune Global 500 companies and over 100 of the largest companies in China, generating an average of 128.6 billion dollars a year. As one of the fastest developing super powers in the world, it is increasingly important for businesses to understand the cultural background existing in the Chinese business world. This allows for companies to promote their working relationship and increase profitability. | Beijing is home to an estimated 128.6 million people. | c |
id_1183 | Beijing is the capital city of China. Formerly known as Peking, Beijing is one of the most populated cities in the world, with an estimated population of 19,612,368 people. Beijings Capital International Airport is the second busiest in the world. In addition the city is home to forty one of the Fortune Global 500 companies and over 100 of the largest companies in China, generating an average of 128.6 billion dollars a year. As one of the fastest developing super powers in the world, it is increasingly important for businesses to understand the cultural background existing in the Chinese business world. This allows for companies to promote their working relationship and increase profitability. | Beijing is one of the most populated cities in the world. | e |
id_1184 | Beijing is the capital city of China. Formerly known as Peking, Beijing is one of the most populated cities in the world, with an estimated population of 19,612,368 people. Beijings Capital International Airport is the second busiest in the world. In addition the city is home to forty one of the Fortune Global 500 companies and over 100 of the largest companies in China, generating an average of 128.6 billion dollars a year. As one of the fastest developing super powers in the world, it is increasingly important for businesses to understand the cultural background existing in the Chinese business world. This allows for companies to promote their working relationship and increase profitability. | Beijing is the most populated city in the world. | c |
id_1185 | Being Left-handed in a Right-handed World The world is designed for right-handed people. Why does a tenth of the population prefer the left? The probability that two right-handed people would have a left-handed child is only about 9.5 percent. The chance rises to 19.5 percent if one parent is a lefty and 26 percent if both parents are left-handed. The preference, however, could also stem from an infants imitation of his parents. To test genetic influence, starting in the 1970s British biologist Marian Annett of the University of Leicester hypothesized that no single gene determines handedness. Rather, during fetal development, a certain molecular factor helps to strengthen the brains left hemisphere, which increases the probability that the right hand will be dominant, because the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, and vice versa. Among the minority of people who lack this factor, handedness develops entirely by chance. Research conducted on twins complicates the theory, however. One in five sets of identical twins involves one right-handed and one left-handed person, despite the fact that their genetic material is the same. Genes, therefore, are not solely responsible for handedness. Genetic theory is also undermined by results from Peter Hepper and his team at Queens University in Belfast, Ireland. In 2004 the psychologists used ultrasound to show that by the 15th week of pregnancy, fetuses already have a preference as to which thumb they suck. In most cases, the preference continued after birth. At 15 weeks, though, the brain does not yet have control over the bodys limbs. Hepper speculates that fetuses tend to prefer whichever side of the body is developing quicker and that their movements, in turn, influence the brains development. Whether this early preference is temporary or holds up throughout development and infancy is unknown. Genetic predetermination is also contradicted by the widespread observation that children do not settle on either their right or left hand until they are two or three years old. But even if these correlations were true, they did not explain what actually causes left-handedness. Furthermore, specialization on either side of the body is common among animals. Cats will favor one paw over another when fishing toys out from under the couch. Horses stomp more frequently with one hoof than the other. Certain crabs motion predominantly with the left or right claw. In evolutionary terms, focusing power and dexterity in one limb is more efficient than having to train two, four or even eight limbs equally. Yet for most animals, the preference for one side or the other is seemingly random. The overwhelming dominance of the right hand is associated only with humans. That fact directs attention toward the brains two hemispheres and perhaps toward language. Interest in hemispheres dates back to at least 1836. That year, at a medical conference, French physician Marc Dax reported on an unusual commonality among his patients. During his many years as a country doctor, Dax had encountered more than 40 men and women for whom speech was difficult, the result of some kind of brain damage. What was unique was that every individual suffered damage to the left side of the brain. At the conference, Dax elaborated on his theory, stating that each half of the brain was responsible for certain functions and that the left hemisphere controlled speech. Other experts showed little interest in the Frenchmans ideas. Over time, however, scientists found more and more evidence of people experiencing speech difficulties following injury to the left brain. Patients with damage to the right hemisphere most often displayed disruptions in perception or concentration. Major advancements in understanding the brains asymmetry were made in the 1960s as a result of so-called split-brain surgery, developed to help patients with epilepsy. During this operation, doctors severed the corpus callosumthe nerve bundle that connects the two hemispheres. The surgical cut also stopped almost all normal communication between the two hemispheres, which offered researchers the opportunity to investigate each sides activity. In 1949 neurosurgeon Juhn Wada devised the first test to provide access to the brains functional organization of language. By injecting an anesthetic into the right or left carotid artery, Wada temporarily paralyzed one side of a healthy brain, enabling him to more closely study the other sides capabilities. Based on this approach, Brenda Milner and the late Theodore Rasmussen of the Montreal Neurological Institute published a major study in 1975 that confirmed the theory that country doctor Dax had formulated nearly 140 years earlier: in 96 percent of right-handed people, language is processed much more intensely in the left hemisphere. The correlation is not as clear in lefties, however. For two thirds of them, the left hemisphere is still the most active language processor. But for the remaining third, either the right side is dominant or both sides work equally, controlling different language functions. That last statistic has slowed acceptance of the notion that the predominance of right-handedness is driven by left-hemisphere dominance in language processing. It is not at all clear why language control should somehow have dragged the control of body movement with it. Some experts think one reason the left hemisphere reigns over language is because the organs of speech processingthe larynx and tongueare positioned on the bodys symmetry axis. Because these structures were centered, it may have been unclear, in evolutionary terms, which side of the brain should control them, and it seems unlikely that shared operation would result in smooth motor activity. Language and handedness could have developed preferentially for very different reasons as well. For example, some researchers, including evolutionary psychologist Michael C. Corballis of the University of Auckland in New Zealand, think that the origin of human speech lies in gestures. Gestures predated words and helped language emerge. If the left hemisphere began to dominate speech, it would have dominated gestures, too, and because the left brain controls the right side of the body, the right hand developed more strongly. Perhaps we will know more soon. In the meantime, we can revel in what, if any, differences handedness brings to our human talents. Popular wisdom says right-handed, left-brained people excel at logical, analytical thinking. Left-handed, right-brained individuals are thought to possess more creative skills and may be better at combining the functional features emergent in both sides of the brain. Yet some neuroscientists see such claims as pure speculation. Fewer scientists are ready to claim that left-handedness means greater creative potential. Yet lefties are prevalent among artists, composers and the generally acknowledged great political thinkers. Possibly if these individuals are among the lefties whose language abilities are evenly distributed between hemispheres, the intense interplay required could lead to unusual mental capabilities. Or perhaps some lefties become highly creative simply because they must be more clever to get by in our right-handed world. This battle, which begins during the very early stages of childhood, may lay the groundwork for exceptional achievements. | There tend to be more men with left-handedness than women. | n |
id_1186 | Being Left-handed in a Right-handed World The world is designed for right-handed people. Why does a tenth of the population prefer the left? The probability that two right-handed people would have a left-handed child is only about 9.5 percent. The chance rises to 19.5 percent if one parent is a lefty and 26 percent if both parents are left-handed. The preference, however, could also stem from an infants imitation of his parents. To test genetic influence, starting in the 1970s British biologist Marian Annett of the University of Leicester hypothesized that no single gene determines handedness. Rather, during fetal development, a certain molecular factor helps to strengthen the brains left hemisphere, which increases the probability that the right hand will be dominant, because the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, and vice versa. Among the minority of people who lack this factor, handedness develops entirely by chance. Research conducted on twins complicates the theory, however. One in five sets of identical twins involves one right-handed and one left-handed person, despite the fact that their genetic material is the same. Genes, therefore, are not solely responsible for handedness. Genetic theory is also undermined by results from Peter Hepper and his team at Queens University in Belfast, Ireland. In 2004 the psychologists used ultrasound to show that by the 15th week of pregnancy, fetuses already have a preference as to which thumb they suck. In most cases, the preference continued after birth. At 15 weeks, though, the brain does not yet have control over the bodys limbs. Hepper speculates that fetuses tend to prefer whichever side of the body is developing quicker and that their movements, in turn, influence the brains development. Whether this early preference is temporary or holds up throughout development and infancy is unknown. Genetic predetermination is also contradicted by the widespread observation that children do not settle on either their right or left hand until they are two or three years old. But even if these correlations were true, they did not explain what actually causes left-handedness. Furthermore, specialization on either side of the body is common among animals. Cats will favor one paw over another when fishing toys out from under the couch. Horses stomp more frequently with one hoof than the other. Certain crabs motion predominantly with the left or right claw. In evolutionary terms, focusing power and dexterity in one limb is more efficient than having to train two, four or even eight limbs equally. Yet for most animals, the preference for one side or the other is seemingly random. The overwhelming dominance of the right hand is associated only with humans. That fact directs attention toward the brains two hemispheres and perhaps toward language. Interest in hemispheres dates back to at least 1836. That year, at a medical conference, French physician Marc Dax reported on an unusual commonality among his patients. During his many years as a country doctor, Dax had encountered more than 40 men and women for whom speech was difficult, the result of some kind of brain damage. What was unique was that every individual suffered damage to the left side of the brain. At the conference, Dax elaborated on his theory, stating that each half of the brain was responsible for certain functions and that the left hemisphere controlled speech. Other experts showed little interest in the Frenchmans ideas. Over time, however, scientists found more and more evidence of people experiencing speech difficulties following injury to the left brain. Patients with damage to the right hemisphere most often displayed disruptions in perception or concentration. Major advancements in understanding the brains asymmetry were made in the 1960s as a result of so-called split-brain surgery, developed to help patients with epilepsy. During this operation, doctors severed the corpus callosumthe nerve bundle that connects the two hemispheres. The surgical cut also stopped almost all normal communication between the two hemispheres, which offered researchers the opportunity to investigate each sides activity. In 1949 neurosurgeon Juhn Wada devised the first test to provide access to the brains functional organization of language. By injecting an anesthetic into the right or left carotid artery, Wada temporarily paralyzed one side of a healthy brain, enabling him to more closely study the other sides capabilities. Based on this approach, Brenda Milner and the late Theodore Rasmussen of the Montreal Neurological Institute published a major study in 1975 that confirmed the theory that country doctor Dax had formulated nearly 140 years earlier: in 96 percent of right-handed people, language is processed much more intensely in the left hemisphere. The correlation is not as clear in lefties, however. For two thirds of them, the left hemisphere is still the most active language processor. But for the remaining third, either the right side is dominant or both sides work equally, controlling different language functions. That last statistic has slowed acceptance of the notion that the predominance of right-handedness is driven by left-hemisphere dominance in language processing. It is not at all clear why language control should somehow have dragged the control of body movement with it. Some experts think one reason the left hemisphere reigns over language is because the organs of speech processingthe larynx and tongueare positioned on the bodys symmetry axis. Because these structures were centered, it may have been unclear, in evolutionary terms, which side of the brain should control them, and it seems unlikely that shared operation would result in smooth motor activity. Language and handedness could have developed preferentially for very different reasons as well. For example, some researchers, including evolutionary psychologist Michael C. Corballis of the University of Auckland in New Zealand, think that the origin of human speech lies in gestures. Gestures predated words and helped language emerge. If the left hemisphere began to dominate speech, it would have dominated gestures, too, and because the left brain controls the right side of the body, the right hand developed more strongly. Perhaps we will know more soon. In the meantime, we can revel in what, if any, differences handedness brings to our human talents. Popular wisdom says right-handed, left-brained people excel at logical, analytical thinking. Left-handed, right-brained individuals are thought to possess more creative skills and may be better at combining the functional features emergent in both sides of the brain. Yet some neuroscientists see such claims as pure speculation. Fewer scientists are ready to claim that left-handedness means greater creative potential. Yet lefties are prevalent among artists, composers and the generally acknowledged great political thinkers. Possibly if these individuals are among the lefties whose language abilities are evenly distributed between hemispheres, the intense interplay required could lead to unusual mental capabilities. Or perhaps some lefties become highly creative simply because they must be more clever to get by in our right-handed world. This battle, which begins during the very early stages of childhood, may lay the groundwork for exceptional achievements. | Juhn Wada based his findings on his research of people with language problems. | n |
id_1187 | Being Left-handed in a Right-handed World The world is designed for right-handed people. Why does a tenth of the population prefer the left? The probability that two right-handed people would have a left-handed child is only about 9.5 percent. The chance rises to 19.5 percent if one parent is a lefty and 26 percent if both parents are left-handed. The preference, however, could also stem from an infants imitation of his parents. To test genetic influence, starting in the 1970s British biologist Marian Annett of the University of Leicester hypothesized that no single gene determines handedness. Rather, during fetal development, a certain molecular factor helps to strengthen the brains left hemisphere, which increases the probability that the right hand will be dominant, because the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, and vice versa. Among the minority of people who lack this factor, handedness develops entirely by chance. Research conducted on twins complicates the theory, however. One in five sets of identical twins involves one right-handed and one left-handed person, despite the fact that their genetic material is the same. Genes, therefore, are not solely responsible for handedness. Genetic theory is also undermined by results from Peter Hepper and his team at Queens University in Belfast, Ireland. In 2004 the psychologists used ultrasound to show that by the 15th week of pregnancy, fetuses already have a preference as to which thumb they suck. In most cases, the preference continued after birth. At 15 weeks, though, the brain does not yet have control over the bodys limbs. Hepper speculates that fetuses tend to prefer whichever side of the body is developing quicker and that their movements, in turn, influence the brains development. Whether this early preference is temporary or holds up throughout development and infancy is unknown. Genetic predetermination is also contradicted by the widespread observation that children do not settle on either their right or left hand until they are two or three years old. But even if these correlations were true, they did not explain what actually causes left-handedness. Furthermore, specialization on either side of the body is common among animals. Cats will favor one paw over another when fishing toys out from under the couch. Horses stomp more frequently with one hoof than the other. Certain crabs motion predominantly with the left or right claw. In evolutionary terms, focusing power and dexterity in one limb is more efficient than having to train two, four or even eight limbs equally. Yet for most animals, the preference for one side or the other is seemingly random. The overwhelming dominance of the right hand is associated only with humans. That fact directs attention toward the brains two hemispheres and perhaps toward language. Interest in hemispheres dates back to at least 1836. That year, at a medical conference, French physician Marc Dax reported on an unusual commonality among his patients. During his many years as a country doctor, Dax had encountered more than 40 men and women for whom speech was difficult, the result of some kind of brain damage. What was unique was that every individual suffered damage to the left side of the brain. At the conference, Dax elaborated on his theory, stating that each half of the brain was responsible for certain functions and that the left hemisphere controlled speech. Other experts showed little interest in the Frenchmans ideas. Over time, however, scientists found more and more evidence of people experiencing speech difficulties following injury to the left brain. Patients with damage to the right hemisphere most often displayed disruptions in perception or concentration. Major advancements in understanding the brains asymmetry were made in the 1960s as a result of so-called split-brain surgery, developed to help patients with epilepsy. During this operation, doctors severed the corpus callosumthe nerve bundle that connects the two hemispheres. The surgical cut also stopped almost all normal communication between the two hemispheres, which offered researchers the opportunity to investigate each sides activity. In 1949 neurosurgeon Juhn Wada devised the first test to provide access to the brains functional organization of language. By injecting an anesthetic into the right or left carotid artery, Wada temporarily paralyzed one side of a healthy brain, enabling him to more closely study the other sides capabilities. Based on this approach, Brenda Milner and the late Theodore Rasmussen of the Montreal Neurological Institute published a major study in 1975 that confirmed the theory that country doctor Dax had formulated nearly 140 years earlier: in 96 percent of right-handed people, language is processed much more intensely in the left hemisphere. The correlation is not as clear in lefties, however. For two thirds of them, the left hemisphere is still the most active language processor. But for the remaining third, either the right side is dominant or both sides work equally, controlling different language functions. That last statistic has slowed acceptance of the notion that the predominance of right-handedness is driven by left-hemisphere dominance in language processing. It is not at all clear why language control should somehow have dragged the control of body movement with it. Some experts think one reason the left hemisphere reigns over language is because the organs of speech processingthe larynx and tongueare positioned on the bodys symmetry axis. Because these structures were centered, it may have been unclear, in evolutionary terms, which side of the brain should control them, and it seems unlikely that shared operation would result in smooth motor activity. Language and handedness could have developed preferentially for very different reasons as well. For example, some researchers, including evolutionary psychologist Michael C. Corballis of the University of Auckland in New Zealand, think that the origin of human speech lies in gestures. Gestures predated words and helped language emerge. If the left hemisphere began to dominate speech, it would have dominated gestures, too, and because the left brain controls the right side of the body, the right hand developed more strongly. Perhaps we will know more soon. In the meantime, we can revel in what, if any, differences handedness brings to our human talents. Popular wisdom says right-handed, left-brained people excel at logical, analytical thinking. Left-handed, right-brained individuals are thought to possess more creative skills and may be better at combining the functional features emergent in both sides of the brain. Yet some neuroscientists see such claims as pure speculation. Fewer scientists are ready to claim that left-handedness means greater creative potential. Yet lefties are prevalent among artists, composers and the generally acknowledged great political thinkers. Possibly if these individuals are among the lefties whose language abilities are evenly distributed between hemispheres, the intense interplay required could lead to unusual mental capabilities. Or perhaps some lefties become highly creative simply because they must be more clever to get by in our right-handed world. This battle, which begins during the very early stages of childhood, may lay the groundwork for exceptional achievements. | The study of twins shows that genetic determinations not the only factor for left-handedness. | e |
id_1188 | Being Left-handed in a Right-handed World The world is designed for right-handed people. Why does a tenth of the population prefer the left? The probability that two right-handed people would have a left-handed child is only about 9.5 percent. The chance rises to 19.5 percent if one parent is a lefty and 26 percent if both parents are left-handed. The preference, however, could also stem from an infants imitation of his parents. To test genetic influence, starting in the 1970s British biologist Marian Annett of the University of Leicester hypothesized that no single gene determines handedness. Rather, during fetal development, a certain molecular factor helps to strengthen the brains left hemisphere, which increases the probability that the right hand will be dominant, because the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, and vice versa. Among the minority of people who lack this factor, handedness develops entirely by chance. Research conducted on twins complicates the theory, however. One in five sets of identical twins involves one right-handed and one left-handed person, despite the fact that their genetic material is the same. Genes, therefore, are not solely responsible for handedness. Genetic theory is also undermined by results from Peter Hepper and his team at Queens University in Belfast, Ireland. In 2004 the psychologists used ultrasound to show that by the 15th week of pregnancy, fetuses already have a preference as to which thumb they suck. In most cases, the preference continued after birth. At 15 weeks, though, the brain does not yet have control over the bodys limbs. Hepper speculates that fetuses tend to prefer whichever side of the body is developing quicker and that their movements, in turn, influence the brains development. Whether this early preference is temporary or holds up throughout development and infancy is unknown. Genetic predetermination is also contradicted by the widespread observation that children do not settle on either their right or left hand until they are two or three years old. But even if these correlations were true, they did not explain what actually causes left-handedness. Furthermore, specialization on either side of the body is common among animals. Cats will favor one paw over another when fishing toys out from under the couch. Horses stomp more frequently with one hoof than the other. Certain crabs motion predominantly with the left or right claw. In evolutionary terms, focusing power and dexterity in one limb is more efficient than having to train two, four or even eight limbs equally. Yet for most animals, the preference for one side or the other is seemingly random. The overwhelming dominance of the right hand is associated only with humans. That fact directs attention toward the brains two hemispheres and perhaps toward language. Interest in hemispheres dates back to at least 1836. That year, at a medical conference, French physician Marc Dax reported on an unusual commonality among his patients. During his many years as a country doctor, Dax had encountered more than 40 men and women for whom speech was difficult, the result of some kind of brain damage. What was unique was that every individual suffered damage to the left side of the brain. At the conference, Dax elaborated on his theory, stating that each half of the brain was responsible for certain functions and that the left hemisphere controlled speech. Other experts showed little interest in the Frenchmans ideas. Over time, however, scientists found more and more evidence of people experiencing speech difficulties following injury to the left brain. Patients with damage to the right hemisphere most often displayed disruptions in perception or concentration. Major advancements in understanding the brains asymmetry were made in the 1960s as a result of so-called split-brain surgery, developed to help patients with epilepsy. During this operation, doctors severed the corpus callosumthe nerve bundle that connects the two hemispheres. The surgical cut also stopped almost all normal communication between the two hemispheres, which offered researchers the opportunity to investigate each sides activity. In 1949 neurosurgeon Juhn Wada devised the first test to provide access to the brains functional organization of language. By injecting an anesthetic into the right or left carotid artery, Wada temporarily paralyzed one side of a healthy brain, enabling him to more closely study the other sides capabilities. Based on this approach, Brenda Milner and the late Theodore Rasmussen of the Montreal Neurological Institute published a major study in 1975 that confirmed the theory that country doctor Dax had formulated nearly 140 years earlier: in 96 percent of right-handed people, language is processed much more intensely in the left hemisphere. The correlation is not as clear in lefties, however. For two thirds of them, the left hemisphere is still the most active language processor. But for the remaining third, either the right side is dominant or both sides work equally, controlling different language functions. That last statistic has slowed acceptance of the notion that the predominance of right-handedness is driven by left-hemisphere dominance in language processing. It is not at all clear why language control should somehow have dragged the control of body movement with it. Some experts think one reason the left hemisphere reigns over language is because the organs of speech processingthe larynx and tongueare positioned on the bodys symmetry axis. Because these structures were centered, it may have been unclear, in evolutionary terms, which side of the brain should control them, and it seems unlikely that shared operation would result in smooth motor activity. Language and handedness could have developed preferentially for very different reasons as well. For example, some researchers, including evolutionary psychologist Michael C. Corballis of the University of Auckland in New Zealand, think that the origin of human speech lies in gestures. Gestures predated words and helped language emerge. If the left hemisphere began to dominate speech, it would have dominated gestures, too, and because the left brain controls the right side of the body, the right hand developed more strongly. Perhaps we will know more soon. In the meantime, we can revel in what, if any, differences handedness brings to our human talents. Popular wisdom says right-handed, left-brained people excel at logical, analytical thinking. Left-handed, right-brained individuals are thought to possess more creative skills and may be better at combining the functional features emergent in both sides of the brain. Yet some neuroscientists see such claims as pure speculation. Fewer scientists are ready to claim that left-handedness means greater creative potential. Yet lefties are prevalent among artists, composers and the generally acknowledged great political thinkers. Possibly if these individuals are among the lefties whose language abilities are evenly distributed between hemispheres, the intense interplay required could lead to unusual mental capabilities. Or perhaps some lefties become highly creative simply because they must be more clever to get by in our right-handed world. This battle, which begins during the very early stages of childhood, may lay the groundwork for exceptional achievements. | Marc Daxs report was widely accepted in his time. | c |
id_1189 | Being socially responsible is acting ethically and showing integrity. It directly affects our quality of life through such issues as human rights, working conditions, the environment, and corruption. It has traditionally been the sole responsibility of governments to police unethical behaviour. However, the public have realised the influence of corporations and, over the last ten years, the level of voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives that dictate the actions of corporations has increased. | Ten years ago, it was up to each corporation to decide whether they acted morally or not. | c |
id_1190 | Being socially responsible is acting ethically and showing integrity. It directly affects our quality of life through such issues as human rights, working conditions, the environment, and corruption. It has traditionally been the sole responsibility of governments to police unethical behaviour. However, the public have realised the influence of corporations and, over the last ten years, the level of voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives that dictate the actions of corporations has increased. | Corporations can influence the publics quality of life. | e |
id_1191 | Being socially responsible is acting ethically and showing integrity. It directly affects our quality of life through such issues as human rights, working conditions, the environment, and corruption. It has traditionally been the sole responsibility of governments to police unethical behaviour. However, the public have realised the influence of corporations and, over the last ten years, the level of voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives that dictate the actions of corporations has increased. | The ethical actions of corporations has changed over the last ten years. | e |
id_1192 | Being socially responsible is acting ethically and showing integrity. It directly affects our quality of life through such issues as human rights, working conditions, the environment, and corruption. It has traditionally been the sole responsibility of governments to police unethical behaviour. However, the public have realised the influence of corporations and, over the last ten years, the level of voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives that dictate the actions of corporations has increased. | Traditionally, the government have relied upon only the large corporations to help drive corporate social responsibility, whilst they concentrated on the smaller corporations. | c |
id_1193 | Being socially responsible is acting ethically and showing integrity. It directly affects our quality of life through such issues as human rights, working conditions, the environment, and corruption. It has traditionally been the sole responsibility of governments to police unethical behaviour. However, the public have realised the influence of corporations and, over the last ten years, the level of voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives that dictate the actions of corporations has increased. | Corporations can influence the publics quality of life. | e |
id_1194 | Being socially responsible is acting ethically and showing integrity. It directly affects our quality of life through such issues as human rights, working conditions, the environment, and corruption. It has traditionally been the sole responsibility of governments to police unethical behaviour. However, the public have realised the influence of corporations and, over the last ten years, the level of voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives that dictate the actions of corporations has increased. | The ethical actions of corporations has changed over the last ten years. | e |
id_1195 | Belize is a country located on the north eastern coast of Central America, well known for its diversity, both culturally and biologically. | Belize is home to a wide variety of wildlife. | e |
id_1196 | Belize is a country located on the north eastern coast of Central America, well known for its diversity, both culturally and biologically. | Belize is a South American country. | n |
id_1197 | Belize is a country located on the north eastern coast of Central America, well known for its diversity, both culturally and biologically. | Belize is located near an ocean or sea. | e |
id_1198 | Beneficence In the 18th century, there were great improvements in surgery, midwifery and hygiene. In London between 1720 and 1745, Guys, Westminster, St Georges, the London and Middlesex general hospitals were all founded. Other hospitals were established in Exeter (1741), Bristol (1733), Liverpool (1745) and York (1740). In the course of 125 years after 1700, at least 154 new hospitals and dispensaries were founded in towns across Britain. These were not municipal undertakings; they were benevolent efforts that relied on voluntary contributions and bequests. It worked well for 250 years prior to the creation of the NHS in 1948. The first medical school in England was the London Hospital medical college founded in 1785. The teaching and practice of medicine and surgery were improving, but treatments remained limited, encouraging medical fakers with homemade remedies. There was minimal knowledge of the disease process, and diagnosis remained poor, so the same medication was given regardless of the ailment. The most popular treatment was laudanum, a mixture of an opiate-based drug and alcohol, prescribed for pain relief and common ailments such as headaches and diarrhoea. Unfortunately some people became dependent on it and died from overdoses. Anaesthetics (chloroform and ether) were not used to relieve pain in surgery until 1847. Suturing of wounds was common practice, though needles and thread were not sterile, so infection was rife. Hygiene and infection control remained non-existent until the 1870s, when Louis Pasteurs germ theory of disease had become widely accepted. A Scottish surgeon named Joseph Lister atomized carbolic acid (phenol) for use as an anti- septic, leading to a major decline in blood poisoning following surgery, which had normally proved fatal. The hygiene and nursing practices of Florence Nightingale were adopted by hospitals and led to a reduction in cross-infection and an improvement in recovery rates. | On average at least one new hospital per year was founded in Britain between 1700 and 1825. | n |
id_1199 | Beneficence In the 18th century, there were great improvements in surgery, midwifery and hygiene. In London between 1720 and 1745, Guys, Westminster, St Georges, the London and Middlesex general hospitals were all founded. Other hospitals were established in Exeter (1741), Bristol (1733), Liverpool (1745) and York (1740). In the course of 125 years after 1700, at least 154 new hospitals and dispensaries were founded in towns across Britain. These were not municipal undertakings; they were benevolent efforts that relied on voluntary contributions and bequests. It worked well for 250 years prior to the creation of the NHS in 1948. The first medical school in England was the London Hospital medical college founded in 1785. The teaching and practice of medicine and surgery were improving, but treatments remained limited, encouraging medical fakers with homemade remedies. There was minimal knowledge of the disease process, and diagnosis remained poor, so the same medication was given regardless of the ailment. The most popular treatment was laudanum, a mixture of an opiate-based drug and alcohol, prescribed for pain relief and common ailments such as headaches and diarrhoea. Unfortunately some people became dependent on it and died from overdoses. Anaesthetics (chloroform and ether) were not used to relieve pain in surgery until 1847. Suturing of wounds was common practice, though needles and thread were not sterile, so infection was rife. Hygiene and infection control remained non-existent until the 1870s, when Louis Pasteurs germ theory of disease had become widely accepted. A Scottish surgeon named Joseph Lister atomized carbolic acid (phenol) for use as an anti- septic, leading to a major decline in blood poisoning following surgery, which had normally proved fatal. The hygiene and nursing practices of Florence Nightingale were adopted by hospitals and led to a reduction in cross-infection and an improvement in recovery rates. | In the 1870s the germs responsible for a disease could be identified. | c |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.