Exercise 2. Поставьте артикли a/an или the там, где необходимо. Объясните наличие/ отсутствие артикля пунктом из правила (разобрать по образцу каждое предложение Переведите предложения. 1. It was … second trip to Memphis. 2. This is … map. … map is large. 3. He is … smartest student in … university.

1. It was the second trip to Memphis. (The ставится перед порядеовыми числительными)

2. This is a map. The map is large. (A ставится перед существительным, о котором упомянается впервые. Во втором предложении оно упомянается не впервые и мы знаем о какой карте идёт речь, поэтому определённый артикль.

3. He is the smartest student in university. (The используется вместе с превосходной степенью прилагательных. University используется без артикля если речь идёт не конкретно о здании университета.)

1.       I do my duty

2.       We do our homework

3.       I do know him.

4.       I’m doing my exam in a few weeks.

5.       He does know how to play piano.

6.       I need to do my homework now.

7.       My friend does his best to win in the competition

8.       I did lock the door

9.       He does understand you.

10.   Do you do exercises every day?

11.   My mum likes to do shopping, but I don't

12.   Do you know her? She is my big sister

13.   Doing nothing seems to be her hobby.

14.   May I help you to do the accounts?

Law and sеciety 
Mr. Jones, having murdered his wife, was burying her in the garden one night, when his neighbour, hearing the noisе, asked him what he was doing. 
“Just burying the сat,” said Mr. Jones. 
“Funny sort of time to bury a cat,” said the neighbour. 
“Funny sort of cat,” said Mr, Jones.
Now it is obvious to everyone that, in а community such as the one in which we live, some kind оf law is necessary to try to prevent people like Mr. Jones from killing their wives. When the world was at а very primitive stage, there was no such law, and, if а man chose to kill his wife оr if a woman succeeded in killing her husband, that was their own bisinеsз and no one interfered оfficially.
But, for а very long time now, members of every community have made laws for themselves in sеlf-protection. Otherwise it would have meant that the stronger man could have done what he liked with the weaker, and bad men could have joined together and terrorized the whole neighbourhood.
If it were not for the law, you could not go out in broad daylight without the fear of bеing kidnapped, robbed or murdered. There are far, far more good people in the world than bad, but there are enough of the bad to make law necessary in the interests of everyone. 
There is no difficulty in understanding this but it is just as important to understand that law is not necessary just because there are bad people in the world. If we were all as good аs we ought to be, laws would still be necessary. If we never told lies, never took anything that didn't belong to us, never omitted to do anything that we ought to do and never did anything that we ought not to do, we should still require.a set of rules of behaviour, in other words laws, to enable us to live in any kind of satisfactory state.
How is one good man in a motor-car to pass another good man also in а motor-car coming in the opposite direction, unless there is some rule of the road? People sometimes hover_ in front of one another when they are walking on the pavement before they can pass, and they may even collide. Not much harm is done then, but, if two good men ia motor-cars going in the opposite directions hover in front of one another, not knowing which side to pass, the result wiIl probably be that there will be two good men less in the world. 
So you can see that there must be laws, however good we may be. Unfortunately, howevеr, we are none of us always good and some of us are bad, gr at any rate have our bad moments, and so the law has to provide for all kinds of possibilities. Suppose you went to a greengrocer and bought some potatoes and found on your retuп home that they were mouldy or even that some of them were stones. What could you do if there were no laws on the subject? In the аbsenсе of law you could only rely upon the law of the jungle. You could go back to the shop, demand proper potatoes and hit the shopkeeper on the nose if he refused to give them to you. You might, then look round the shop to try to find some decent potatoes. While you were doing this, the shopkeeper might hit you on the back of the neck with a pound weight. Altogether not a very satisfactory morning shopping.
Or you might pay your money to go to see а film at a cinema. You might go inside, sit down and wait. When the cinema was full, there might be flashed on the screen: “You've had it, Chums”. And that might be the whole оf the entertainment. If there were no law, the manager could safely remain on the premises and, as you went out, smile at you and say: “Норе уou've enjoyed the show, sir, “That is to say, he could do this safely if he were bigger than you оr had а well-armed bodyguard. Every country tries, therefore, to provide laws which will help its реople to live safely and as comfortably as possible.. This is not at аll an easy thing to do, and no country has been successful in producing laws which are entirely satisfactory.