Read each passage and choose the best word or phrase from among the four

2 choices for each blank. Then, on your answer sheet, find the number of the
question and mark your answer.

The Elusive Thylacine

With a powerful jaw, a tiger's stripes, and a kangaroo's tail, the
thylacine sounds like a creature from mythology. In fact, it was-or
•
perhaps is-very real. Native to Australia and the island of
Tasmania, the thylacine ( 26 ) to have become extinct in
1936, when the last captive specimen died at Tasmania's Hobart Zoo. _
They were wiped out long ago on mainland Australia after wild dogs
were introduced to the continent, but they survived longer on
Tasmania as they had no such competition for food. Instead, they
were hunted down there by sheep farmers who saw them as a threat
to livestock. A grainy black-and-white film remains of Benjamin, the
Hobart Zoo's thylacine, opening its jaws wide and pacing in its cage.
Could this be the last we ever see of this amazing animal?
Some would say no. Hundreds of sightings have been reported
since Benjamin died, according to The Bulletin, an Australian
magazine that recently offered a $1.25 million reward for hard
evidence that the thylacine has survived. The offer generated
massive interest from hunters and filmmakers, and also from a
number of less reliable witnesses, who submitted digital images of
thylacines that were skillfully executed but completely fake. Critics
derided the offer as trivializing the tragedy of extinction. After three
months, The Bulletin had not received a shred of hard evidence of a
thylacine and declared the animal truly\gone forever. The
conventional scientific wisdom ( 27 ). As Randolph Rose,
professor of zoology at the University of Tasmania, notes, "Any
animal with a population base of less than 1,000 is headed for
extinction within 60 years."
Still, true believers remain. They continue to scour the dense

73
 forests of northwest Tasmania for the long-snouted creature, listening
for its distinctive bark. They may be better off scouring news
headlines, however. The Australian Museum in Sydney has
announced a project to bring the beast back to life Jurassic Park-style
through the cloning of genetic material taken from a thylacine pup
preserved in ethanol in 1866. "It's a ( 28 )," admits
Professor Mike Archer, dean of science at the University of New
South Wales. "But so were cloned sheep, heavier-than-air flying
machines, and a stroll on the moon."

（26）1 was not thought 2 was widely believed

3 was falsely rumored
（27）1 is open to doubt
3 suggests otherwise
（28）1 long shot
3 foregone conclusion
4 is no longer thought
2 is not very helpful
4 supports this view
2 safe bet
4 moral obligation

The Resurgence of Vinyl

Record-company executives are ( 29 ). Over the last
decade, sales of compact discs, the main source of profit in the music
business, have languished while sales of analog LPs, a format many
companies abandoned in the 1980s, have been growing roughly IO to
15 percent a year. Many album titles are being released on vinyl at
the same time as on CD, and turntable sales are on the upswing.
Although vinyl LPs still only make up a small fraction of overall
music sales, the question remains: who on earth would still want to
listen to a scratchy-sounding record spinning on a turntable?
It turns out that a lot of people do. Many audiophiles insist that
analog sounds better than digital, and even casual listeners often
concur, saying that LPs sound more natural than CDs. Older listeners
are increasingly buying back records they originally replaced with
CDs, and younger buyers think vinyl is "cool." The funny thing is,
the audio experts ( 30 ). When compact discs were first
introduced in 1982, they hailed them as a major breakthrough in
audio playback. Advertisements promised "perfect sound forever."
Consumers quickly jumped on the bandwagon, dumped their LP
collections, and retired their turntables to the attic. This was not

74
 surpnsmg. The rapid pace of technological progress today has led to
widespread expectations that everything will go on getting better and
better.
But as technology and globalization have transformed the way
we live and work, many people feel they have lost control of their
environment. In this sense, choosing analog ( 31 )
technology's increasing sophistication. Josh Bizar, director of sales
and marketing at Music Direct, a leading seller of used music and
equipment, feels that, for many young listeners especially, records
have taken on a broader cultural meaning. "I think they're turning to
vinyl in part as a typical rebellion against their parents' music and
lifestyle, and also against the globalization and corporatization of
music in general, which is not only happening in music, but in every
aspect of our daily life," he says. •
（29）1 jumping for joy 2 making good time
3 scratching their heads 4 counting their blessings
（30）1 hoped this would happen 2 said as much
3 didn't predict this 4 knew this years ago
（31）1 is a good reflection of 2 is a way to resist
3 means accepting 4 helps to promote

Read each passage and choose the best answer from among the four choices
3 for each question. Then, on your answer sheet, find the number of the
question and mark your answer.

Searching for ETs

Ever since the invention of the radio, man has been sending a
constant stream of messages into outer space. Indeed, the efficacy of
radio signals for transmitting information at the speed of light over
interstellar distances has led scientists to wonder whether other forms
of intelligent life on distant planets may not have already stumbled
onto these signals and consequently started trying to communicate
with us in similar ways. Since 1960, both governments and private
institutions have been conducting SETI (search for extraterrestrial
75
 intelligence) programs, scanning the skies for signs that we are not
alone.
Using the world's largest radio telescope, the Arecibo dish in
Puerto Rico, researchers at the SERENDIP (Search for
Extraterrestrial Radio Emissions from Nearby Developed Intelligent
Populations) project at the University of California are now able to
make both broad sweeps of outer space as well as more focused
searches of nearby stars. Though the telescope is capable of
monitoring up to 100 million channels at once, SERENDIP focuses
primarily on a narrow 2.5 MHz bandwidth straddling 1420 MHz, the
spectral frequency of hydrogen. Researchers have surmised that this
frequency would most likely be used by intelligent life forms to make
contact because hydrogen is the most common element in the
universe. The hydrogen frequency is also relatively "quieter,"
meaning less interference.
But researchers were left with a seemingly insurmountable
task: who could possibly sift through this mountain of collected data,
isolating that one extraterrestrial transmission from all the
background "noise" generated by stars, galaxies, and manmade TV
and radio signals? And how could they achieve this on a less than
astronomical budget?
The answer: people just like you and me. Computer scientists
David Gedye and Craig Kasnoff came up with the brilliant idea of
using the Internet as, in effect, a gigantic supercomputer to separate
the kernel of wheat from the interstellar chaff. Their project,
SETI@home, has had more than 3 million volunteers worldwide
download data-processing software onto their personal computers,
collectively making the networked computers the most powerful
computer system on Earth. The 35 gigabytes of information
collected daily is divided into "packages" that are sent to volunteers'
computers. Their screensavers are programmed to work on the data
when their computers sit idle. The analyzed packages are then sent
back to SERENDIP for further analysis. As an incentive
SERENDIP honors those whose computers have "crunched" the mos
packages each year. Moreover, if a computer were to discover a
signal from an extraterrestrial, the owner would gain additional
bragging rights as a co-discoverer. If such a signal were to be
detected, it would be analyzed by scientists, and if deemed genuine,
would be turned over to linguists and mathematicians to determine its
meaning.
Despite 45 years of SETI efforts, no contact from

76
 extraterrestrials has yet been confirmed. However, on the night of
August 15, 1977, a signal from an unknown source was recorded by
the Big Ear telescope at Ohio State University. It was dubbed the
"Wow!" signal, an event never explained or repeated. Just imagine,
as you go to sleep tonight, that you and your computer could possibly
become the discoverers of the next "Wow!"
(32) What do we learn about SERENDIP and its ongoing search for
extraterrestrial life?
1 SERENDIP's search for alien life is based on technological
methods accidentally discovered by scientists in the 1960s.
2 SERENDIP is committed to locating life in other parts of
space by scanning 100 million channels at a time.
3 SERENDIP researchers believe that intelligent beings in
outer space may already be transmitting interstellar radio
messages.
4 SERENDIP is hoping to make contact with extraterrestrial
beings by transmitting radio messages into outer space.

(33) According to the passage, 1420 MHz is considered more

significant than other frequencies because
1 scientists have reason to believe that communications from
outer space would more likely be broadcast at this frequency.
2 SERENDIP scientists detected a higher occurrence of "noise"
at this frequency in earlier experiments.
3 the presence of hydrogen in a particular region of space
decreases the probability that the region could support
intelligent life.
4 this wider bandwidth allows scientists to monitor a
significant number of frequencies at the same time.

(34) As part of their SETI@home project, David Gedye and Craig

Kasnoff were able to
1 categorize their data on the world's largest computer before
sending it to the volunteers for further study.
2 contact a network of scientists through the Internet, getting
them to volunteer their expertise and time for data analysis.
77
3 network 3 million PCs, which has enabled SERENDIP to
bypassthe Arecibo dish when gathering data for analysis.
4 create a huge, cost-effective network of computers that
could separate possible alien transmissions from
background noise.

Micronation Monarchs
If you're fed up with your government, what can you do?
Criticize it, maybe. For some, though, that isn't enough. Looking for
something better, they renounce their citizenship and adopt a new
homeland. Or, if they really want to go all the way, they set up their
own country and proclaim themselves sovereign. Enter the
"micronation," a self-declared entity without legal basis or
international recognition. Often these micronations exist only on
paper or the Internet, but they are nearly always home to curiosity
and sometimes even international controversy.
In Western Australia, the principality of Hutt River Province is
governed by Prince Leonard, a farmer-turned-monarch who declared
his own micronation in 1970 after a dispute with the government over
grain quotas. Although his realm, or farm, is little more than a
curiosity for tourists, about 20 other self-styled kingdoms in Australia
have since come into being. The Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the
Coral Sea consists of a few uninhabited islands off Queensland that
were claimed by gay-rights activists in protest over Australia's stance
against same-sex marriage. Constitutional law experts have
dismissed these attempts at secession as lacking any legal status
whatsoever. "It's a nice way of thumbing your nose at authority, but
ultimately it's just a fantasy," says George Williams, a law professor
at the University of New South Wales.
When micronations are linked to crime or international
jurisdiction issues, however, they invite more serious attention.
Sealand, founded in international waters in the English Channel on an
abandoned World War II antiaircraft platform in 1967 by ex-British
Army officer Roy Bates, is one of the more controversial. It has a
government, a data storage industry-and a population of five.
Sealand has been the scene of forcible confinements, including that
of a German lawyer. When London refused a German intervention
request to secure his release, an envoy from the German Embassy had
to visit Sealand and negotiate with his captor, Bates. The self-dubbed
"Prince Roy" then claimed that this constituted de facto German

78
 recognition of his aation-state.
But Sealand exists in legal limbo. Britain has refused to
recognize the antiaircraft platform, and in 1987 extended its own
territorial waters to a zone encompassing the platform. English lower
courts, however, have ruled against British territoriality over the
platform in the past and London hasn't challenged them, perhaps
fearing further judgments legitimizing Sealand's independence. A
German court in 1978 explicitly rejected the notion that the concrete
shell could be a nation-state, saying it lacks "essential attributes"
under international law-a territory, a people, and a government.
Others, like historian Frank Turner, say that Britain violated
international sea law by neglecting to tear down its gunnery
•
emplacements in international waters after the war. Bates,
meanwhile, points out that countries like Monaco and China have
also not been universally recognized by other nations. The
ambiguous legal position of Sealand benefits from an unresolved
dispute in political science: while some scholars feel statehood is
attained merely through recognition by other nation-states, others
think meeting requirements such as having a government and
territory is necessary. Unless the British military takes Sealand by
force, however, Bates will no doubt continue to serve as a role model
for aspiring micronation monarchs.

(35) How do legal experts regard the status of the Australian

"kingdoms" that have come into existence?
1 Though their territories are small, they are posing important
legal questions as they grow in number.
2 The existence of such micronations means that conventional
legal opinions are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
3 Although they may offer an interesting way to express
criticism of the government, they are in no way legitimate
states.
4 Despite their importance as sources of tourist revenue, they
are illegal and should be abolished.
(36) Why, according to Roy Bates, did the incident involving a
German lawyer prove significant for the international status of
Sealand?
1 The British government refused to intervene in the case,
79
 showing that it accepted Bates' authority over the platform.
2 The case attracted widespread international attention, leading
to an increase in sympathy for Bates' cause.
3 The incident proved that the government of Sealand was able
to defend itself successfully from foreign attacks.
4 The German government negotiated directly for the lawyer's
release, thus implicitly recognizing the independence of
Bates' micronation.

(37) Why does Sealand's legal status remain unclear?

1 The British government is undecided whether or not to
recognize the micronation.
2 Specialists are unable to decide what the criteria for an
independent state should be.
3 The platform on which Sealand was founded had no right to
be built in international waters.
4 English courts have historically denied Roy Bates' right to
rule Sealand.

Why Human Executives Ape the Primates

When people speak of the corporate "jungle," they may not
realize how apt this metaphor actually is. While the expression itself,
however, implies a dog-eat-dog workplace where the most aggressive
win, author Richard Conniff takes a different view. In his book The
Ape in the Corner Office: Understanding the Work-place Beast in All
of Us, Conniff asserts that humans actually commonly display non-
competitive behaviors in their workplace environments that are
markedly similar to those of primates and other animals in the natural
environment.
"Conflict and aggression are normal primate behaviors, and
that's not a bad thing," says Conniff. "But most people's perception
of the animal world is that they think it's only conflict." He argues
that, because of the stress and fear that conflict engenders, our
perception of its role in the corporate world is skewed. In reality,
cooperation is a considerably more common element in both the
corporate and natural worlds than is often supposed. "Even chimps,
with a reputation for being brutal, spend only 5 percent of the day in
hostile behaviors and 15 to 20 percent of the day grooming one
80
 another," the author says.
Being cooperative is written into our genes. Such behaviors
as building networks, doing favors, sharing our goodies, and
patting the backs of our co-workers are the most effective
strategies for getting ahead in the workplace, strategies that are
little different from behaviors used by primates and other animals.
While many still hold to the stereotype that the Darwinian
aggressor invariably wins in both the natural and workplace
environments, they are missing a more important reality. Nice guys
usually don't come in last: in fact, the reverse is often the norm.
Of course there's more to winning than just being nice.
Both primates and humans have strong power drives that
often lead to conflict. "Chimpanzees will display behavior to
show how strong they are-they'll bang trees-and people have
that same tendency of intimidating others with their
behavior," says Frans de Waal, a primatologist. But it's clear
that the success of humans and primates in their social
environments is a result of how well individual members
balance conflict and cooperation, with the emphasis on
cooperation and network building.
Conniff stresses the point that humans are primarily
social creatures, and that those who tip that balance toward
aggression eventually pay a price. "There are plenty of
examples of bad bosses who get ahead by naked aggression,"
he says. "It can seem to work in the short term, but the long-
term costs are enormous." Overly aggressive bosses find that
their employees' motivation is low, turnover is high, and
sickness due to the high levels of stress runs rampant. The
result is lowered productivity.
Nevertheless, Conniff also makes clear that, though
humans and other animals tend to be cooperative, there can
only be one alpha-or dominant-male in any given
environment. Members of a given group, human or otherwise,
establish hierarchies in which each role is clearly defined.
Knowing our place in the hierarchy is of paramount
importance, for if we step out of line, conflict will naturally
ensue. According to Conniff, animals instinctively know this.
Chimpanzees attempt to reduce their body size and even grovel
when approaching an alpha male. Though hating to admit it,
humans often act in similar ways, with perhaps a dash more
subtlety. "We do similar things with our vocal tones and facial
expressions," Conniff explains. "Subordinates smile more while
alphas smile less, because subordinates have to worry about
pleasing people." That is not to say, though, that subordinates,
whether human or ape, don't have

81
ambitions-and many are willing to employ cunning to achieve
them. "In chimps, a common strategy is to break up alliances that
can be used against them," de Waal explains. ''They see a main rival
sitting with someone else and they try to break up that meeting. They
use strategies that I'm sure most people perform without knowing
that they are doing it."
Some people may choose to opt out of these social games,
preferring instead to play the lone wolf. They choose this option at
great risk, however, for primates and humans live and function in
groups, not as individuals. "We often complain about the rat race,"
says Conniff. "But the truth is that we not only need, but like, our
fellow rats."
Many of us may chafe at the idea that we are still guided by our
animal instincts, but Conniff warns that it is naive to "ignore the
many ways genetic propensities influence our behavior. Workplace
behaviors that we take to be no more than the whim of the moment
often turn out on closer examination to be rooted millions of years
deep in our biology."
（38）In his argument, Conniff asserts that
1 the corporate world resembles a jungle because it really is
dominated by the dog-eat-dog mentality commonly seen
among chimpanzees.
2 humans should learn from the primate world that conflict is
not something to fear, but rather something to foster.
3 successful humans, unlike their primate cousins, will
invariably tum to cooperation to resolve differences.
4 the corporate world mirrors the jungle because humans, just
like animals, are genetically wired to behave in certain ways.
(39) Concerning overly aggressive executives, Conniff believes
1 the evidence suggests that such individuals are unlikely to
reach positions of authority.
2 their initial success will eventually be undercut by their
inability to effectively motivate their subordinates.
3 the business and natural worlds lend themselves to Darwinian
principles, so power naturally resides with these aggressive
individuals.

82
 4 their material success ironically leads them to face
intimidation from their fellow workers.
(40) What is the author attempting to show by introducing de Waal's
comment about the tendency of chimps to try and break up
alliances?
1 That Conniff is misleading us when he says that those in
lower positions are unaware that they are actually behaving
like animals.
2 That while subordinates often act meekly toward their
superiors, they also instinctively employ other strategies to
help them move up the corporate ladder.
3 That although such methods can work on occasion, it is often
more useful for subordinates to ally themselves with
superiors.
4 That awareness of our own strengths and weaknesses is vital
when attempting to create alliances against rivals.
(41) Overall, what does Conniff imply about the evolution of human
society?
1 Many of the qualities that we might think distinguish us from
animals actually reflect a shared genetic inheritance.
2 Only through understanding their own primal instincts will
humans be able to overcome their aggressive natures.
3 Human evolution has paralleled primate evolution in recent
generations, leading to greater social cooperation.
4 Though human society is inherently more complex than
primate society, workplaces could benefit from adopting
customs common in the animal world.

83