学年

質問の種類

英語 高校生

至急!!私立大学看護学部の過去問です。答えがないため、回答を作って欲しいです!!科目は英語です。

問題番号に対応 効とする。 うち受験票お researchers at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna, Austria, have found. Dogs won't give food to a human, even if that person gave them some food first, and that they would help other dogs that had helped them before. Therefore, the team Previous studies have shown that dogs can recognize cooperative and uncooperative humans, "reciprocal altruism"- that is, doing a good thing in return to a human who had given expected to find that their test subjects would put these two things together and show To start, the team trained a group of 37 dogs to press a button which would activate a them food first. *enclosure with the dispenser, while one of (2) two humans was in a separate enclosure with the button. One would press the button to food dispenser. Then, they put each dog in an would not. Each dog was paired with both humans in give food to the dog, and (4) unhelpful one. turn. After that, the researchers switched over the button and the dispenser. They expected that the dogs would press the button to give food to the helpful human but not to the though the dogs did press the button, they did it just as often when either human had the food dispenser, and even when no human was there at all. "In these kinds of studies (5) [perform / to / dogs / which/ trained / are in a particular behavior for an experiment, they will usually do the behavior a few times as they have simply learned the association between the behavior and getting a reward, and it may be enjoyable for them to do the behavior," said Jim McGetrick, a PhD student at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna who led the research. 身を正しく が本冊子 1番 2 次の英文を読んで下の設問に答えなさい。 (3) giving us some food? Are they a combination of reasons. "It is (6) Why wouldn't our best pals want to help us out by secretly all bad boys and girls? McGetrick believes there is possible that the dogs did not understand enough about the task to realize that only one of the humans was providing them with food," he said. It could also be because they didn't fully understand the button and dispenser system, or because they were too focused on the food to notice whether a particular human was pressing the button or not. "Having said all that, even if they did completely understand the task and were fully attentive to the actions of the humans, there is still a good possibility that they wouldn't have given food back in return," he added. "It could be that providing food to a dog as they do not typically do that in everyday life." After all, humans are the ones who human is something very strange for (7) already have food, from a dog's perspective. why would your pet need to worry about (8) making sure you have enough? However, all the humans in the study were people the dogs didn't know. "It is quite 5

回答募集中 回答数: 0
英語 高校生

この文の第二段落のamid calls for ~のcallsは、名詞でしょうか?前置詞のamidとcalls forのつながりが、なぜこのような訳になるのか理解できません。このcalls が名詞だと仮定して直訳すると、管理下において大規模に火を放つことを求める要求の最中に... 続きを読む

王 jon 【目標解答時間 15分 配点 37点 15 次の英文を読み, 下記の設問 (A~D) に答えなさい。 Fire is "a good servant but a bad master." In my house, in summer, I smell the air for the faintest hint of smoke as keenly as any horse or dog or kangaroo. I watch for columns of smoke, visualising again and again how fire could rush( 1 )the hill towards us. But if you are philosophical about it, fire is a natural 5 part of the Australian environment and has been for millions of years. Living with the threat of fire in the bush, or in the wild, is like living with sharks when diving, or with snakes while walking, or with traffic accidents on a city street. The idea that we should remove every shark from the sea, or every snake from the land, and control- burn, or deliberately set fire, to prevent any risk of 10 bushfires is a recipe for making the environment even worse. As Phil Koperberg, head of the New South Wales Fire Brigades, said ( 2 ) the Sydney bushfires of 1994, amid calls for massive control burning, “Do you want to concrete over all the bush? If you choose to live in the bush, you choose to accept the risk. f It is often claimed that some Austratian plants and animals have actually adapted to fire, evidence of an extraordinarily long period (millions of years before human arrival) during which fire has been more significant in the Australian environment than it has been on any other continent, but this is probably not strictly true. Many plants have adapted to the environment in 20 ways that also happen to be valuable in times of fire. ( 3 ), animals have adapted to a variety of different habitats, and can therefore survive during different periods of vegetation regrowth after a fire (or after, say, a cyclone, a flood, or just a tree falling in a forest). A tree that has the ability to regenerate from roots or lower trunk when the 25 upper tree dies as a result of being broken off in a storm, or falls over, rotten to the core, will also be able to respond when the upper part is killed by a fire. Seeds adapted to long hot droughts, and requiring a combination of heat and water for germination", will also find a fire, if followed by rain, a good stimulus for growing new plants. There does appear to be evidence that chemicals in 30 smoke can help promote growth in plants, but whether this is a direct 可能性があるかを 何度も が続いているのだ。 森林地帯, ダイビングのときにサメ, そやカンガルーにも負けな の匂いを嗅ぐ。 私は,どのよ 暮らすようなものである。 海 しき主人である」( れば, 火事はオーストラリア >> のヘビを取り除くべきだと 意図的に火を放つべきだ , 1994年のシドニー ている真っ只中 と言った。 入れるこ

未解決 回答数: 0