Question

dolce

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

問4
次の①~⑥の英文のうち、本文の内容に一致しているものは 1. 本文の内容に
反するものは2と答えなさい。
1 The materials of activist groups and organizations mention
problems like the fact that 4.2 million babies died in the last year.
2 The diseases that killed most of these 4.2 million babies could
easily have been prevented.
3 The fact that 4.2 million babies died last year was more serious
than the author had expected.
4 The author mentioned the figure of 4.2 million because he felt
sympathy for parents who lost their children.
⑤Between 1950 and 2016 the number of dead babies was reduced by
about two-thirds.
To reduce the number of dead babies, it is most important that we
make cautious calculations to understand what will be effective.

4
①活動家の団体や組織の資料は、420万人の赤ちゃんが昨年1年で亡くなったという事実のよう
な問題に言及している。 →第2パラグラフ第2文に一致している。
② 420万人の赤ちゃんの大半の命を奪った病気は簡単に防げただろう。→第3パラグラフ第2
文を言い換えたもの。
③筆者にとって、昨年420万人の赤ちゃんが亡くなったという事実は予想以上に深刻な事態であ
った。→第3パラグラフ最終2文で「その数字が膨大ではないから,つまり,申し分なく小
さなものであるから挙げたのです」 と述べられているので誤り。
④筆者が420万人という数字に言及したのは、子どもを亡くした親に共感を覚えたためであ
る。 →子どもを亡くした親については第4パラグラフで言及されているが,筆者が親に共感
を覚えたとは書かれておらず,また,筆者が420万人という数字に言及したのは第3パラグラ
フ最終文で 「その数字が申し分なく小さなものだから」と述べられているので誤り。
⑤ 1950年から2016年の間に、赤ちゃんの死亡数はおよそ3分の2減少した。 第5パラグラ
フ第1文の 4.2 million と第4文の 14.4 million という数字から、約3分の2減少したと言
えるので一致している。
⑥赤ちゃんの死亡数を減らすには,冷静な計算をして, 何が有効かを認識することが最も大切で
ある。 →第6パラグラフ第2文の内容に一致している。

Answer 1

✨ Best Answer ✨

Atsuki@Clearnote×東大生

4.2/14.4はだいたい2/3ですね！

dolce

4.2/14.4＝0.291...
2/3＝0.666...
この計算で良いんですか？

吉野町💫　#₅₂ ラグすぎーーー

違うかもですが

2/3減少したことから1/3=0.33...

4.2/14.4＝0.291...

Atsuki@Clearnote×東大生

そういうことです！
1個目の回答少し違いましたねすいません💦

dolce

なるほど！
分かりました。
お二方ともありがとうございました。