TEST 31 - KEY

TỔNG ĐIỂM TOÀN BÀI: (20 điểm)

I. LISTENING (25 câu x 0,16 = 4 điểm)

Part I: You will hear part of a conversation. Listen and complete the form below, using NO MORE THAN THREE
WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER for each answer.
1. Ricard 2. CZ8809 3. 12th September / 4. police report 5. minor
September 12/
12.09

Part 2. You will hear a radio interview with the gardening experts Jed and Helena Stone. For questions 6-10, choose
the answer (А, В, C or D) which fits best according to what you hear.

6. A 7. D 8. D 9. B 10. C

Part 3. You will hear Clare Martin talk about wildlife photography. Listen and indicate true (T) or false (F)
statements.

1. T 2. F 3. F 4. T 5. T

Part 4: Listen to a talk about language and complete the following sentences. Write NO MORE THAN
THREE WORDS taken from the recording for each blank.

1. Danish, Norwegian, 2. dubbing or 3. mutual 4. (state-sponsored) 5. European

Swedish subtitles intelligibility education colonization

6. legendary authors 7. apartment 8. consistent 9. murky 10. linguistic

inquiries grammatical rules continuum

II. LEXICO-GRAMMAR (50 câu x 0,12 = 6 điểm)

Part 1. (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

1. C 2. D 3. C 4. A 5. D 6.C 7.D

8. B 9. A 10. A 11.D 12.B 13. D 14. C

15. D 16.C 17.B 18.D 19.B 20.D 21.C

22.A 23.A 24.A 25.B

Part 2: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

1. over 2. about 3. through 4. across 5. out

6. over 7. off 8. down 9. along 10. with

1
Part 3: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)
1. preoccupation 2. outspoken 3. undercoat 4. immortalize 5. counter-productive

6. armistice 7. impoverished 8. reciprocity 9. sobriety 10. foolhardy

Part 4: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

Line Mistakes Correction

1 1. make do

3 2. studies learns

5 3. sufficient insufficient

6 4. using use

8 5.at on

III. READING (50 câu x 0,12 = 4,8 điểm)

Part 1: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)
1.C 2.C 3.B 4.C 5.C

6.A 7.A 8.C 9.B 10.D

Part 2: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

1. realize 2. recharge 3. time 4. movement 5. invention
6. draw 7. rely 8. supply 9. carry 10. useful

Part 3: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

1. ii 2. vi 3. iv 4. i 5. ix
6. v 7. F 8. F 9. NG 10.T

Part 4: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

1. B 2. D 3. C 4. A 5. A
6. B 7. A 8. D 9. A 10. B

Part 5: (Mỗi câu đúng: 0,12 điểm)

1. D 2. C 3. A 4. D 5. C

6. B 7. D 8. A 9. B 10. B

2
IV. WRITING (4 điểm)
Part 1: (0.5 điểm - Mỗi câu đúng: 0.1 điểm)

1. The inhabitants are nowhere near as badly off as they were 20 years ago.
2. By the time you arrive, the chairman will have left.
3. That her colleagues were so openly hostile towards her proposal was too difficult to understand.
4. We wouldn’t have been reimbursed if we hadn’t taken legal advice.
5. This isn’t the first time we’ve had arguments with that particular harbor master.

Part 2: (0.5 điểm - Mỗi câu đúng: 0.1 điểm)

1. I don’t know what prompted fred to make so extraordinary a decision.
2. Treating customers with a lack of efficiency reflects badly on the company.
3. Everything was planned with the utmost care by the organizers.
4. Coming second was (of) no consolation (to her) because winning was all that mattered to her.
5. I gave him my word (that) there would be no repetition of the situation in the future.

Part 3: (3 điểm) Giám khảo tự quyết định dựa vào các yêu cầu sau:
- Task Response (25%): fully addresses all parts of the task, presents a fully developed position in answer to the
question with relevant, fully extended and well supported ideas
- Coherence and Cohesion (25 %): links information and ideas logically, uses a range of cohesive devices
appropriately, presents a clear central topic within each paragraph.
- Lexical resources (25%): uses a wide range of vocabulary fluently and flexibly, uses some uncommon lexical items,
produces rare errors in spelling and/or word formation.
- Grammar/Structures (25%): Uses a wide range of structures accurately and flexibly with few errors or
inappropriateness.

LISTENING KEY AND TRANSCRIPTS :

Part I: You will hear part of a conversation. Listen and complete the form below, using NO MORE THAN THREE
WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER for each answer. (10pts)
1. Ricard 2. CZ8809 3. 12th September / 4. police report 5. minor
12.09

Assistant 1: Rawlings Insurance. Good morning. Can I help you?

Elisabeth: Oh, hello. I'm ringing to report an accident.
Assistant 1: A car accident?
Elisabeth: Yes.
Assistant 1: Just hold the line a moment please. I'm putting you through to our motor insurance department.
Assistant 2: Hello?
Elisabeth: Hello.
Assistant 2: I understand you want to report an accident?
Elisabeth: Yes. My car's been damaged - someone came out in front of me ...
Assistant 2: Could I just check a few personal details before we go any further?
Assistant: Oh yes, sorry.
Assistant 2: Your name, first of all.
Elisabeth: It's ELISABETH Ricard.
3
Assistant 2: Is that R-I-K-A-R-D?
Elisabeth: It's spelt with a C not a K.
Assistant 2: Oh, OK ... And your date of birth please?
Elisabeth: It's the eighth of October, 1975.
Assistant 2: ... And lastly, I just need to check your address.
Elisabeth: Oh, actually I moved house last month so the street name's different. It's 60 Forest Road. I think you've got
22 Ash Avenue on your records?
Assistant 2: I have. So, I'll just make a note of that ... That's fine ... And is that in the same town still? Callington?
Elisabeth: That's right.
Assistant 2: Right, now ... do you have your insurance policy in front of you?
Elisabeth: Yes, I do.
Assistant 2: Can you give me the policy number please? It's at the top.
Elisabeth: Oh yes. Five-oh-nine-two-four?
Assistant 2: It's in a box - it should start with letters ...
Elisabeth: Oh, C-Z- double eight-oh-nine?
Assistant 2: That's the one. And now I want to ask you about the accident itself. Is that OK?
Elisabeth: Yes, that's fine.
Assistant 2: First of all, did it happen today?
Elisabeth: No, it happened yesterday evening, but by the time I got home it was late, so I didn't call.
Assistant 2: That's not a problem. So ... let's see ... today's the thirteenth of September, so it happened on the twelfth. Is
that right?
Elisabeth: It is.
Assistant 2: Do you know approximately what time the accident occurred?
Elisabeth: Er ... oh dear ... I wasn't wearing a watch, and I was a bit shocked. But I'd say it was between 8.15 and 8.45.
Assistant 2: That's OK. I'll just record that it happened at about 8.30. It doesn't matter exactly ... And I don't suppose
you've got any supporting evidence have you? I mean witness statements, that kind of thing?
Elisabeth: I don't have witness statements I'm afraid, but I've got a police report. They came and measured up and
checked the marks on the road. But unfortunately nobody else was around at the time of the accident.
Assistant 2: Any hospital report?
Elisabeth: No.
Assistant 2: So I take it you don't have any medical problems then? Any injuries?
Elisabeth: Only minor ones. It was mainly the car that got damaged luckily.
Assistant 2: Absolutely. But we do recommend that you have a checkup anyway. Within twenty-four hours if possible.
Elisabeth: Yes, OK. I'll make an appointment today.
Assistant 2: Fine. And now, can you tell me what happened exactly? I'm going to make a few notes.
Part 2. You will hear a radio interview with the gardening experts Jed and Helena Stone. For questions 6-10, choose
the answer (А, В, C or D) which fits best according to what you hear. (10 pts)

6. A 7. D 8. D 9. B 10. C

4
Interviewer: Jed Stone’s best known now for his talents as a garden designer – but he and his wife Helena ran a highly
successful jewellery business in the nineteen nineties, which brought them fame and high living. Then they lost it all
and, some years later, bought a derelict house which they renovated and now together they’ve created a garden. They
join me in the studio today. You do seem to do most things in partnership, like the jewellery business, but using Jed’s
name. Why’s that? Helena?

Helena: Well, this is a bit of a bone of contention, actually. We have a friend in PR who said, “You have a great name,
Jed Stone. People would pay a fortune for such a good name.’ But, sadly, at the time, it never crossed my mind that I
wouldn’t get the credit for what we do, and that does get to me sometimes [1] – but, there again, I’m very bad at putting
myself forward. People see Jed as a figurehead, which is fine, actually, because I don’t enjoy being recognised or get
any thrill out of that, whereas Jed loves it.

Interviewer: Is that right, Jed?

Jed: Obviously, I’d love to say, ‘No, I don’t,’ but yeah, I do. Even as a child, I thought it must be marvellous to walk
down a street and have people know who you were. Ironically, that’s the worst of it now. It would be nice just to go and
buy a paper without somebody saying something. But I suppose I do like being a public figure. It gives me a sense that
I’ve done something people appreciate [2]. It doesn’t stop me doing anything, but it does modify how I do it.

Interviewer: But Helena, you did appear on our television screens briefly as a presenter on The Travel Show. That must
have been a dream job, travelling around the world?

Helena: Actually, I thought I was being heroic taking that job. I’d actually rather have gone down a coal mine. It was
ironic really, because Jed adores travelling, whilst I hate it. The timing was critical though; I mean, we were living in
this derelict house. We’d knocked huge holes in the walls to make windows and we could hardly afford to get the job
finished and I wanted to be there when it was done. So I genuinely didn’t want to do the job they were offering, but I
felt I had no choice [3] because, apart from anything else, it would provide us with a reasonable income.

Interviewer: So what about this jewel garden? Did you have a clear idea of what you wanted to do when you bought
the house?

Jed: Not at all. In fact, we were provoked into action. I was giving a lecture on gardening and I was including some
snaps of our own wilderness to show what certain plants looked like. But these photos hadn’t loaded onto my laptop
properly, and you couldn’t see a thing. So I started to make it all up – describing this jewel garden with magical colours
– it came straight out of my imagination, it hadn’t been a long-term plan or anything. Anyway, as soon as I’d finished,
these journalists came rushing up saying, ‘We must come and take pictures of your jewel garden.’ And I heard myself
replying, ‘Fine, but come when the colours are good, don’t come now.’ To cut a long story short, we had to make the
jewel garden before they came, and actually, we did ninety per cent of the work that summer [4]. That was our
incentive!

Interviewer: And why did you call it a ‘jewel garden’? Having read about the disasters with the jewellery business, one
would have thought you wouldn’t want the word ‘jewel’ in your house at all.

Helena: Well, I like to work on projects and if you have a project where you’re thinking only of jewel colours then that
starts to limit you, and design is all about reduction. Really it was just a good, positive way of tackling what plants we
were putting in, and the way we were going to design the garde], wasn’t it, Jed?

Jed: Yeah. But for me it was also partly a metaphor, it’s making something worthwhile out of a failure. We did spend
years doing the jewellery and it wasn’t all disastrous; there were good things about it too and we wanted to salvage them
and treasure them. It seemed a waste not to take that bit of our lives and to somehow incorporate it into our new design
venture [5] – to take the bad experience and use it in a creative way. Jed and Helena, thank you for telling us about it
today.

5
Part 3. You will hear Clare Martin talk about wildlife photography. Listen and indicate true (T) or false (F)
statements. (10 points)

1. T 2. F 3. F 4. T 5. T

Good afternoon and welcome. I gather all of you are interested in becoming wildlife photographers, so I’ve brough
along some of the pictures I took on two of my most interesting assignments. The first was to South Africa, where I
went last year. It’s probably one of the best places in the world to be if you’re a wildlife photographer! And the second
was on my most recent trip to the Amazon, where the wildlife is also amazing. I’ll let you see those later, but first of all
I’d like to tell you what being a wildlife photographer entails. Every day, I get emails from people asking me what they
have to do to become a professional wildlife photographer. Some of these emails come from schoolchildren doing
project about a future career they would be interested in taking up. But most of these requests come from school
leavers seriously thinking about a career as a wildlife photographer. Usually my first reaction is “I don’t know!”. But of
course this doesn’t help. It does however indicate that there is no easy answer to this question. It is actually incredibly
difficult to become more than a part-time freelancer. There are so many amateurs flooding the market with really
good qualities pictures that it’s very hard to make a living from it. Most of the famous professionals in wildlife
photography never had any formal training. Arthur Morris, probably the best known bird photographer, had been a
teacher for years before going full-time into photography. I’ve only once met anyone with any kind of formal training.
He attended a university in England where he did a degree in what’s called Biology Imaging, which also includes
photography, filming and drawing. And he still ended up working as a safari guide! The best way to get yourself into
the profession is to do it alongside a job that brings you as close as possible into your subjects. This could be as a
conservationist or travel guide. Then while photographing, you can slowly start selling pictures while your experience
and expertise grows. After a few years, you might decide that you can give up the other job. One thing many people
overlook is that, once you are a professional, it’s no longer about taking great pictures because you love it. It’s about
earning enough money to compensate for all the expenses such as equipments, films, processing, travel, etc. This puts
quite a few people off. But you have to remember that you will not only be marketing your pictures, but, in a way, also
yourself. So if you’re wondering which subject would be best to take at university, forget about creative subjects and
take Business. You’ll certainly find it useful. Now, if you’d like to take a look at these pictures…

Part 4: Listen to a talk about language and complete the following sentences. Write NO MORE THAN
THREE WORDS taken from the recording for each blank. (20 pts)

1. Danish, Norwegian, 2. dubbing or 3. mutual 4. (state-sponsored 5. European

Swedish subtitles intelligibility education) colonization

6. legendary authors 7. apartment 8. consistent 9. murky 10. linguistic

inquiries grammatical rules continuum

The distinct forms of speech heard around Bremen, Germany and Interlaken, Switzerland are considered regional
dialects of the German language. And yet, when someone from Bremen is visiting the Swiss Alps, the conversations
they hear between locals will likely be incomprehensible to them. Similarly, outside of China, Mandarin and Cantonese
are often referred to as Chinese dialects. But they’re even more dissimilar than Spanish and Italian. On the other hand,
speakers of Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish, which are recognized as three distinct languages, can usually
communicate in their native tongues with little difficulty. And Turkish language soap operas, broadcast without
dubbing or subtitles, are some of the most popular shows in Azeri-speaking Azerbaijan. So, when is a form of speech
considered a dialect versus a language? It seems reasonable that the degree of mutual intelligibility would determine
whether two ways of speaking are classified as separate languages or as dialects of the same language. But as we've
seen, there are many occasions where this is not the case. Perhaps surprisingly, the distinction between a language and a
dialect usually has nothing to do with pronunciation, vocabulary, or any other linguistic features. However, it’s not
coincidental, either. It’s a matter of politics. The basis for what’s officially deemed a language was shaped by the
6
emergence of a European nation states beginning around the 1500s. In order to establish and maintain centralized
governments, clear territorial boundaries, and state-sponsored education systems, many nation states promoted a
standardized language. Which form of speech was chosen to be the standard language was usually based on what people
spoke in the capital. And while other forms of speech persisted, they were often treated as inferior. This tradition
extended across the globe with European colonization and into modern times. Italy, for example, has at least 15 of
what might be called regional dialects. One of them, the Florentine dialect, became known as Standard Italian when the
country politically unified in 1861. It was selected because legendary authors like Dante and Machiavelli used it in
their original works, and it came to represent an image of Italian national identity that some found particularly desirable.
Later on, in his attempt to establish a unified, fascist state, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini saw language
standardization as an important objective. His government promoted standard Italian while prohibiting other forms of
speech from the public sphere, framing them as backward and unsophisticated. In everything from job applications to
court testimonies, standard languages act as gatekeepers around the world. For instance, one 1999 study showed that
landlords responded to apartment inquiries based on what form of speech their prospective tenants used. When callers
spoke African-American Vernacular English, or AAVE, landlords were more likely to reject their inquiries. When they
spoke so-called Standard American English, which is often associated with whiteness, landlords responded more
positively. Both of these forms of speech are considered English dialects. In the United States, some people have cast
AAVE as an incorrect or simplified version of mainstream US English. But AAVE follows consistent grammatical
rules every bit as sophisticated as other forms of English Linguists tend to avoid the term dialect altogether. Instead,
many opt to call different forms of speech “varieties.” This way, languages are seen as groups of varieties. So the
English language is made up of varieties including Standard British and American English, AAVE, Nigerian English,
Malaysian English, and many others. Each has its own unique history and characteristic pronunciation, vocabulary, and
grammatical structures. But the dividing line between varieties is murky. Human language, in all its cross-pollinating,
ever-evolving glory, naturally resists the impulse to sort it into neat buckets. Oftentimes, forms of speech exist on a kind
of linguistic continuum where they overlap with others, and the differences between them are gradual—not clear cut.
And that’s the confounding beauty of the dynamic, diverse, and dazzling universe of human communication.