Academic/General Training Module by Adam Smith First Published in 2015

Are the statements below true, false or not given in the text? 
1. It is possible, but not normal, to say 'powerful tea'.
2. It is equally acceptable in English to say 'powerful computers' or 'strong 
computers'.
3. Our brains remember some pairs of words better than others.
 
 

---

 IELTS
 JOURNAL 
 
100 
Exercise 39: Similar paragraph headings 
Sometimes two paragraph headings are very similar, making it difficult to decide which 
one is correct. Look at this example from Cambridge IELTS 1. 
Paragraph: 
For the first time, dictionary publishers are incorporating real, spoken English 
into their data. It gives lexicographers (people who write dictionaries) access to 
a more vibrant, up-to-date vernacular language which has never really been 
studied before. In one project, 150 volunteers each agreed to discreetly tie a 
Walkman recorder to their waist and leave it running for anything up to two 
weeks. Every conversation they had was recorded. When the data was collected, 
the length of tapes was 35 times the depth of the Atlantic Ocean. Teams of 
audio typists transcribed the tapes to produce a computerised database of ten 
million words. 
Which paragraph heading would you chose, and why? 
1. New method of research
2. The first study of spoken language
 
 
 

---

 IELTS
 JOURNAL 
 
101 
Exercise 40: Paragraph headings 
Read the following passage about a chess-playing computer.
A) On February 10, 1996, Deep Blue became the first machine to win a chess 
game against a reigning world champion (Garry Kasparov) under regular time 
controls. However, Kasparov won three and drew two of the following five 
games, beating Deep Blue by a score of 4–2. Deep Blue was then heavily 
upgraded and played Kasparov again in May 1997, winning the six-game 
rematch 3½–2½. Deep Blue won the deciding game six, becoming the first 
computer system to defeat a reigning world champion in a match under 
standard chess tournament time controls. 
B) After the loss, Kasparov said that he sometimes saw deep intelligence and 
creativity in the machine's moves, suggesting that during the second game, 
human chess players had intervened on behalf of the machine, which would be 
a violation of the rules. IBM denied that it cheated, saying the only human 
intervention occurred between games. The rules provided for the developers to 
modify the program between games, an opportunity they said they used to 
shore up weaknesses in the computer's play that were revealed during the 
course of the match. This allowed the computer to avoid a trap in the final game 
that it had fallen for twice before. Kasparov demanded a rematch, but IBM 
refused and dismantled Deep Blue.