Give the correct form of the words in brackets.1. The new president said the government is interested in the of the country’s historical values. (PRESERVE)2. The building is a masterpiece of style in design and construction technique. (ARCHITECT)3. More and more heritage sites are by development pressure, mass tourism, war urbanization, climate change and investor projects. (THREAT)4. The company taught us a lot about the species here and safety in the jungle. (DANGER)

Complete the sentence with the correct word.From this , the old building looked less daunting and more like a monument to history.

Match the word with the definition (NB-TH)Question 5.history, traditions, buildings and objects that a country or society has had for many years and that are considered an important part of its characterA. architectureB. preserveC. jungleD. heritageE. limestoneQuestion 6.a white or light grey rock that is used as a building materialA. jungleB. preserveC. limestoneD. heritageE. architecture

3. What is a common challenge in the preservation of heritage houses?Group of answer choicesHigh maintenance costsLimited government fundingLack of public interestModernization efforts

ArchitectureThe modern philosophy of "out with the old, in with the new" has been used and abused for years. Oftentimes, it has more to do with making a profit rather than a legitimate need for something new. Across the United States, beautiful, historic architecture is frequently destroyed to make way for malls, high-rise apartment buildings, grandiose homes, and other structures. Unfortunately, little is done to protect our history.Over the past several years, it has become increasingly common for big-name developers to tear down Victorian, Craftsman, and Colonial buildings. This destruction is often performed with the thought that it is the property that holds the true value, not the structure that sits on it. Likewise, homeowners have begun to value their property's location over the house they have spent many years living in. Little regard is given to the painstaking details and craftsmanship that went into these buildings, nor the innate beauty of hand-carved woodwork and ornamentation. "Out with the old, in with the new" has resulted in people no longer appreciating the history and artistic integrity of our country's oldest buildings and failing to realize that once "the new" is brought in, "the old" is lost to us forever.It is bad enough that developers and private citizens are blind to the beauty around them; what is worse is that local governments refuse to step in and prevent this destruction. Cities and towns need to stand up to large developers that flash money around in the name of progress. Rather than allowing developers to tear down old buildings simply to put up new ones, local governments could enact ordinances to preserve their area's architecture. If an old building is unusable or unsafe as it is, the structure could be restored instead of demolished; not only would this save one-of-a-kind architecture, it is also an extremely environmentally-conscience concept because less building material is used and wasted.In addition, local governments could prevent homeowners from tearing down their homes if the buildings are of a historic nature. Town officials could easily draw up legislation to preserve all buildings erected before a certain date, which would effectively prevent anyone from destroying historic architecture or buying property with express intent of rebuilding on the land.If local governments take more of an interest in their towns' character and history right now, our culture will be preserved for many generations to come.5Select the correct answer.How could the writer improve the underlined sentence to remove the logical fallacy? A. The “out with the old, in with the new” approach to architecture is clearly a result of people who no longer care about our country’s oldest buildings. B. Everyone who appreciates our country’s oldest buildings should forget the architectural philosophy “out with the old, in with the new.” C. Anyone who accepts the “out with the old, in with the new” architectural philosophy is a menace to society. D. Some people have embraced the “out with the old, in with the new” philosophy, as the number of applications for demolition permits hit a record high this year.

ArchitectureThe modern philosophy of "out with the old, in with the new" has been used and abused for years. Oftentimes, it has more to do with making a profit rather than a legitimate need for something new. Across the United States, beautiful, historic architecture is frequently destroyed to make way for malls, high-rise apartment buildings, grandiose homes, and other structures. Unfortunately, little is done to protect our history.Over the past several years, it has become increasingly common for big-name developers to tear down Victorian, Craftsman, and Colonial buildings. This destruction is often performed with the thought that it is the property that holds the true value, not the structure that sits on it. Likewise, homeowners have begun to value their property's location over the house they have spent many years living in. Little regard is given to the painstaking details and craftsmanship that went into these buildings, nor the innate beauty of hand-carved woodwork and ornamentation. "Out with the old, in with the new" has resulted in people no longer appreciating the history and artistic integrity of our country's oldest buildings and failing to realize that once "the new" is brought in, "the old" is lost to us forever.It is bad enough that developers and private citizens are blind to the beauty around them; what is worse is that local governments refuse to step in and prevent this destruction. Cities and towns need to stand up to large developers that flash money around in the name of progress. Rather than allowing developers to tear down old buildings simply to put up new ones, local governments could enact ordinances to preserve their area's architecture. If an old building is unusable or unsafe as it is, the structure could be restored instead of demolished; not only would this save one-of-a-kind architecture, it is also an extremely environmentally-conscience concept because less building material is used and wasted.In addition, local governments could prevent homeowners from tearing down their homes if the buildings are of a historic nature. Town officials could easily draw up legislation to preserve all buildings erected before a certain date, which would effectively prevent anyone from destroying historic architecture or buying property with express intent of rebuilding on the land.If local governments take more of an interest in their towns' character and history right now, our culture will be preserved for many generations to come.2Select all the correct answers.Which two statements explain why the underlined text is a logical fallacy? It is a straw man. It makes an overly general statement about people. Rather than addressing an argument people actually make about modern architecture, it addresses an argument that is easier to rebut. It restates its own claim in different words. It claims that “out with the old, in with the new” has caused people to stop loving antique architecture, without providing any evidence.