English Olympiad Class 9 - Sample question paper 08

Passage 1 - One of the many mysteries of Stonehenge may have been solved, not because of a scientific breakthrough or painstaking research, but after a maintenance team’s hosepipe turned out to be a little short. Archaeologists have long argued over whether the ancient monument was once a perfect circle or if it was always, as it is now, an incomplete ring. When a hosepipe used to keep the grass green in hot spells failed to reach a broken part of the circle, unsightly brown patches began to appear. Custodian Tim Daw fretted over the blemishes when he realized they matched the spots where stones would probably have stood if the monument had been a complete circle.

Daw said it was a “light bulb moment”. “I was standing on the public path looking at the grass near the stones and thinking we needed to find a longer hosepipe to get the parched patches to green up,” he said. The marks were where archaeologists had looked without success for signs that there had been stone holes. “I called my colleague over and he saw them and realized their possible significance as well. Not being archaeologists, we called in the professionals.”

Aerial photographs were hurriedly commissioned (before the rains and removed the brown patches) and the scorch marks on the western side of Wiltshire site, south-west England, were mapped. Some of the brown patches indeed tallied with where stones would have stood, if the circle was complete. Other brown patches corresponded to recorded archaeological excavations, including trenches dug by the engineer William Gowland in 1901. That some of the patches matched the site of the trenches supports the theory that they indicate disturbed ground. The conclusions have been detailed in a report by Daw and published in the latest edition of the journal ‘Antiquity’. The report points out that, despite being one of the most intensively explored prehistoric monuments, Stonehenge continues to hold surprises. It also highlights the value of continually surveying the site from the ground and air.

Susan Greaney, senior properties historian for English Heritage, said the accidental discovery was “really significant”.

Passage 2 - We share not just jokes, laughter and our innermost secrets with our friends; we are also genetically similar to our friends.

A US study published in the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences analyzed 1.5 million markers of gene variation from 1,932 people. The genetic makeup of pairs of unrelated friends was compared with pairs of unrelated strangers. Close friends shared about 1 percent of the same gene variants. In other words, unrelated friends had as much genetic similarity as fourth cousins or people who share great-great-great grandparents.

Most people don’t even know who their fourth cousins are! Yet, we somehow, among a myriad of possibilities, manage to select as friends, the people, who resemble our kin.

Friends are most similar in genes that affect the sense of smell and most different in genes that control immunity or ability to protect against diseases. A difference in immune system genes is also seen in spouses and may have an evolutionary explanation—having the genes to fight different infections reduces the risk of epidemics or spread of diseases. The social aspect may explain why human evolution appears to have progressed faster in the last 30,000 years.

This gives us a deeper account of the origins of friendship. Not only do we form ties with people superficially like ourselves, but also with people who are like us on a deep genetic level.