IELTS Reading Matching Sentence Endings Example 1

B.The highest barrier, they agree, is that the linguistics profession’s emphasis on theory gradually wears down the enthusiasm of linguists who work in communities. Chomsky disagrees. He has recently begun to speak in support of language preservation. But his linguistic, as opposed to humanitarian, the argument is, let’s say, unsentimental: the loss of a language, he states, ‘is much more of a tragedy for linguists whose interests are mostly theoretical, like me, than for linguists who focus on describing specific languages, since it means the permanent loss of the most relevant data for general theoretical work’. At the moment, few institutions award doctorates for such work, and that’s the way it should be, he reasons. In linguistics, as in every other discipline, he believes that good descriptive work requires thorough theoretical understanding and should also contribute to building new theory. But that’s precisely what documentation does, objects Evans. The process of immersion in a language, to extract, analyse and sum it up, deserves a PhD because it is ‘the most demanding intellectual task a linguist can engage in’.

1. even though it is in danger of disappearing.
2. provided that it has a strong basis in theory.
3. although it may share certain universal characteristics
4. because there is a practical advantage to it
5. so long as the drawbacks are clearly understood.
6. in spite of the prevalence of theoretical linguistics.
7. until they realize what is involved

1. although it may share certain universal characteristics
2. even though it is in danger of disappearing.
3. in spite of the prevalence of theoretical linguistics.
4. provided that it has a strong basis in theory.

For the second question, the answer is in the first para, sixth line; “Once there, they may face difficulties such as community suspicion. As Nick Evans says, a community who speak an endangered language may have reasons to doubt or even oppose efforts to preserve it.”

For the third question, the answer is in the second para, third line; “But his linguistic, as opposed to humanitarian, the argument is, let’s say, unsentimental: the loss of a language, he states, ‘is much more of a tragedy for linguists whose interests are mostly theoretical, like me, than for linguists who focus on describing specific languages, since it means the permanent loss of the most relevant data for general theoretical work’.”

For the fourth question, the answer is in the second para, eighth line; “At the moment, few institutions award doctorates for such work, and that’s the way it should be, he reasons. In linguistics, as in every other discipline, he believes that good descriptive work requires thorough theoretical understanding and should also contribute to building new theory.”