CELPIP Listening Practice Test 40

MAN: You look like you're having a rough afternoon. Need a hand?

WOMAN: My car's around the corner and won't start. Nothing when I turn the key.

MAN: Not even a click? I've got a set with clamps in my trunk, but they're no use unless it's the battery.

WOMAN: How would I tell? I've been on hold with roadside on my cell twenty minutes, still ninth in line.

MAN: Quicker than that. Switch your headlights on and watch them.

WOMAN: I tried that already, out there with my flashlight. They come up bright, then sag right down.

MAN: That's your battery. If they'd held steady I'd have said starter.

WOMAN: I do own a booster pack. My brother made me buy one.

MAN: Is it in the car?

WOMAN: Plugged into the wall in my hall closet.

MAN: Then we'll use mine. I'll pull around beside yours.

WOMAN: Thanks. There's white crust on one of the posts. Should I get my wrench and clean them off first?

MAN: Crust that thin isn't what's stopping you, and a post that comes off doesn't always go back on. Leave it.

WOMAN: I'll go pop the hood.

WOMAN: That did not sound good. It caught, but it cranked four or five seconds.

MAN: That's slow. Did you keep it running after I unhooked you?

WOMAN: Ten minutes, right here. Then I shut it off to move my bag, and the restart was worse.

MAN: Don't shut it off again. Take it up to Fraser Street while it's still turning. They'll test it for nothing.

WOMAN: Could that wait an hour? My prescription's at the pharmacy, and that counter closes at five-thirty.

MAN: Their tester's gone by five, so no. And if you pull into the pharmacy lot, you may not pull out of it.

WOMAN: I could always flag someone down for another boost.

MAN: You could. A boost only lends you charge, though — it does nothing about whatever's losing it.

WOMAN: The parts store's right beside them. Should I pick up a battery there?

MAN: I'd buy nothing yet. If the charging system's the problem, you're a hundred and forty down and still stuck.

WOMAN: Wonderful. There goes my afternoon. Fine — test first, wallet shut.

MAN: My number's on the back of this receipt. Tell me what they find; I'm around till six.

WOMAN: It's me, from the parking lot. It failed the test in about a minute. The charging side's perfect — so that's the hundred and forty I'm not spending.

MAN: Good news. Are they putting a new one in?

WOMAN: That's what I'm deciding. Two hundred and ten, in today, two years on it. My cousin says the same battery's a hundred and thirty online.

MAN: It probably is. It also doesn't turn up till Thursday, and until then you're driving on one that's already quit once.

WOMAN: He'd put it in for me on the weekend.

MAN: Putting it in isn't what I'd worry about. It's the four days before.

WOMAN: No, you're right. Two-ten still stings, though.

MAN: Then ask whether the old one's still inside its warranty. Nobody volunteers that, and it comes off the bill.

WOMAN: The receipt's in a drawer at home, and I'm not crossing town.

MAN: You won't have to. There's a date stamped on the case.

WOMAN: I'll ask, then. Either way, they're putting it in before I leave.

MAN: Sensible. And keep a set of cables in that trunk someday.

WOMAN: It's on the list. Thanks again for stopping.

MAN: Hey, do you have a minute? It's about the retirement party invite.

WOMAN: Sure, what's up?

MAN: So, are we actually going to Nadia's retirement party or not?

WOMAN: I don't know. Part of me wants to, part of me really doesn't.

MAN: We haven't talked to her much since the mix-up over the budget report.

WOMAN: That's exactly it. It feels strange showing up like nothing happened.

MAN: The invitation did come to both of us, though. That has to mean something.

WOMAN: Or it means her assistant made the list and included the whole floor out of habit.

MAN: You really think that?

WOMAN: Honestly, maybe. I just don't want to walk in and have it be awkward all night.

MAN: It's a two-hour drive to the venue, so we'd need to decide soon.

WOMAN: I'm aware. I keep putting off replying to the invite.

MAN: Would it help to just call her, clear the air first?

WOMAN: Maybe. I've picked up the phone twice and put it back down both times.

MAN: That bad?

WOMAN: It's not that it's bad, I just don't know what I'd even say.

MAN: For what it's worth, I'd go if you wanted to go.

WOMAN: Would you, though? You weren't exactly thrilled when I brought it up last week.

MAN: I wasn't thrilled about the drive. That's different.

WOMAN: Fine, fair. Let's say we RSVP yes tonight, no more putting it off.

MAN: Are you sure?

WOMAN: Not really. But sitting here going back and forth isn't fixing anything either.

MAN: Okay. Yes, then. I'll book us a hotel room nearby.

WOMAN: Thank you. Just, let's not bring up the report while we're there.

WOMAN: Hi. I’m considering a MetroCycle membership because my office has moved. The subway gets me downtown, but I need a reliable last leg to work when the bus is delayed.

MAN: The monthly plan may suit you. It costs twenty-four dollars plus tax and renews every thirty days, rather than on the first of each month. Electric-assist bikes carry an extra usage surcharge.

WOMAN: I’d use the regular bikes. I thought the membership included an hour each time.

MAN: It did during a pilot project—sorry, that ended last winter. The current allowance is forty-five minutes per trip. You can take several trips daily because the clock resets once you return the bike securely. It does not reset if you merely pause while keeping the bike checked out.

WOMAN: That should cover my ride. The map shows stations at Union Square and Mercer Street. Are both permanent?

MAN: Union Square is. The Mercer Street station is temporarily two blocks east because of roadwork. The app shows the new site, but the printed subway map is outdated. Use the live map; it also displays available bikes and empty docks.

WOMAN: What if every dock is occupied? I don’t want charges while circling the neighbourhood.

MAN: Report the station as full in the app before your included time expires. You’ll receive a fifteen-minute grace period to reach another station. It isn’t automatic, and customer service may not reverse a charge without a report in the system.

WOMAN: Can I leave the bike beside the station after reporting it?

MAN: No. It must still be locked into an official dock. Cable locks exist at a few event sites, but not Mercer Street.

WOMAN: How steep are the overtime charges?

MAN: For a standard bike, the first thirty minutes beyond your allowance cost four dollars. Each later thirty-minute block costs eight dollars, even when partly used. A fifty-minute trip therefore costs four dollars extra, whereas an eighty-minute trip costs twelve.

WOMAN: That could add up. Would the annual plan be safer?

MAN: It is cheaper over twelve months, but the riding limit and overtime rates are identical. Since your route is new, start monthly, test station availability for a few weeks, and switch later if it works consistently.

WOMAN: Fair enough. I’ll register tonight.

MAN: Once your card is verified, the membership begins when you unlock your first bike, not when you submit the form.

MAN: A record that had stood in Elmsworth since 1994 fell early Saturday, when twenty-two-year-old delivery courier Naomi Castellano completed the town's Harbour Loop half-marathon in one hour, eleven minutes and eighteen seconds, beating the previous mark by nearly forty seconds. Castellano, who only began serious training last autumn after her cycling club disbanded, said she had not expected to contend for the record at all, adding that she treated Saturday's race as, in her own words, a training run with better snacks. Race director Owen Fitzhugh, who has organized the Harbour Loop for eleven years, said the course was altered this year to avoid roadwork near the marina, a change some runners feared would slow finishing times; instead, the revised route, largely downhill for its final three kilometres, appears to have helped Castellano's pace. Fitzhugh cautioned, however, that officials have not yet confirmed the new course matches the original distance precisely, meaning the record stays provisional until a survey is finished next week. The previous holder, Priya Deshmukh, now a physiotherapist in Elmsworth, attended the race and embraced Castellano at the finish line, calling the run genuinely thrilling to watch. Deshmukh's own mark had survived three decades of attempts, including two by her younger brother. Council member Ida Werner said Castellano's name will be inscribed on the harbourfront monument once the measurement is finalized, though she stopped short of naming a date.

woman1: We've got the venue confirmed for the eighteenth. Diana, are you still pushing for formal judging?

woman2: I am, Sophie. A scored competition gives our strongest speakers something real to work toward.

man1: Strongest speakers have plenty of stages already, Diana. What our newer members lack is a low-pressure place to actually start.

woman1: Ronan's onto something. Half our roster have never spoken publicly outside this room. A scored event might scare them off.

woman2: Scaring people off isn't the goal, but coddling them indefinitely doesn't build skill either. Stakes are how you grow.

man1: Stakes are useful when you're ready for them. Imposing stakes prematurely just confirms beginners' worst fears.

woman1: What if we ran two parallel categories — beginner showcase and advanced competition — under the same evening?

woman2: That could work, although splitting attention dilutes the prestige of the competitive side.

man1: Prestige isn't really our remit. We're a club, not a televised contest.

woman2: Fair, but if winners aren't visibly recognized, no one trains seriously between events.

woman1: Then prizes for advanced, certificates for showcase. Beginners still leave with something tangible without facing rankings.

man1: I could support that, provided the showcase goes first so newcomers aren't watching polished speakers and panicking.

woman2: Going first is reasonable. My condition is that judges for advanced are actually qualified — no friends of the club.

woman1: Agreed. I'll reach out to the regional federation tomorrow about lending us two certified adjudicators.

man1: And I'll write up an announcement that frames the showcase warmly. The wording matters more than people realise.

woman2: Send me the draft before posting; tone slips quickly when we're trying too hard to be welcoming.

MAN: I'm Alicia Beaudry, and for the next few minutes I want to look at how video platforms rate violent content for younger viewers. A growing number of parent groups are pressing platforms to adopt stricter content classification, and the debate has moved past simple age labels into how the recommendation system itself works. Child-safety advocate Marisol Fuentes cites an internal platform report showing that fifty-eight percent of violent-content views on under-sixteen accounts arrived through the recommendation feed rather than direct search. She argues current age labels restrict what a search returns but do nothing to filter what the algorithm queues up next, and wants a graduated rating tied specifically to recommendation eligibility. Platform representative Foster Radcliffe defends the existing descriptor system, which sorts content into three categories: violence, intense themes, and disturbing imagery. He calls it adequate if enforced properly. Radcliffe cites a documentary about a historical battle that was wrongly flagged and demoted in recommendations for three weeks before an appeal restored it, arguing descriptors should stay tied to what content actually contains, not to a shifting viewing statistic. Halifax middle-school teacher Yuki Tanaka has her own reason to be skeptical. During a digital-literacy unit, she had her class fill out an anonymous survey, more or less on a hunch, and the results floored her: twelve of her thirty students admitted using a parent's account or a fake birth year to get around the restrictions. Tanaka says that's enough to convince her a recommendation-based fix is basically pointless without real identity checks first, and wants age verification sorted out before anyone redesigns eligibility around Fuentes's numbers. The platform has begun testing a flagging system that restricts recommendations for accounts meeting two conditions together: a viewing pattern statistically similar to accounts already confirmed under sixteen, and an account created within the past eighteen months. Independent researchers looking at early trial data point out a limit: since Fuentes's own figure implies much of the exposure already happens through direct search, cutting recommendations won't stop a determined viewer from finding restricted content anyway. Neither side has moved much since the trial began. Fuentes still wants eligibility redesigned around her data, Radcliffe still insists the descriptors are doing their job, and Tanaka still isn't convinced any of it matters without better age checks. Taken together, the three positions point to a system built on trusting a self-reported birth year that was never going to hold up, no matter how the recommendation feed gets tuned. Platform executives say they will review the eighteen-month cutoff and the three descriptor categories once the trial's first full year of data is available, but for now, all three guests remain exactly where they started.