lunes, 30 de julio de 2012



SAY IT NOW british institute

Más de 600 oraciones que abordan 
toda la gramática inglesa con diccionario, tiempos verbales, verbos especiales, ejercitación y demás

Se puede consultar igualmente 


Lo que se espera de ti es que ENTIENDAS el contenido de los dichos y de los chistes.

Opportunity makes the thief.


The things most people want to know are usually none of their business.

- I say, porter! How long will the next train be?
- About six carriages, sir.
- Smart, aren’t you?
- No sir. I’m Jenkins. Smart’s on strike.


It’s the overtakers who keep the undertakers busy.


The only people who haven’t appeared on television are those who are too busy watching it.


You really have insomnia if you can’t sleep when it’s time to get up.

I’ve sometimes thought of marrying
And then I’ve thought again.


To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive.


Seven people in every eight are insured against an accident. The eighth person has the accident.

Rush hour?-
When the traffic stands still.

What will history say?
History will tell lies, as usual.

Don’t kill your wife with housework.
Let electricity do it.

13. Fantastic!!!

- I’ve been practising ten hours a day. I can play everything Brahms or Beethoven wrote plus an abundance of Bach and Bartok
- Last night on television I saw a man play the piano with his nose...
- What’s the use.

¿Necesitas ayuda?

Recurre a (diccionario)

domingo, 29 de julio de 2012


A Question of Catholic Honesty
by Daniel C. Maguire

Dr. Maguire is professor of moral theology at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and past president of the Society of Christian Ethics. He wasthe visiting professor of moral theology at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana, during the 1983-84 school year. This article appeared in the Christian Century, September 14-21, 1983-84 p. 803-807. Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation; used by permission. Current articles and subscription information can be found at This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted and Winnie Brock.

"In the ‘already but not yet’ of Christian existence, members of the church choose different paths to move toward the realization of the kingdom in history. Distinct moral options coexist as legitimate expressions of Christian choice." This "prochoice" statement recently made by the Catholic bishops of the United States has nothing to do with abortion. Rather, it addresses the possibility of ending life on earth through nuclear war. On that cataclysmic issue, the bishops’ pastoral letter on peace warns against giving "a simple answer to complex questions." It calls for "dialogue." Hand-wringingly sensitive to divergent views, the bishops give all sides a hearing, even the winnable nuclear war hypothesis -- a position they themselves find abhorrent. At times they merely raise questions when, given their own views, they might well have roundly condemned.
Change the topic to abortion, and nothing is the same. On this issue, the bishops move from the theological mainstream to the radical religious right. Here they have only a single word to offer us: No! No abortion ever -- yesterday, today or tomorrow. No conceivable tragic complexity could ever make abortion moral. Here the eschaton is reached: there is no "already but not yet"; there is only "already." "Distinct moral options" do not exist; only unqualified opposition to all abortions moves toward "the realization of the kingdom in history." There is no need for dialogue with those who hold other views or with women who have faced abortion decisions. Indeed, as Marquette University theologian Dennis Doherty wrote some years ago, there seems to be no need even for prayer, since no further illumination, divine or otherwise, is anticipated.
Here we have no first, second, third and fourth drafts, no quibbles over "curbing" or "halting." Here we have only "a simple answer to complex questions." The fact that most Catholics, Protestants and Jews disagree with this unnuanced absolutism is irrelevant. The moral position of those who hold that not every abortion is murder is treated as worthless. Moreover, the bishops would outlaw all disagreement with their view if they could, whether by way of the Buckley-Hatfield amendment, the Helms-Hyde bill, or the Hatch amendment.
As a Catholic theologian, I find this situation abhorrent and unworthy of the richness of the Roman Catholic traditions that have nourished me. I indict not only the bishops, but also the "petulant silence" (Beverly Harrison’s phrase) or indifference of many Catholic theologians who recognize the morality of certain abortions, but will not address the subject publicly. I indict also the male-dominated liberal Catholic press which does too little to dissipate the myth of a Catholic monolith on abortion. It is a theological fact of life that there is no one normative Catholic position on abortion. The truth is insufficiently known in the American polity because it is insufficiently acknowledged by American Catholic voices.
This misconception leads not only to injustice but to civil threat, since non-Catholic as well as Catholic citizens are affected by it. The erroneous belief that the Catholic quarter of the American citizenry unanimously opposes all abortions influences legislative and judicial decisions, including specific choices such as denying abortion funding for poor women. The general public is also affected in those communities where Catholic hospitals are the only health care facilities. The reproductive rights of people living in such communities are curtailed if (as is common) their hospital is administratively locked into the ultraconservative view on abortion, and even on such reproductive issues as tubal ligation and contraception. Physicians practicing at such hospitals are compromised. Academic freedom is frequently inhibited at Catholic universities and colleges -- public agencies that often are federal contractors -- with consequent injustice to the students and to the taxpayers. (In the face of all of this, non-Catholic citizens have been surprisingly and -- I dare aver -- uncourageously polite.)
Ten years ago, Catholic theologian Charles Curran stated in the Jurist (32:183 [1973]) that "there is a sizable and growing number of Catholic theologians who do disagree with some aspects of the officially proposed Catholic teaching that direct abortion from the time of conception is always wrong." That "sizable number" has been growing since then despite the inhibiting atmosphere. It is safe to say that only a minority of Catholic theologians would argue that all abortions are immoral, though many will not touch the subject for fear of losing their academic positions. (As one woman professor at a large eastern Catholic university said, "I could announce that I had become a communist without causing a stir, but if I defended Roe v. Wade [the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion in the United States], I would not get tenure.")
To many, the expression "Catholic pluralism" sounds like a contradiction in terms. The Catholic system, however, does have a method for ensuring a liberal pluralism in moral matters: a system called "probabilism." While it is virtually unknown to most Catholics, probabilism became standard equipment in Catholic moral theology during the 17th century. It applies to situations where a rigorous consensus breaks down and people begin to ask when they may in good conscience act on the liberal dissenting view -- precisely the situation with regard to abortion today.
Probabilism was based on the insight that a doubtful moral obligation may not be imposed as though it were certain. "Where there is doubt, there is freedom" (Ubi dubium, ibi libertas) was its cardinal principle. It gave Catholics the right to dissent from hierarchical church teaching on a moral matter, if they could achieve "solid probability," a technical term. Solid probability could come about in two ways: intrinsically, in a do-it-yourself fashion, when a person prayerfully discovered in his or her conscience "cogent," nonfrivolous reasons for dissenting from the hierarchically supported view; or extrinsically, when "five or six theologians of stature held the liberal dissenting view, even though all other Catholic theologians, including the pope, disagreed. Church discipline required priest confessors who knew that a probable opinion existed to so advise persons in confession even if they themselves disagreed with it.
In a very traditional book, Moral and Pastoral Theology, written 50 years ago for the training of seminarians, Henry Davis, S.J., touched on the wisdom of probabilism by admitting that since "we cannot always get metaphysical certainty" in moral matters, we must settle for consenting "freely and reasonably, to sufficiently cogent reasons."
Three things are noteworthy about probabilism: (1) a probable, opinion which allows dissent from the hierarchically maintained rigorous view is entirely based on insight -- one’s own or that of at least five or six experts. It is not based on permission, and it cannot be forbidden. (2) No moral debate -- -and that includes the abortion debate -- is beyond the scope of a probabilistic solution. To quote Father Davis again: "It is the merit of Probabilism that there are no exceptions whatever to its application; once given a really probable reason for the lawfulness of an action in a particular case, though contrary reasons may be stronger, there are no occasions on which I may not act in accordance with the good probable reason that I have found." (3) Probabilism is theologically deep, going back to John and Paul’s scriptural teaching that Spirit-filled persons are "taught of God," and to Thomas Aquinas’s doctrine that the primary law for the believer is the grace of the Holy Spirit poured into the heart, while all written law -- including even Scripture, as well as the teachings of the popes and councils -- is secondary. Probabilism allows one to dissent from the secondary through appeal to the primary teaching of the Spirit of God. It is dangerous, of course, but it is also biblical and thoroughly Catholic.
There are far more than five or six Catholic theologians today who approve abortions under a range of circumstances, and there are many spiritual and good people who find "cogent," nonfrivolous reasons to disagree with the hierarchy’s absolutism on this issue. This makes their disagreement a "solidly probable" and thoroughly respectable Catholic viewpoint. Abortion is always tragic, but the tragedy of abortion is not always immoral.
The Bible does not forbid abortion. Rather, the prohibition came from theological and biological views that were seriously deficient in a number of ways and that have been largely abandoned. There are at least nine reasons why the old taboo has lost its footing in today’s Catholic moral theology. In a 1970 article "A Protestant Ethical Approach," in The Morality of Abortion (with which few Catholic theologians would quarrel), Protestant theologian James Gustafson pointed out five of the foundational defects in the traditional Catholic arguments against all abortions: (1) These arguments relied on "an external judge" who would paternalistically "claim the right to judge the past actions of others as morally right or wrong," with insufficient concern for the experience of and impact on mothers, physicians, families and society. (2) The old arguments were heavily "juridical," and, as such, marked by "a low tolerance for moral ambiguity." (3) The traditional arguments were excessively "physical" in focus, with insufficient attention to "other aspects of human life." (I would add that the tradition did not have the advantage of modern efforts to define personhood more relationally. The definition of person is obviously central to the abortion question.) (4) The arguments were "rationalistic," with necessary nuances "squeezed out" by "timeless abstractions" which took the traditional Catholic reasoning "far from life." (5)The arguments were naturalistic and did not put "the great themes of the Christian faith at a more central place in the discussion." It would be possible to parallel Gustafson’s fair and careful criticisms with exhortations from the Second Vatican Council, which urged correctives in precisely these areas.
Other criticisms can be added to Gustafson’s list: (6) The theology that produced the traditional ban on all abortions was not ecumenically sensitive. The witness of Protestant Christians was, to say the least, underesteemed. Vatican II condemned such an approach and insisted that Protestants are "joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them also He gives His gifts and graces, and is thereby operative among them with His sanctifying power." The bishops and others who condemn all abortion tout court should show some honest readiness to listen in the halls of conscience to Protestant views on abortion before they try to outlaw them in the halls of Congress.
(7) Furthermore, the old theology of abortion proceeded from a primitive knowledge of biology. The ovum was not discovered until the 19th century. Because modern embryology was unknown to the tradition, the traditional arguments were spawned in ignorance of such things as twinning and recombination in primitive fetal tissue and of the development of the cortex.
On the other hand, the teachings about abortion contained some remarkable scientific premonitions, including the insight that the early fetus could not have personal status. Said St. Augustine: "The law does not provide that the act [abortion] pertains to homicide. For there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation when it is not formed in flesh and so is not endowed with sense." As Joseph Donceel, S.J., notes, up until the end of the 18th century "the law of the Roman Catholic Church forbade one to baptize an aborted fetus that showed no human shape or outline." If it were a personal human being, it would deserve baptism. On the question of a rational soul entering the fetus, Donceel notes that Thomas Aquinas "spoke of six weeks for the male embryo and three months for the female embryo." In Aquinas’s hylomorphic theory, thematter had to be ready to receive the appropriate form. According to such principles, as Rosemary Ruether points out, "Thomas Aquinas might well have had to place the point of human ensoulment in the last trimester if he had been acquainted with modern embryology."
If the bishops and other negative absolutists would speak of tradition, let them speak of it in its full ambiguity and subtlety, instead of acting as though the tradition were a simplistic, Platonic negative floating through time untouched by contradiction, nuance or complexity.
(8) Vatican II urged priests and church officers to have "continuous dialogue with the laity." The arguments prohibiting all abortion did not grow out of such dialogue, nor are the bishops in dialogue today. If they were, they would find that few are dancing to the episcopal piping. A November 1982 Yankelovich poll of Catholic women shows that fewer than one-fifth would call abortion morally wrong if a woman has been raped, if her health is at risk, or if she is carrying a genetically damaged fetus. Only 27 per cent judge abortion as wrong when a physically handicapped woman becomes pregnant. A majority of Catholic women would allow a teen-ager, a welfare mother who can’t work, or a married woman who already has a large family to have an abortion.
Since the tradition has been shaped by the inseminators of the species (all Catholic theologians, priests and bishops have been men), is the implication that there is no value in the witness of the bearers? Why has all authority on this issue been assumed by men who have not been assigned by biology to bear children or by history to rear them? Are the Catholic women who disagree with the bishops all weak-minded or evil? Is it possible that not a single Catholic bishop can see any ambiguity in any abortion decision? The bishops are not unsubtle or unintelligent, and their pastoral letter on peace shows a surefooted approach to complexity. Their apparent 100 per cent unanimity against all abortion is neither admirable nor even plausible. It seems, rather, imposed.
(9) This leads to the question of sin and sexism. Beverly Harrison (professor of Christian ethics at Union Theological Seminary in New York) charges that "much discussion of abortion betrays the heavy hand of the hatred of women." Are the negative absolutists sinlessly immune to that criticism? Since the so-called "prolife" movement is not dominated by vegetarian pacifists who find even nonpersonal life sacred, is the "prolife" fetal fixation innocent? Does it not make the fertilized egg the legal and moral peer of a woman? Indeed, in the moral calculus of those who oppose all abortion, does not the potential person outweigh the actual person of the woman? Why is the intense concern over the 1.5 million abortions not matched by an equal concern over the male-related causes of these 1.5 million unwanted pregnancies? Has the abortion ban been miraculously immune to the sexism rife in Christian history?
Feminist scholars have documented the long record of men’s efforts to control the sexuality and reproductivity of women. Laws showcase our biases. Is there no sexist bias in the new Catholic Code of Canon Law? Is that code for life or against women’s control of their reproductivity? After all, canon law excommunicates a person for aborting a fertilized egg, but not for killing a baby after birth. One senses here an agenda other than the simple concern for life. What obsessions are operating? A person could push the nuclear button and blow the ozone lid off the earth or assassinate the president (but not the pope) without being excommunicated. But aborting a five-week-old precerebrate, prepersonal fetus would excommunicate him or her. May we uncritically allow such an embarrassing position to posture as "prolife"? Does it not assume that women cannot be trusted to make honorable decisions, and that only male-made laws and male-controlled funding can make women responsible and moral about their reproductivity?
The moral dilemma of choosing whether to have an abortion faces only some women between their teens and their 40s. The self-styled "prolife" movement is made up mainly of men and postfertile women. Is there nothing suspicious about passionately locating one’s orthodoxy in an area where one will never be personally challenged or inconvenienced?
A moral opinion merits respectable debate if it is supported by serious reasons which commend themselves to many people and if it has been endorsed by a number of reputable religious or other humanitarian bodies. Note the two requirements: good reasons and reliable authorities.The principle of respectable debate is based on some confidence in the capacity of free minds to come to the truth, and on a distrust of authoritarian shortcuts to consensus and uniformity. This principle is integral to American political thought and to the Catholic doctrine of probabilism. On the other hand, prohibition represents a despairing effort to compel those whom one cannot convince; it can only raise new and unnecessary doubts about Catholic compatibility with democratic political life.
But what of legislators who personally believe that all abortion is wrong? Those legislators must recognize that it is not their function to impose their own private moral beliefs on a pluralistic society. St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas both found prostitution morally repugnant, but felt that it should be legalized for the greater good of the society. St. Thomas wryly but wisely suggested that a good legislator should imitate God, who could eliminate certain evils but does not do so for the sake of the greater good. The greater good supported by the principle of respectable debate is the good of a free society where conscience is not unduly constrained on complex matters where good persons disagree. Thus a Catholic legislator who judges all abortions to be immoral may in good conscience support the decisions of Roe v. Wade, since that ruling is permissive rather than coercive. It forces no one to have an abortion, while it respects the moral freedom of those who judge some abortions to be moral.
Good government insists that essential freedoms be denied to no one. Essential freedoms concern basic goods such as the right to marry, the right to a trial by jury, the right to vote, the right to some education and the right to bear or not to bear children. The right not to bear children includes abortion as a means of last resort. Concerning such goods, government should not act to limit freedom along income lines, and should ensure that poverty takes no essential freedoms from any citizen. Furthermore, the denial of abortion funding to poor women is not a neutral stance, but a natalist one. The government takes sides on .the abortion debate by continuing to pay for births while denying poor women funds for the abortion alternative that is available to the rich. Funding cutbacks are also forcing many to have later abortions, since they have to spend some months scraping up the funds denied them by the government. The denial of funding is an elitist denial of moral freedom to the poor and a stimulus for later or unsafe abortions.
Abortion has become the Catholic orthodoxy’s stakeout. In January 1983, California Bishop Joseph Madera threatened excommunication for "lawmakers who support the effective ejection from the womb of an unviable fetus." (His warning also extended to "owners and managers of drugstores" where abortion-related materials are sold.) In a bypass of due process, Sister Agnes Mary Mansour was pressured out of her identity as a Sister of Mercy because her work for the poor of Michigan involved some funding for abortions. Despite his distinguished record in working for justice and peace, Robert Drinan, S.J., was ordered out of politics by the most politically involved pope of recent memory. I am not alone in seeing a link between this and the, antecedent right-wing furor over Father Drinan’s position on abortion funding. The 4,000 Sisters of Mercy (who operate the second-largest hospital system in the U.S., after the Veterans Administration) were ordered, under threat of ecclesiastical penalties, to abandon their plan to permit tubal ligations in their hospitals. A Washington, D.C., group called Catholics for Free Choice had its paid advertisements turned down by Commonweal, the National Catholic Reporter and America. This group is not promoting abortions, but simply honestly acknowledging Catholic pluralism on the issue. (Interestingly, the only "secular" magazine to refuse their advertisement was the National Review.) In June 1983, Lynn Hilliard, a part-time nurse in a Winnipeg, Manitoba, clinic where abortions are performed, had her planned marriage in a Catholic parish peremptorily canceled by Archbishop Adam Exner two weeks before the event, even though the archbishop admitted he did not know whether Ms. Hilliard was formally responsible for any abortions. In the face of all this injustice, Catholic theologians remain remarkably silent; they exhibit no signs of anger. Seven hundred years ago, Thomas Aquinas lamented that we had no name for the virtue of anger in our religious lexicon. He quoted the words of St. John Chrysostom, words that are still pertinent today: "Whoever is without anger, when there is cause for anger, sins."
Viewed 20786 times.



Other Social Issues

In Spanish: see Iglesia

sábado, 28 de julio de 2012



SAY IT NOW british institute

Consejos (y datos) que te van a ayudar a traducir; tenlos siempre a mano

Si te preguntáramos qué significa "gato", seguramente nos vas a pedir que la "pongamos en marcha" para poder contestar. Si te dijéramos "Se me rompió el gato" inmediatamente te darías cuenta que no es precisamente del “mamífero felino” sino del que te levanta el auto. Lo mismo sucedería si te preguntáramos por la palabra "SE". No es el mismo "SE" en SE DICE que en SE MATÓ.
Sin embargo, si te presentáramos la palabra "pomodoreamos" sabrías de qué se trata; dirías que  es un verbo, AUNQUE SEGUIRíAS SIN SABER SU SIGNIFICADO. La terminación ...AMOS te dio la pauta.
Para traducir del inglés al castellano es necesario conocer esas "claves" (...amos); acaso sean sólo  letras o  combinaciones de letras,  o de  toda una serie de características que nos "avisan" de qué se trata para poder buscar en el diccionario.
En 'the leaves ' , leaves es un SUSTANTIVO por estar precedido por THE, artículo; en 'he leaves', leaves es un verbo por estar precedido por HE,  pronombre.
De no haber procedido a este análisis -sustantivo o verbo- al ir al diccionario NO SABRIA  cómo buscar. Cuando 'leaves' es verbo, significa PARTIR; cuando es sustantivo, HOJA. ¿Qué elegiría de no haber hecho el correspondiente análisis?
Si nos permites una sugerencia, analiza ,ante todo, los VERBOS; APRENDE LAS CLAVES VERBALES; una vez identificado el verbo, los contenidos a su izquierda son sustantivos y adjetivos. Con eso ya has resuelto las tres cuartas partes del problema.

1. IT significa "lo". 
    A veces no significa nada: It’s drink, es la bebida.
    Reemplaza, como pronombre, a los animales y a las cosas
2. THEM significa "los, las"
3.  I AM significa "soy/estoy"
4.  'S puede ser 'IS' , 'HAS' o caso posesivo
     HE'S coming (IS), viene, está viniendo.
     HE'S gone (HAS), se ha ido.
     THE BOY'S BOOK, el libro del niño
5.  ...ER; sufijo de  comparación: largER than: mas grande que.
      Idem verbal, para sustantivar: speak, hablar; speakER, locutor.
6.  ...EST; sufijo de superlación: the largEST., el más grande.
7.  Cuando un sufijo ( /...est /...ed, etc ) va precedido de doble  consonante idéntica (biGGest / swiMMing, etc) para buscar la palabra en el diccionario  se debe eliminar, junto con el sufijo, una de las consonantes. (biGGEst: big)
8. TURN  quiere decir, entre otras cosas, GIRAR. Sin embargo, seguido de una
     partícula adverbial ( ON, por ejemplo) cambia su significado: ENCENDER.
9. La S final es clave verbal (he leaveS, parte, sale) pero también clave de
     plural de sustantivos: catS (gatos).
10 DO significa hacer, pero no tiene significado cuando es un auxiliar: I DO my homework (hago los deberes) pero DO you come on Sundays? (¿vienes los
11 ...ES  es clave verbal y sustrantiva. (He pushES -empuja- leavES, hojas)
12 ...LY es sufijo verbal; significa MENTE; finalLY, finalMENTE)
13 SO significa TAN : so good, tan bueno.; también significa POR LO TANTO,
14 THAT significa QUE: he said that Mary...,  DIJO QUE MARIA; en este uso -
     conjunción- puede suprimirse he said Mary...; también significa    ESE/AQUEL (ése-aquél)
15. WAS Y WERE son  pasados de TO BE (ser/estar)

16...ING. Equivale a "...ando/endo", aunque no siempre: The wind is blowING
-el  viento está soplando- pero Learning English is... -aprender inglés es..
17  HAVE significa  tener: I have a book (TENGO un libro)
                                haber: He has learnt it (lo HA aprendido)
                                hacer: Thay have it washed (lo HACEN lavar)
18. HAVE con JUST y un participio pasado (...ado/ido) se traduce por ACABAR
      He has just come: acaba de venir
      He had just come: acababa de venir.
19. Los participios pasados se traducen al castellano por ...ado/ido
      washED: lavado / gone: ido
20. BE más participio pasado es VOZ PASIVA. En este caso BE siempre se
      traduce  por SER: he will BE TAUGHT, se le enseñará (será enseñado)
21.  "SE" en castellano es forma de pasiva. Se analizará  el agua (el agua será
22. HAVE GOT significa lo mismo que have: tener. He has got a dog idem he
     has a dog, tiene un perro..
23. Siempre que detrás de una preposición haya un verbo, éste estará en .
      BY learnING: aprendiendo
      FOR comING, para venir
24 ...ED es clave de tiempo pasado y de participio pasado.
25. ASK significa preguntar o pedir.
26  GET es un escándalo de significados. Busque bien a fondo en diccionario.
27 Se recomienda el uso de un buen diccionario.
28 Las diferencias ortográficas entre el inglés  americano y el británico se
      remiten a algunas terminaciones que no perjudican ni su búsqueda ni su
      HonOUR se transforma en honOR en americano; colOUR en colOR, etc.
      TraveLLer se trasnsforma en TRAVELER ; waGGon en waGon, etc
      CentRE en centER; theatRE en theatER.
      DefenCe se transforma en defenSe
      Plough en plow; tyre en tire; gaol en jail; determine, examine y doctrine en americano suprimen la "E" final. 



SAY IT NOW  british institute

Más de 600 oraciones que abordan 
toda la gramática inglesa con diccionario, tiempos verbales, verbos especiales, ejercitación y demás

Se puede consultar igualmente 

  • Textos para traducir

¿Cómo no hablar de computación? A propósito de 'computers'... en los textos que te sugerimos que interpretes vas a notar  la "transparencia" de la mayoría de las palabras: anuncian su traducción.




1. The 1980s witnessed the introduction and widespread use of personal computers  at all levels of schooling.  During the decade the number of computers used in U.S.  elementary and secondary schools increased from under 100,000 to over 2.5 million.  A majority of students now use computers and COMPUTER SOFTWARE sometime during the school year--either to learn about computers or as a tool for learning other subjects.  By the end of the decade, the typical school had 1 computer per 20 students, a ratio that computer educators feel is still not high enough to affect classroom learning as much as books and classroom conversation do.


Witnessed: dar testimonio / widespread: difundido / schooling: enseñanza / increased: aumentar / from... to: desde...hasta / sometime: alguna vez, en algún momento / ratio: promedio / classroom learning: aprendizaje áulico / do: reemplaza a affect, afectar.

2. Some critics see computer education as merely the latest in a series of unsuccessful attempts to revolutionize education through the use of audio- and visually-oriented nonprint media. For example, motion pictures, broadcast television,  audio recorders, and videotapes were all initially heralded for their instructional potential, but each of these ultimately became minor classroom tools alongside conventional methods.


Merely: meramente / latest: la última / unsuccessful: sin éxito / through: por medio de / broadcast: transmisión / heralded: estimados / tools: herramientas / alongside: en comparación con .

3. Supporters believe, however, that computers are a much more powerful learning medium than the others that preceded it. They cite the essential interactive nature of using computers programmed to provoke decision making and manipulations of visual environments.  Also, each computer is controlled by one student or pair of students.  Learning tasks can become more individualized, enabling each student to receive immediate feedback.  Some experts say that having students work collaboratively on computers leads to greater initiative and more autonomous learning.


Supporters: los que están a favor / learning medium: recurso de aprendizaje / cite: nombrar / decision making: toma de decisiones / environments: entornos / tasks: tareas / enabling: autorizar / feedback: retroalimentación /  having students work: hacer trabajar a los estudiantes / leads: conducir .

4. Computers in elementary and secondary schools are used in two major contexts.  The first is computer-education instruction:  how to use WORD PROCESSING programs; how to program computers in languages such as BASIC, PASCAL, and LOGO ;  and how to use other computer applications such as database programs.and spread-sheets.  One-half of computer use by secondary students and one-third of the use of elementary students is of this kind.  From 1985 to 1989, keyboarding and word-processing instruction increased rapidly, but computer-programming instruction declined, as schools sought to involve all students in computer education, not just the few excited by programming.


Spread-sheets: planillas de cálculo / use: sust.,  uso / kind: tipo, forma / declined: declinar / sought: pasado de seek, buscar / few: pocos / excited: entusiasmados

Personal Computers


1. A personal computer is a computer that is based on a MICROPROCESSOR, a small SEMICONDUCTOR chip that performs the operations of a CENTRAL PROCESSING UNIT (CPU).  The general class of microcomputers comprises computers based on microprocessors. The personal computer is a microcomputer.
Personal computers are single-user machines, whereas larger computers generally have multiple users.  The first generation of personal computers were distinguishable from MINICOMPUTERS  by a small memory capacity, typically in the 16-64 kilobyte range (a kilobyte, or K, is 1,024 BYTES). Models available from the mid-1980s, however, had memories in the megabyte to gigabyte range (a megabyte, or M, is 1,024K, and a gigabyte is 1,024M);  this increased memory capacity equaled and even surpassed the power of earlier mini-computers.


Comprises: comprender, abarcar / single-user: usuario único / whereas: en cambio, mientras que / range: rango / available: disponibles / mid-1980s: mediados de los '80 / however: sin embargo / surpassed: sobrepasar / earlier: (las) primeras

2. Basic Structure
A computer system consists of three parts:  the central processing unit (CPU), INPUT-OUTPUT DEVICES, and memory.  A CPU performs arithmetic and logic operations.  The microprocessors of personal computers process data in 8-bit, 16-bit, or 32-bit chunks (see BIT, COMPUTER).
The most common input-output devices are keyboards and cathode-ray tube (CRT) displays, which can provide both graphic and text modes.  Other input-output devices include modems, for interacting over the telephone;  the mouse, joystick, and light pen, for making tactile input;  and printers, for producing hard, or permanent, output.


Performs: ejecutar, llevar a cabo / devices: instrumentos / both: ambos /
tactile inputs: entradas dactilográficas.

3. Primary memory refers to memory that is directly accessible by the CPU.  Many older CPUs have primary memories with 64-kilobyte capacities.  Newer processors can handle 1 megabyte or more.  Personal computers are often packaged with less primary memory than the CPU can handle.  A wide range of add-on memory devices, have, therefore, been made available.


Older: más viejos / newer: más nuevos / handle: manejar / packaged: (en este caso) vendidas / add-on memory: que agregan memoria.

4. Secondary memory refers to external memory required for storing data that will not fit into the computer's primary memory. Secondary-memory media typically used in personal computers include one or more magnetic floppy disks, each of which can store up to about 1.4 million characters of text information, and internally mounted hard disks that can store about 20 million or more characters each. (Continued)


Storing: almacenar / fit: caber .



1. Artificial intelligence (AI) is the ability of an artificial mechanism to exhibit intelligent behavior.  Artificial intelligence is also the name of the field in which artificial mechanisms that exhibit intelligence are developed and studied. The term invites philosophical speculation about what constitutes the mind or intelligence.  Such questions can be considered separately, however, as the endeavor to construct and understand increasingly sophisticated mechanisms remains.


Behavior conducta / developed: desarrollar / term: término /  mind: mente /  endeavor: esfuerzo / increasingly: que aumentan / remains: permanecer.

2. While research in all aspects of AI is vigorous, there is concern that both the progress and expectations of AI have been overstated.  AI programs are primitive when compared to the kinds of intuitive reasoning and induction of which the human brain is capable.  AI has shown great promise in the area of EXPERT SYSTEMS, or knowledge-based expert programs, which, although powerful when answering questions within a specific domain, are nevertheless incapable of any type of adaptable, or truly intelligent, reasoning.


While: mientras / research: investigación / concern: acuerdo / overstated: sobreestimado / kinds: tipos, clases / reasoning: razonamiento / brain: cerebro / capable: capaz / shown: mostrar / knowledge-based: basados en el conocimiento / although: aunque / within: dentro de / nevertheless: sin embargo.

3. Examples of artificially intelligent systems include computer programs that perform medical diagnoses, legal reasoning, speech understanding, vision interpretation, natural-language processing, problem solving, and learning. Most of these systems are far from being perfected.  Most have proved valuable, however, either as research vehicles or in specific, practical applications. (Continued)


Speech: habla / solving: resolución /  far from: lejos de / either...or: o...o / DICTIONARY: WORD REFERENCE