学年

質問の種類

英語 高校生

下線部(4)に関して、この質問に込められているDaveの気持ちを基本後で説明しなさい に対して 申し訳なさだと思ったんですけどこれってどんな意味があるんですか

4 20 Chapter 1 英文を読んで、 設問に答えなさい。 物語 271 words Time: 35 minutes Ted had a son, but his son had no mother. Ted and his seven-year-old A-1 son, Dave, lived alone. Ted was not very rich, so he had to work hard every day. One evening, Ted was driving home after his hard work. He was very 5 tired, but he loved his son. "(A) Dave must be feeling lonely now. I have to go home as soon as possible." He hurried home, but he came back home at nine o'clock. Dave was still awake when he saw his father, and said, "Dad, how much do you make an 時きゅうないとどうなの? 10 hour?" 息子 15 Ted got angry at his son. He was not making enough money for their living. And he was too tired to stay calm "Why do you ask (1)such a silly question when I come home from hard work? I make twenty dollars an hour. Is that good enough for you?" "I'm sorry, Dad. But... (B) will you give me ten dollars?" "Another silly question! Just go to bed and sleep! Right now!" A-2 After Dave went to his room, Ted sat down on his sofa and had a drink. (2)He came to himself again, and thought he was wrong to his son. He went 自分自身のうに into Dave's room. fr 理性をとりどす. "I'm sorry, my son. I didn't want to get angry with you. Here's your ten dollars." A-3 "Thank you, Dad!" 25 Dave got up and opened his treasure box. He had another ten dollars in it. When Ted saw this, (3)he got angry again. "Why do you want another ten dollars? You already have ten dollars!" But Dave asked, watching his Dad's eyes, "(4)Dad, can I buy your one hour with these twenty dollars?" come to oneself. begin acting and thinking like one's normal self A-4 「速読」 1. x >

解決済み 回答数: 1
英語 高校生

ターゲットではworthは形容詞となっているのにルールズでは前置詞となっていますがどっちなんでふか?

告 るも SNS が銀 ーで を てい asas... 「・・・と同じくらい〜だ」 that 以下は as ; ~ as ... 「... と同じくらい~だ」の形が使われ, they can read a gesture as subtle as a change in eye direction 「視線の方向の変化と同じくらい (視線の方向の変化のような)微妙なジェスチャーを読み取れる」となります。 問6 難易度 ★★★ these protodogs were worth knowing は, be worth -ing 「~するに値する」の 形で、「そういった原始犬は知るに値するものだった」という意味です(worth は 前置詞なので、後ろには「名詞・動名詞」がきます)。 これを仮主語構文の it was worthwhile to ~ 「~することは価値があった」 の 形に書き換えます (worthwhile は形容詞 「価値がある」)。 toの後に原形know を 入れて、後はその目的語として these protodogs を入れればOKです。 ちなみに, ここでも 〈these + 名詞 > の形で前の内容をまとめています。 問7 難易度 ★★★ at. Lesson 3 ■ Section 2 [nésaseri] □ 180 形容詞編 necessary 13 E 必要な (= essential) ◆ It is necessary that A (should) do AIO 必要である 図 (~saries) 必要品; 生活必需品 understan : is necess: ines. □ necéssity 臼 必要 (性) (~ties)必要sir □nècessárily (否定文で)必ずしも appropriate (・・・) 適切な (for / to) (・・・ に 当てる (for/to) appreciate of 1657 There's no gift for hi correct [karékt] 182 正しい; 適切な を訂正するを直す corréction 名 collect [apropriat] □□ 181 [wǝ:10] you and yong 183 このあとの worth 京の価値がある (~する) に値する (doing) 86316 せんち This novel is worth reading again この小 t is a single c Televis 度読むに値する。(与 It is worth (worthwhite) worth this novel again.) wórthy (...に)値して(of) 65 積極的な; 肯定的な明確な 確信してThis wor positive [pá(:)zǝtiv] 「狩猟に犬を連れて行く利点として筆者が挙げていないもの」が問われています。 >>> Rule 42 解法 NOT 問題の解法 (1) 内容一致の原則 内容一致問題では, 「設問文」 を先読みします (先に設問文に目を通してから本 文を読む)。 しかし「選択肢」 まで見る必要はありません (4つのうち3つが「ウ 「ソの内容」の可能性があり、本文を読む前にウソの情報が頭に入ってしまうため)。 (2) NOT問題は別 「選択肢から当てはまらないものを選ぶ問題 (NOT問題)」の場合, 先に選択肢 を見ておくのもアリです。普通なら4つ中3つが「ウソ」であってもNOT問題 ならウソは1つだけなので、先に目を通してもダメージが少ないのです (好みな する必要はありません。 自分で試してみてどっちが合うか判断 ので無 □ 184 plastic 柔軟な; プラスチックの, ビニールの Th [plastik] 00185 プラスチック (製品) asw 10 triguosbano political [politikal] □口 186 政治(上)の official lafifalt 187 W □pólitics 政治(活動): 政治学 □pólicy 政策方針 politician 政治家 公式の公用の役所の 役員(担当) 職員 □ office 事務所:公役所 br 上

解決済み 回答数: 1
英語 高校生

問4の⑤の計算はどうすれば合うのですか。 教えてください🙇‍♀️ 3枚目が答えです。

次の英文を読んで,下の設問に答えなさい。 Last year, 4.2 million babies died. That is the most recent number reported by UNICEF of deaths before the age of one, worldwide. We often see lonely and emotionally charged numbers like this in the news or in the materials of activist groups or organizations. They produce a reaction. Who can even imagine 4.2 million dead babies? It is so terrible, and even worse when we know that almost all died from easily preventable diseases. And how can anyone argue that 4.2 million is anything other than a huge number? You might think that nobody would even try to argue (that, but you would be wrong. That is exactly why I mentioned this number. Because it is not huge: it is beautifully small. If we even start to think about how tragic each of these deaths is for the parents who had waited for their newborn to smile, and walk, and play, and instead had to bury their baby, then this number could keep us crying for a long time. But who would be helped by these tears? Instead let's think clearly about human suffering. The number 4.2 million is for 2016. The year before, the number was 4.4 million. The year before that, it was 4.5 million. Back in 1950, it was 14.4 million. That's almost 10 million more dead babies per year, compared with today. Suddenly this terrible number starts to look smaller. In fact (2)the number has never been lower. Of course, I am the first person to wish the number was even lower and falling even faster. But to know how to act, and how to prioritize resources, nothing can be more important than doing the cool-headed math and realizing what works and what doesn't. And this is clear: more and more deaths are being prevented. comparing the numbers. (3). We would never realize that without

解決済み 回答数: 1