No.1 Hosting the Olympics has a lot of pros and cons. Write your opinion about this.
POINTS:infrastructure / economy / terrorism
No.2 Japan should increase the number of hydroelectric power generations. Do you agree or disagree with this idea?
POINTS: environment / stability /ecosystem
No3. Electric vehicles should be promoted. Do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
POINTS: fossil fuels / quiet electric motors / unaffordable
解答解説
No.1 Hosting the Olympics has a lot of pros and cons. Write your opinion about this.
No.1 解答例
I think hosting the Olympics is rather a good idea. I have two reasons for this view. First of all, the Olympics can boost the domestic economy. For example, there are a lot of financial benefits such as revenue from ticket sales, profit from tourism, job creation and so on. Besides, the Olympics will enhance the quality of life of the local people. Thanks to support from various organizations such as JOC, the host cities will improve infrastructures and citizens can use these facilities after the Olympics. In conclusion, for these reasons, I believe the Olympics should be held.
No.2 Japan should increase the number of hydroelectric power generations. Do you agree or disagree with this idea?
No.2 解答例
I agree with the idea that Japan should construct more hydroelectric power stations. Mainly I have two reasons for this view. In the first place, Hydroelectric power generation is environmentally friendly. It does not burn anything and prevent progress of global warming caused by greenhouse gases. Second, Hydroelectric power generation is rather stable. It eliminates the destabilizing factors of thermal power generation such as scarce reserves of fossil fuels. Considering these factors, I think Japan should promote hydroelectric power generation.
No.3 Electric vehicle should be promoted. Do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
No.3 解答例
I agree with the idea that electric vehicle should be promoted. I have two reasons for this view. First, electric vehicles are environmentally friendly. Unlike gasoline counterparts, electric vehicles with no combustion engine do not emit CO2 or pollutants into the air. Second, electric vehicles, which run on non-fossil fuels, rule out concerns about oil depletion. At this rate, we will not be able to use gasoline‐powered vehicle within this century, but we can use electric counterparts after exhaustion of petroleum. For the reasons above, I think electric vehicles should be spread as soon as possible.
-I insisted that he is innocent. (私は、彼が無罪であると主張した)
-He insists on freedom to express his opinions. (彼は発言の自由を主張する)
Claim
自分の意見を確固たる根拠なしに述べること
-She claimed that the manager had lied to her. (彼女は,その経営者が彼女に嘘をついたと主張した)
-He claimed that his answer was correct.(彼は、その答えは正しかったと主張した)
State
Insistのような強い主張の仕方とは違って,単に強く主張することなく何かを述べることです。
-He states that he knew nothing about the accident. (彼は、その事件について何も知らないと述べた)
-They stated their views. (彼らは、自分たちの意見をのべた)
Mention
これは言及するという意味を持ちますが、使い方には注意が必要です。
Mention には言及するという意味の中に簡潔に、手短に述べるという意味が含まれており、詳細を語るときにはmentionは使いません。また、insistのような強い主張とはまた違った表現になります.
-Tom mentioned the incedent to Mary. (トムはその出来事をメアリーに話した)
-I think that you mentioned that last week.(君その話、先週話してたと思うんだけど)
be used to 名詞で〜に慣れている。この表現はused to(かつては〜だった) という表現と勘違いしやすいので、注意しましょう。
attribute A to B で,Aの原因をBと考えるという意味になります。 因果関係を生む動詞は文章を読む上で非常に大事です。なぜなら、これだけで理由を説明するBecauseや、結果を表すthereforeと同じ意味になるのです。こうした語彙であれば、多くの人が注意している場合が多いですが、動詞の因果関係は見逃しがちです。パラフレーズを見抜くのであれば、確実に覚えておきたい表現でしょう。
文法の問題。副詞のenoughの使い方がわかるかどうかが鍵となります。副詞のenoughは形容詞を後ろから説明して、enoughの値がどれくらい十分なのかを説明しています。ここではyoung peopleがどれだけold(=mature)なのかということをto不定詞以降で表しています。
young people old enough to
下線部のstatistical illusionというのは、trueからの文章をさしています。このことから答えは3になります。
1が違う理由は、関係ないように見えて関係しているとは言っていません。むしろここでの論理は逆ですね。関係しているように見せて実際は関係ない事柄ということです。
2が違う理由はat a glanceだと関係しているように見えるので逆ですね。
4については、similar trendsというのが間違っています。simlar trendだとどっちかが上がった時に、どっちかも上がるという傾向でないとおかしいです。
設問4
これは文法問題です。 ought to have + vppという形がわからないと答えを導き出せません。すべきだったのにしなかったという意味になります。否定形と同じ扱いですね。それ以外の選択肢は実際に教訓を得たことになり現在法律が変わってないのと矛盾するのでバツになります。
設問5
これは知識問題ですので、日頃単語を覚える時に覚えてください。
設問6
this phenomenon(お酒を一つの場で過剰に摂取すること(以後A)) と the current laws(20歳から飲酒可,(以後B))の関係が [clear(誰がみても100%) のrelation なのか,以後①], [at least(最低限)のconnectedなのか,以後②]と言うのが問題になりますね。
まず空欄の前の方は、attribute (A) directly to (B) ではないといっていますので、at leastの方の選択肢が入ります。
①In july one of Taiwan’s top newspapers, United Daily News, published a story based on supposedly leaked minutes from a secret government meeting. ②America had asked Taiwan to manufacture biological weapons at a lab run by the island’s defence ministry, the report claimed. ③Taiwanese and American officials quickly denied it. ④The allegedly leaked minutes, it transpired, were not written in the usual style of Taiwanese government records. ⑤They were filled with official-sounding phrases used in mainland China, but not Taiwan. ⑥This was likely Chinese disinformation, Taiwanese officials said. ⑦Yet the story spread to Taiwanese talk shows and influencers. ⑧Within weeks it had evolved into a wilder claim: ⑧Taiwan was going to collect 150,000 samples of Taiwanese blood and hand them over to the Americans, so that they could develop a virus to kill Chinese people. 出典:”China is flooding Taiwan with disinformation”From The Economist