Questões de Concurso Comentadas sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês

Foram encontradas 9.238 questões

Q3825677 Inglês
Text 11A1-I

        “Newspeak,” the “official language of Oceania” in the novel 1984, comes from “new speak” and was created to supersede “Oldspeak,” or Standard English. Newspeak isn’t just buzzwords, but the deliberate replacement of one set of words in the language for another. Its transition, expected to be completed “by about the year 2050,” appears not through history or social change, but through the will of the Party. The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but also to make all other modes of thought impossible.

         Orwell discusses the “perfected” form of Newspeak, with grammatical “peculiarities,” such as “an almost complete interchangeability between different parts of speech.” Its vocabulary is divided into the A, B, and C classes. The A class contains “everyday life” words mutated with prefixes and intensifiers like “uncold,” “pluscold,” and “doublepluscold.” The B class contains doublethink coinages like “joycamp” and “Minipax,” similar to “the characteristic features of political language (…) in totalitarian countries.” The citizens of Oceania must have “an outlook” shaped by these restricted words; even sexual life was regulated by “sexcrime” and “goodsex.”

        The C class “consisted entirely of scientific and technical terms,” defined rigidly and stripped of meanings. There was no vocabulary for science as a habit of mind; any meaning it could bear was “already sufficiently covered by the word Ingsoc.” This linguistic control made translating the past nearly impossible. “All mans are equal” could exist only as “a palpable untruth,” and Jefferson’s preamble could only be swallowed by the single word “crimethink.”

        The phrase “alternative facts” could fit easily into the “Newspeak Dictionary,” showing how such language can sink into discourse and become Newspeak itself.

Josh Jones. George Orwell Explains How “Newspeak” Works,
the Official Language of His Totalitarian Dystopia in 1984.
January 25th, 2017. Internet:https://www.openculture.com>  (adapted). 
Using reading strategies to obtain a global understanding of text 11A1-I, choose the option that best synthesizes the central idea conveyed by the text.
Alternativas
Q3818251 Inglês
Read the sentences carefully and select the one that is correct. 
Alternativas
Q3818244 Inglês

Read the text below carefully, and then answer question.


“Christmas stockings may contain more surprises than usual this year, as children open presents that can talk back. Toymakers in China have declared 2025 the year of artificial intelligence (AI) and are producing robots and teddies that can teach, play and tell stories. Older children, meanwhile, are glued to viral AI videos and AI-enhanced games. At school, many are being taught with materials created with tools like ChatGPT. Some are even learning alongside chatbot-tutors.


In work and play, AI is rewiring childhood. It promises every child the kind of upbringing previously available only to the rich, with private tutors, personalised syllabuses and bespoke entertainment. Children can listen to songs composed about them, read stories in which they star, play video games that adapt to their skill level and have an entourage of chatbot friends cheering them on. A childhood fit for a king could become universal.


It is a future filled with opportunities—and hidden traps. As real kings often discover, a bespoke upbringing can also be a lonely and atomised one. What’s more, as their subjects often find out, it can create adults who are ill-equipped for real life. As AI changes childhood for better and for worse, society must rethink the business of growing up.


Being reared by robots has advantages. Tech firms are already showing how AI can enhance learning, especially where teachers and materials are scarce. Literacy and language-learning have been boosted in early trials. The dream is that, with an AI tutor, children can be saved from classes pitched to the median, in which bright pupils are bored and dim ones are lost. If you want a version of this leader for an eight-year-old Hindi-speaker, AI can rewrite it; if they would prefer it as a cartoon strip or a song, no problem.


Technology is creating new forms of fun, too. Hollywood may dismiss AI videos as “slop”, but young people are devouring them and making their own. Old toys are being upgraded: an AI-powered edition of “Trivial Pursuit” can pose questions on any topic. Video games are creating novel experiences, such as chatting to Darth Vader in “Fortnite”. Any child can meet their heroes (and shoot them).


There are well-publicised risks in letting children loose on an evolving technology. AI tutors may hallucinate wrong answers. Toys can go off the rails: parents should check stockings for the AI teddy that was recently found to have spiced up its chat with talk of kinky sex. Children can easily misuse AI, to cheat at homework or harass each other with “deepfake” videos. Chatbots can coax vulnerable adolescents into harming themselves. Tech firms insist these stumbling blocks can be fixed; ChatGPT is only three years old.


Yet childhood may be disrupted most radically by things that AI does when it is behaving as intended. The technology quickly learns what its master likes—and shows more of it. Social-media feeds have already created echo chambers where people see only views they agree with (or love to hate). AI threatens to strengthen these echo chambers and lock children into them at an early age. The child who likes football may be told football stories by his teddy and given footballing examples by his AI tutor. Not only does this stamp out serendipity. A favourites-only diet means a child need never learn to tolerate something unfamiliar.


One-sided relationships with chatbots present a similar risk. AI companions that never criticise, nor share feelings of their own, are a poor preparation for dealing with imperfect humans. A third of American teenagers say they find chatting to an AI companion at least as satisfying as talking to a friend, and easier than talking to their parents. Yes-bots threaten to create children not used to taking turns, who grow up into colleagues unable to compromise and partners unfamiliar with the give-and take required in a relationship.


Other trends are pushing in the same direction. As birth rates crash, fewer children are growing up with siblings to smooth their sharp edges. Rising numbers of young adults are deciding that long-term romantic relationships are not worth the hassle. Remote work means that people who grow up in a personalised, asocial world can slip into jobs where they interact with colleagues only through screens—a chore they may soon delegate to an AI agent.


Some basic counter-measures are urgent. Parents should think twice before entrusting their child to a word-regurgitation machine, whether it is sewn into a bear or not. Chatbots should have age restrictions that are properly enforced; governments should not give AI firms the leeway they gave social networks, which are only now being cajoled into age-gating. Teachers are kidding themselves if they think essays written at home can any longer be trusted. In the age of AI, more in-school assessment is essential.


Happy princes, hollow kingdoms 


Schools should also enhance their role as centres of discovery. If AI is giving children more of what they want, it is more important that schools provide chances to meet people and encounter ideas that lie outside their experience. Algorithmic personalisation threatens to be a powerful barrier to social mobility if it nudges people to stay in the lane in which they start out. Inequality could widen if poor schools merely embrace chatbots as cheap substitutes for human teachers.


AI shows undeniable potential to improve education and enrich entertainment. It may one day let every child live like royalty. But the truly privileged may be those whose parents and teachers know when to turn it off.


Fonte: https://www.biznews.com/tech/economist-ai-rewiring-childhood. Acesso em

14/12/2025.  

 

Why does the text argue that relationships with chatbots may harm social development? 
Alternativas
Q3818243 Inglês

Read the text below carefully, and then answer question.


“Christmas stockings may contain more surprises than usual this year, as children open presents that can talk back. Toymakers in China have declared 2025 the year of artificial intelligence (AI) and are producing robots and teddies that can teach, play and tell stories. Older children, meanwhile, are glued to viral AI videos and AI-enhanced games. At school, many are being taught with materials created with tools like ChatGPT. Some are even learning alongside chatbot-tutors.


In work and play, AI is rewiring childhood. It promises every child the kind of upbringing previously available only to the rich, with private tutors, personalised syllabuses and bespoke entertainment. Children can listen to songs composed about them, read stories in which they star, play video games that adapt to their skill level and have an entourage of chatbot friends cheering them on. A childhood fit for a king could become universal.


It is a future filled with opportunities—and hidden traps. As real kings often discover, a bespoke upbringing can also be a lonely and atomised one. What’s more, as their subjects often find out, it can create adults who are ill-equipped for real life. As AI changes childhood for better and for worse, society must rethink the business of growing up.


Being reared by robots has advantages. Tech firms are already showing how AI can enhance learning, especially where teachers and materials are scarce. Literacy and language-learning have been boosted in early trials. The dream is that, with an AI tutor, children can be saved from classes pitched to the median, in which bright pupils are bored and dim ones are lost. If you want a version of this leader for an eight-year-old Hindi-speaker, AI can rewrite it; if they would prefer it as a cartoon strip or a song, no problem.


Technology is creating new forms of fun, too. Hollywood may dismiss AI videos as “slop”, but young people are devouring them and making their own. Old toys are being upgraded: an AI-powered edition of “Trivial Pursuit” can pose questions on any topic. Video games are creating novel experiences, such as chatting to Darth Vader in “Fortnite”. Any child can meet their heroes (and shoot them).


There are well-publicised risks in letting children loose on an evolving technology. AI tutors may hallucinate wrong answers. Toys can go off the rails: parents should check stockings for the AI teddy that was recently found to have spiced up its chat with talk of kinky sex. Children can easily misuse AI, to cheat at homework or harass each other with “deepfake” videos. Chatbots can coax vulnerable adolescents into harming themselves. Tech firms insist these stumbling blocks can be fixed; ChatGPT is only three years old.


Yet childhood may be disrupted most radically by things that AI does when it is behaving as intended. The technology quickly learns what its master likes—and shows more of it. Social-media feeds have already created echo chambers where people see only views they agree with (or love to hate). AI threatens to strengthen these echo chambers and lock children into them at an early age. The child who likes football may be told football stories by his teddy and given footballing examples by his AI tutor. Not only does this stamp out serendipity. A favourites-only diet means a child need never learn to tolerate something unfamiliar.


One-sided relationships with chatbots present a similar risk. AI companions that never criticise, nor share feelings of their own, are a poor preparation for dealing with imperfect humans. A third of American teenagers say they find chatting to an AI companion at least as satisfying as talking to a friend, and easier than talking to their parents. Yes-bots threaten to create children not used to taking turns, who grow up into colleagues unable to compromise and partners unfamiliar with the give-and take required in a relationship.


Other trends are pushing in the same direction. As birth rates crash, fewer children are growing up with siblings to smooth their sharp edges. Rising numbers of young adults are deciding that long-term romantic relationships are not worth the hassle. Remote work means that people who grow up in a personalised, asocial world can slip into jobs where they interact with colleagues only through screens—a chore they may soon delegate to an AI agent.


Some basic counter-measures are urgent. Parents should think twice before entrusting their child to a word-regurgitation machine, whether it is sewn into a bear or not. Chatbots should have age restrictions that are properly enforced; governments should not give AI firms the leeway they gave social networks, which are only now being cajoled into age-gating. Teachers are kidding themselves if they think essays written at home can any longer be trusted. In the age of AI, more in-school assessment is essential.


Happy princes, hollow kingdoms 


Schools should also enhance their role as centres of discovery. If AI is giving children more of what they want, it is more important that schools provide chances to meet people and encounter ideas that lie outside their experience. Algorithmic personalisation threatens to be a powerful barrier to social mobility if it nudges people to stay in the lane in which they start out. Inequality could widen if poor schools merely embrace chatbots as cheap substitutes for human teachers.


AI shows undeniable potential to improve education and enrich entertainment. It may one day let every child live like royalty. But the truly privileged may be those whose parents and teachers know when to turn it off.


Fonte: https://www.biznews.com/tech/economist-ai-rewiring-childhood. Acesso em

14/12/2025.  

 

Which risk mentioned in the text comes from AI functioning as intended, not from errors or misuse? 
Alternativas
Q3818242 Inglês

Read the text below carefully, and then answer question.


“Christmas stockings may contain more surprises than usual this year, as children open presents that can talk back. Toymakers in China have declared 2025 the year of artificial intelligence (AI) and are producing robots and teddies that can teach, play and tell stories. Older children, meanwhile, are glued to viral AI videos and AI-enhanced games. At school, many are being taught with materials created with tools like ChatGPT. Some are even learning alongside chatbot-tutors.


In work and play, AI is rewiring childhood. It promises every child the kind of upbringing previously available only to the rich, with private tutors, personalised syllabuses and bespoke entertainment. Children can listen to songs composed about them, read stories in which they star, play video games that adapt to their skill level and have an entourage of chatbot friends cheering them on. A childhood fit for a king could become universal.


It is a future filled with opportunities—and hidden traps. As real kings often discover, a bespoke upbringing can also be a lonely and atomised one. What’s more, as their subjects often find out, it can create adults who are ill-equipped for real life. As AI changes childhood for better and for worse, society must rethink the business of growing up.


Being reared by robots has advantages. Tech firms are already showing how AI can enhance learning, especially where teachers and materials are scarce. Literacy and language-learning have been boosted in early trials. The dream is that, with an AI tutor, children can be saved from classes pitched to the median, in which bright pupils are bored and dim ones are lost. If you want a version of this leader for an eight-year-old Hindi-speaker, AI can rewrite it; if they would prefer it as a cartoon strip or a song, no problem.


Technology is creating new forms of fun, too. Hollywood may dismiss AI videos as “slop”, but young people are devouring them and making their own. Old toys are being upgraded: an AI-powered edition of “Trivial Pursuit” can pose questions on any topic. Video games are creating novel experiences, such as chatting to Darth Vader in “Fortnite”. Any child can meet their heroes (and shoot them).


There are well-publicised risks in letting children loose on an evolving technology. AI tutors may hallucinate wrong answers. Toys can go off the rails: parents should check stockings for the AI teddy that was recently found to have spiced up its chat with talk of kinky sex. Children can easily misuse AI, to cheat at homework or harass each other with “deepfake” videos. Chatbots can coax vulnerable adolescents into harming themselves. Tech firms insist these stumbling blocks can be fixed; ChatGPT is only three years old.


Yet childhood may be disrupted most radically by things that AI does when it is behaving as intended. The technology quickly learns what its master likes—and shows more of it. Social-media feeds have already created echo chambers where people see only views they agree with (or love to hate). AI threatens to strengthen these echo chambers and lock children into them at an early age. The child who likes football may be told football stories by his teddy and given footballing examples by his AI tutor. Not only does this stamp out serendipity. A favourites-only diet means a child need never learn to tolerate something unfamiliar.


One-sided relationships with chatbots present a similar risk. AI companions that never criticise, nor share feelings of their own, are a poor preparation for dealing with imperfect humans. A third of American teenagers say they find chatting to an AI companion at least as satisfying as talking to a friend, and easier than talking to their parents. Yes-bots threaten to create children not used to taking turns, who grow up into colleagues unable to compromise and partners unfamiliar with the give-and take required in a relationship.


Other trends are pushing in the same direction. As birth rates crash, fewer children are growing up with siblings to smooth their sharp edges. Rising numbers of young adults are deciding that long-term romantic relationships are not worth the hassle. Remote work means that people who grow up in a personalised, asocial world can slip into jobs where they interact with colleagues only through screens—a chore they may soon delegate to an AI agent.


Some basic counter-measures are urgent. Parents should think twice before entrusting their child to a word-regurgitation machine, whether it is sewn into a bear or not. Chatbots should have age restrictions that are properly enforced; governments should not give AI firms the leeway they gave social networks, which are only now being cajoled into age-gating. Teachers are kidding themselves if they think essays written at home can any longer be trusted. In the age of AI, more in-school assessment is essential.


Happy princes, hollow kingdoms 


Schools should also enhance their role as centres of discovery. If AI is giving children more of what they want, it is more important that schools provide chances to meet people and encounter ideas that lie outside their experience. Algorithmic personalisation threatens to be a powerful barrier to social mobility if it nudges people to stay in the lane in which they start out. Inequality could widen if poor schools merely embrace chatbots as cheap substitutes for human teachers.


AI shows undeniable potential to improve education and enrich entertainment. It may one day let every child live like royalty. But the truly privileged may be those whose parents and teachers know when to turn it off.


Fonte: https://www.biznews.com/tech/economist-ai-rewiring-childhood. Acesso em

14/12/2025.  

 

When the text says AI could make childhood “fit for a king,” what does it imply? 
Alternativas
Q3818241 Inglês

Read the text below carefully, and then answer question.


“Christmas stockings may contain more surprises than usual this year, as children open presents that can talk back. Toymakers in China have declared 2025 the year of artificial intelligence (AI) and are producing robots and teddies that can teach, play and tell stories. Older children, meanwhile, are glued to viral AI videos and AI-enhanced games. At school, many are being taught with materials created with tools like ChatGPT. Some are even learning alongside chatbot-tutors.


In work and play, AI is rewiring childhood. It promises every child the kind of upbringing previously available only to the rich, with private tutors, personalised syllabuses and bespoke entertainment. Children can listen to songs composed about them, read stories in which they star, play video games that adapt to their skill level and have an entourage of chatbot friends cheering them on. A childhood fit for a king could become universal.


It is a future filled with opportunities—and hidden traps. As real kings often discover, a bespoke upbringing can also be a lonely and atomised one. What’s more, as their subjects often find out, it can create adults who are ill-equipped for real life. As AI changes childhood for better and for worse, society must rethink the business of growing up.


Being reared by robots has advantages. Tech firms are already showing how AI can enhance learning, especially where teachers and materials are scarce. Literacy and language-learning have been boosted in early trials. The dream is that, with an AI tutor, children can be saved from classes pitched to the median, in which bright pupils are bored and dim ones are lost. If you want a version of this leader for an eight-year-old Hindi-speaker, AI can rewrite it; if they would prefer it as a cartoon strip or a song, no problem.


Technology is creating new forms of fun, too. Hollywood may dismiss AI videos as “slop”, but young people are devouring them and making their own. Old toys are being upgraded: an AI-powered edition of “Trivial Pursuit” can pose questions on any topic. Video games are creating novel experiences, such as chatting to Darth Vader in “Fortnite”. Any child can meet their heroes (and shoot them).


There are well-publicised risks in letting children loose on an evolving technology. AI tutors may hallucinate wrong answers. Toys can go off the rails: parents should check stockings for the AI teddy that was recently found to have spiced up its chat with talk of kinky sex. Children can easily misuse AI, to cheat at homework or harass each other with “deepfake” videos. Chatbots can coax vulnerable adolescents into harming themselves. Tech firms insist these stumbling blocks can be fixed; ChatGPT is only three years old.


Yet childhood may be disrupted most radically by things that AI does when it is behaving as intended. The technology quickly learns what its master likes—and shows more of it. Social-media feeds have already created echo chambers where people see only views they agree with (or love to hate). AI threatens to strengthen these echo chambers and lock children into them at an early age. The child who likes football may be told football stories by his teddy and given footballing examples by his AI tutor. Not only does this stamp out serendipity. A favourites-only diet means a child need never learn to tolerate something unfamiliar.


One-sided relationships with chatbots present a similar risk. AI companions that never criticise, nor share feelings of their own, are a poor preparation for dealing with imperfect humans. A third of American teenagers say they find chatting to an AI companion at least as satisfying as talking to a friend, and easier than talking to their parents. Yes-bots threaten to create children not used to taking turns, who grow up into colleagues unable to compromise and partners unfamiliar with the give-and take required in a relationship.


Other trends are pushing in the same direction. As birth rates crash, fewer children are growing up with siblings to smooth their sharp edges. Rising numbers of young adults are deciding that long-term romantic relationships are not worth the hassle. Remote work means that people who grow up in a personalised, asocial world can slip into jobs where they interact with colleagues only through screens—a chore they may soon delegate to an AI agent.


Some basic counter-measures are urgent. Parents should think twice before entrusting their child to a word-regurgitation machine, whether it is sewn into a bear or not. Chatbots should have age restrictions that are properly enforced; governments should not give AI firms the leeway they gave social networks, which are only now being cajoled into age-gating. Teachers are kidding themselves if they think essays written at home can any longer be trusted. In the age of AI, more in-school assessment is essential.


Happy princes, hollow kingdoms 


Schools should also enhance their role as centres of discovery. If AI is giving children more of what they want, it is more important that schools provide chances to meet people and encounter ideas that lie outside their experience. Algorithmic personalisation threatens to be a powerful barrier to social mobility if it nudges people to stay in the lane in which they start out. Inequality could widen if poor schools merely embrace chatbots as cheap substitutes for human teachers.


AI shows undeniable potential to improve education and enrich entertainment. It may one day let every child live like royalty. But the truly privileged may be those whose parents and teachers know when to turn it off.


Fonte: https://www.biznews.com/tech/economist-ai-rewiring-childhood. Acesso em

14/12/2025.  

 

According to the text, how is AI influencing childhood today? 
Alternativas
Q3816236 Inglês

Para responder à questão, leia o texto a seguir:



How Long Does It Take to Get Fit Again?



    When it comes to cardiovascular fitness and muscle strength, the adage is true: Use it or lose it. While regular exercise can improve heart health and increase strength and mobility, taking weeks or months off can reverse many of those benefits.

    That’s not to say that rest days are not important. In general, short breaks can help you physically and mentally recharge, but whenever possible, you should avoid extending your time off for too long so that hopping back on the wagon doesn’t feel too daunting or miserable.

    “Your body adapts to the stimulus you provide,” said Dr. Kevin Stone, an orthopedic surgeon and the author of the book “Play Forever: How to Recover From Injury and Thrive.” “Your muscles become used to the stress and the testosterone, the adrenaline and endorphins — all the wonderful things that circulate from exercise. When you take that away, the body initiates a muscle loss program.”



Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/30/well/move/fitness-loss

exercise.html

In the sentence “Your body adapts to the stimulus you provide”, the word stimulus is used to express a specific meaning in the context of physical exercise. Considering the text, the word stimulus refers to:
Alternativas
Q3816235 Inglês

Para responder à questão, leia o texto a seguir:



How Long Does It Take to Get Fit Again?



    When it comes to cardiovascular fitness and muscle strength, the adage is true: Use it or lose it. While regular exercise can improve heart health and increase strength and mobility, taking weeks or months off can reverse many of those benefits.

    That’s not to say that rest days are not important. In general, short breaks can help you physically and mentally recharge, but whenever possible, you should avoid extending your time off for too long so that hopping back on the wagon doesn’t feel too daunting or miserable.

    “Your body adapts to the stimulus you provide,” said Dr. Kevin Stone, an orthopedic surgeon and the author of the book “Play Forever: How to Recover From Injury and Thrive.” “Your muscles become used to the stress and the testosterone, the adrenaline and endorphins — all the wonderful things that circulate from exercise. When you take that away, the body initiates a muscle loss program.”



Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/30/well/move/fitness-loss

exercise.html

Based on the ideas developed throughout the text, the author discusses the effects of interrupting physical activity on the human body. Considering the main argument presented, identify the correct statement.
Alternativas
Q3802308 Inglês
Read the following excerpt:

“I wanted to be his life preserver, the thing that would keep him afloat. Instead, he became my anchor. And I’m tired of drowning.”

― Amanda Grace, But I Love Him

The semantic relationship between the metaphors "life preserver," "anchor," and "drowning" primarily serves to illustrate
Alternativas
Q3802297 Inglês
        SpaceX has pulled off a successful test flight of its newest generation rocket Starship, reversing a trend of disappointing failures. The world's largest and most powerful rocket blasted off from Texas just after 18:30 local time, for a 60-minute flight. Parts of the engine appeared to explode at one stage, and flaps on the side of the rocket caught fire and swung from side to side. The US space agency Nasa plans to use Starship to send humans to the Moon for its Artemis programme in 2027.

       "Great work by the SpaceX team!!", posted SpaceX CEO Elon Musk on X, who is spending billions on developing Starship, with each launch costing an estimated $100m. He will be welcoming the success after three Starship launches ended in failure this year, and one rocket exploded on its test stand in June. Starship is the largest and most powerful rocket built to date, made up of a booster called Super Heavy and the spacecraft Starship.

        The signs were positive from the start of Tuesday's test flight. All of the booster's 33 engines fired up, and after about seven minutes, the booster separated from the spacecraft and fell into the Gulf of Mexico. Starship continued to ascend, reaching a maximum height of almost 200 km above Earth before coasting around the planet. SpaceX said it intended to put the rocket under stress to test its limits, and parts of the rocket's flaps appeared to burn and swing wildly during the descent. The company has designed Starship to one day be a fully reusable transport system capable of carrying people to the Moon and Mars.


BBC News. “SpaceX pulls off Starship rocket launch in muchneeded comeback.” 27 August 2025.
According to the text, what does NASA plan to do with Starship? 
Alternativas
Q4362347 Inglês
Read the text and answer question.


Scientists criticize food manufacturers for massive profits from sales of unhealthy ultraprocessed food 


    Certain ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, are contributing to worldwide obesity, chronic health conditions and premature death, yet the food industry continues to aggressively market new and existing products in this category for massive profits, according to an unprecedented three-part series authored by 43 global experts in nutrition and supported by the United Nations Children’s Fund, or UNICEF, and the World Health Organization.

    More than 50% of the $2.9 trillion paid to shareholders by food corporations between 1962 and 2021 “was distributed by UPF manufacturers alone,” according to research published Tuesday in the leading medical journal The Lancet.

    “We found evidence that UPF consumption is increasing everywhere around the world, fueled by powerful global corporations,” said coauthor Carlos Augusto Monteiro, professor emeritus of nutrition and public health in the School of Public Health at Brazil’s University of São Paulo.

    “To keep this business model, which is highly profitable, the industry cannot afford to make minimally processed foods as they did in the past, so they use extensive political lobbying to stop effective public health policies that support healthy eating,” said Monteiro, who coined the term “ultraprocessed food” in 2009 when he developed the NOVA classification system, which categorizes foods into four groups by their level of industrial processing.

    Companies can “double or triple their profits” by turning corn, wheat, beans and other whole foods “into a colorless and flavorless sawdust which is then reconstructed with artificial flavorings and additives,” said Barry Popkin, the W.R. Kenan Jr. Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Gillings School of Global Public Health.


Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/18/health/ultraprocessed-industryprofits-wellness
Barry Popkin’s description of how whole foods are transformed into ultraprocessed products is intended to:
Alternativas
Q4362346 Inglês
Read the text and answer question.


Scientists criticize food manufacturers for massive profits from sales of unhealthy ultraprocessed food 


    Certain ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, are contributing to worldwide obesity, chronic health conditions and premature death, yet the food industry continues to aggressively market new and existing products in this category for massive profits, according to an unprecedented three-part series authored by 43 global experts in nutrition and supported by the United Nations Children’s Fund, or UNICEF, and the World Health Organization.

    More than 50% of the $2.9 trillion paid to shareholders by food corporations between 1962 and 2021 “was distributed by UPF manufacturers alone,” according to research published Tuesday in the leading medical journal The Lancet.

    “We found evidence that UPF consumption is increasing everywhere around the world, fueled by powerful global corporations,” said coauthor Carlos Augusto Monteiro, professor emeritus of nutrition and public health in the School of Public Health at Brazil’s University of São Paulo.

    “To keep this business model, which is highly profitable, the industry cannot afford to make minimally processed foods as they did in the past, so they use extensive political lobbying to stop effective public health policies that support healthy eating,” said Monteiro, who coined the term “ultraprocessed food” in 2009 when he developed the NOVA classification system, which categorizes foods into four groups by their level of industrial processing.

    Companies can “double or triple their profits” by turning corn, wheat, beans and other whole foods “into a colorless and flavorless sawdust which is then reconstructed with artificial flavorings and additives,” said Barry Popkin, the W.R. Kenan Jr. Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Gillings School of Global Public Health.


Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/18/health/ultraprocessed-industryprofits-wellness
Which of the following sentences is not written in direct speech, according to interview the text?
Alternativas
Q4362345 Inglês
Read the text and answer question.


Scientists criticize food manufacturers for massive profits from sales of unhealthy ultraprocessed food 


    Certain ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, are contributing to worldwide obesity, chronic health conditions and premature death, yet the food industry continues to aggressively market new and existing products in this category for massive profits, according to an unprecedented three-part series authored by 43 global experts in nutrition and supported by the United Nations Children’s Fund, or UNICEF, and the World Health Organization.

    More than 50% of the $2.9 trillion paid to shareholders by food corporations between 1962 and 2021 “was distributed by UPF manufacturers alone,” according to research published Tuesday in the leading medical journal The Lancet.

    “We found evidence that UPF consumption is increasing everywhere around the world, fueled by powerful global corporations,” said coauthor Carlos Augusto Monteiro, professor emeritus of nutrition and public health in the School of Public Health at Brazil’s University of São Paulo.

    “To keep this business model, which is highly profitable, the industry cannot afford to make minimally processed foods as they did in the past, so they use extensive political lobbying to stop effective public health policies that support healthy eating,” said Monteiro, who coined the term “ultraprocessed food” in 2009 when he developed the NOVA classification system, which categorizes foods into four groups by their level of industrial processing.

    Companies can “double or triple their profits” by turning corn, wheat, beans and other whole foods “into a colorless and flavorless sawdust which is then reconstructed with artificial flavorings and additives,” said Barry Popkin, the W.R. Kenan Jr. Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Gillings School of Global Public Health.


Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/18/health/ultraprocessed-industryprofits-wellness
The main purpose of the text is to:
Alternativas
Q4362337 Inglês
Read the text and answer question.


A 'toaster with a lens': The story behind the first handheld digital camera


    In 1975, a young engineer in the company that made Kodak film took the first picture on a handheld digital camera. Photography would never be the same again. When Steve Sasson started working at Eastman Kodak, the American photographic film manufacturer was a vibrant symbol of American industrial ingenuity.

    Set up by George Eastman in the 1870s, the company became synonymous with film photography thanks to their Kodak brand. People bought Kodak films and loaded them into Kodak-branded cameras. Their films were processed using Kodak development chemicals and they thumbed through the resulting prints on Kodak photographic paper. The company had even come up with a snappy slogan at the end of the 19th Century about this nose-to-tail process: "You push the button, we do the rest."

    But when a 23-year-old Sasson joined Kodak in 1973, he felt out of place. He wasn't a research chemist who would work on new films, nor was he a mechanical engineer ready to design new cameras that would work with Kodak films. Instead, he was an electrical engineer, and something about the whole photographic process didn't sit well with him.

    "When you first came to Kodak, you have to take photography lessons," Sasson, now 75, says over a video call with the BBC from his home office in the US. "You had to develop film. You had to go out and take pictures and study film and all that. And to be honest with you, I found it really annoying. You take your picture, you have to wait a long time, you have to fiddle with these chemicals.


Source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20251205-how-the-handheld-digital-camera-was-born
Steve Sasson’s sense of discomfort upon joining Kodak can best be interpreted as resulting from:
Alternativas
Q4362336 Inglês
Read the text and answer question.


A 'toaster with a lens': The story behind the first handheld digital camera


    In 1975, a young engineer in the company that made Kodak film took the first picture on a handheld digital camera. Photography would never be the same again. When Steve Sasson started working at Eastman Kodak, the American photographic film manufacturer was a vibrant symbol of American industrial ingenuity.

    Set up by George Eastman in the 1870s, the company became synonymous with film photography thanks to their Kodak brand. People bought Kodak films and loaded them into Kodak-branded cameras. Their films were processed using Kodak development chemicals and they thumbed through the resulting prints on Kodak photographic paper. The company had even come up with a snappy slogan at the end of the 19th Century about this nose-to-tail process: "You push the button, we do the rest."

    But when a 23-year-old Sasson joined Kodak in 1973, he felt out of place. He wasn't a research chemist who would work on new films, nor was he a mechanical engineer ready to design new cameras that would work with Kodak films. Instead, he was an electrical engineer, and something about the whole photographic process didn't sit well with him.

    "When you first came to Kodak, you have to take photography lessons," Sasson, now 75, says over a video call with the BBC from his home office in the US. "You had to develop film. You had to go out and take pictures and study film and all that. And to be honest with you, I found it really annoying. You take your picture, you have to wait a long time, you have to fiddle with these chemicals.


Source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20251205-how-the-handheld-digital-camera-was-born
Based on the excerpt, the phrase “something about the whole photographic process didn’t sit well with him” primarily suggests that Sasson:
Alternativas
Q4362335 Inglês
Read the text and answer question.


A 'toaster with a lens': The story behind the first handheld digital camera


    In 1975, a young engineer in the company that made Kodak film took the first picture on a handheld digital camera. Photography would never be the same again. When Steve Sasson started working at Eastman Kodak, the American photographic film manufacturer was a vibrant symbol of American industrial ingenuity.

    Set up by George Eastman in the 1870s, the company became synonymous with film photography thanks to their Kodak brand. People bought Kodak films and loaded them into Kodak-branded cameras. Their films were processed using Kodak development chemicals and they thumbed through the resulting prints on Kodak photographic paper. The company had even come up with a snappy slogan at the end of the 19th Century about this nose-to-tail process: "You push the button, we do the rest."

    But when a 23-year-old Sasson joined Kodak in 1973, he felt out of place. He wasn't a research chemist who would work on new films, nor was he a mechanical engineer ready to design new cameras that would work with Kodak films. Instead, he was an electrical engineer, and something about the whole photographic process didn't sit well with him.

    "When you first came to Kodak, you have to take photography lessons," Sasson, now 75, says over a video call with the BBC from his home office in the US. "You had to develop film. You had to go out and take pictures and study film and all that. And to be honest with you, I found it really annoying. You take your picture, you have to wait a long time, you have to fiddle with these chemicals.


Source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20251205-how-the-handheld-digital-camera-was-born
The author’s overall presentation of Kodak in the opening paragraphs mainly serves to:
Alternativas
Q4257976 Inglês
Should all pupils get the right to an outdoor education week?

Kirsten Campbell


    In a matter of days the government will make a decision that could affect generations of children to come. For many, the Primary 7 outdoor residential trip is one of the highlights of their school days. For some, it is inspirational, even lifechanging. A members bill making its way through the Scottish Parliament would guarantee a week of residential outdoor education for every pupil. When it was put first put forward by Conservative MSP Liz Smith, the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) bill won majority support, but it faces what could prove to be an insurmountable obstacle. Without government financial backing it looks doomed to fall. And at a time when budgets are already tight, not everyone is convinced such a commitment is the best use of resources.
    Liz Smith, herself a former teacher, says she has seen the benefits of outdoor education first hand and wants to ensure every child gets the opportunity during their time at school. Her proposed new law would mean every pupil in Scotland is entitled to four nights and five days of outdoor education. But while it was backed in principle in March, it cannot proceed unless the government tables a financial resolution - and so far that hasn't happened. Smith believes the experience of outdoor education can be transformative for children. “I think we should be trying to level up, to ensure that young people, whoever they are, whatever their background, whatever their family circumstances, they should have that opportunity.” She argues the benefits are powerful - and backed up by evidence. “The statistics we have show that if they have participated in residential outdoor education, their attendance is better, their behaviour is better, their self-discipline is better.”
    “What could be better than that?”
    But there is a postcode lottery in provision of residential outdoor education, with research for the University of Edinburgh stating that just a third of secondary schools and only a quarter of primary schools offer this type of experience. Thirty minutes from Glasgow, Dounans outdoor education centre, in the Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park, gives school groups a taste of the outdoors. A Primary 7 group from Fife is spending a week taking part in activities like canoeing, tree climbing and raft-building. Harris, 11, was first to climb to the top of a tall tree as his classmates looked on. “When everyone was cheering me on that helped,” he said. “I was proud of myself for doing that because it was really high.” Ten-year-old Orla was next. “I was nervous and shivery and thought it did look pretty high. It was like a feeling of accomplishment - I felt super happy and joyful.”
    One of the biggest problems though is that the experience doesn't come cheap. Liz Smith estimates the policy would cost between £25m and £40m a year. The minister for children, Natalie Don-Innes, told MSPs that was unaffordable and ringfencing cash for outdoor education could be to the detriment of other activities. She said: “Where would you seek to cut funding from in education? Would it be our teachers, our schools, would it be nurseries or our colleges?”
   A Scottish government spokesman said: “Both the education committee and the Scottish government have been clear that outstanding issues on the affordability of the bill, impact on the education workforce and ensuring provision is equitable for children across Scotland, need to be addressed   before a decision can be taken to lodge a motion for a financial resolution.”
     The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (Cosla) also has concerns about the practicalities, questioning the impact on staffing, the costs of transport and what it would mean for schools' ability to take part in other trips relating to geography, history or the arts. But the Outward Bound Trust believes it would be an investment. It has highlighted the findings of a global study across eight countries, including the UK, which concluded that for every £1 invested in Outward Bound programmes, there is a return of between £5 and £15 in societal value.
     Chief Executive Martin Davidson said: “Outward Bound doesn't teach young people to canoe or to climb, what we teach young people is about themselves. “But we do that through fantastic adventures and outdoor activities that help them learn about themselves and working with others.” The Scottish Parliament will continue to grapple with the issues in both the chamber and in committee over the next couple of days. But time is running out. If the funding issues aren't resolved by the end of the month, the legislation will fall, despite having the backing of most MSPs.

Available on https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4rnjxwjyyo
What is the rhetorical function of the question “What could be better than that?” after listing the evidence of improved student behavior and discipline? 
Alternativas
Q4257975 Inglês
Should all pupils get the right to an outdoor education week?

Kirsten Campbell


    In a matter of days the government will make a decision that could affect generations of children to come. For many, the Primary 7 outdoor residential trip is one of the highlights of their school days. For some, it is inspirational, even lifechanging. A members bill making its way through the Scottish Parliament would guarantee a week of residential outdoor education for every pupil. When it was put first put forward by Conservative MSP Liz Smith, the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) bill won majority support, but it faces what could prove to be an insurmountable obstacle. Without government financial backing it looks doomed to fall. And at a time when budgets are already tight, not everyone is convinced such a commitment is the best use of resources.
    Liz Smith, herself a former teacher, says she has seen the benefits of outdoor education first hand and wants to ensure every child gets the opportunity during their time at school. Her proposed new law would mean every pupil in Scotland is entitled to four nights and five days of outdoor education. But while it was backed in principle in March, it cannot proceed unless the government tables a financial resolution - and so far that hasn't happened. Smith believes the experience of outdoor education can be transformative for children. “I think we should be trying to level up, to ensure that young people, whoever they are, whatever their background, whatever their family circumstances, they should have that opportunity.” She argues the benefits are powerful - and backed up by evidence. “The statistics we have show that if they have participated in residential outdoor education, their attendance is better, their behaviour is better, their self-discipline is better.”
    “What could be better than that?”
    But there is a postcode lottery in provision of residential outdoor education, with research for the University of Edinburgh stating that just a third of secondary schools and only a quarter of primary schools offer this type of experience. Thirty minutes from Glasgow, Dounans outdoor education centre, in the Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park, gives school groups a taste of the outdoors. A Primary 7 group from Fife is spending a week taking part in activities like canoeing, tree climbing and raft-building. Harris, 11, was first to climb to the top of a tall tree as his classmates looked on. “When everyone was cheering me on that helped,” he said. “I was proud of myself for doing that because it was really high.” Ten-year-old Orla was next. “I was nervous and shivery and thought it did look pretty high. It was like a feeling of accomplishment - I felt super happy and joyful.”
    One of the biggest problems though is that the experience doesn't come cheap. Liz Smith estimates the policy would cost between £25m and £40m a year. The minister for children, Natalie Don-Innes, told MSPs that was unaffordable and ringfencing cash for outdoor education could be to the detriment of other activities. She said: “Where would you seek to cut funding from in education? Would it be our teachers, our schools, would it be nurseries or our colleges?”
   A Scottish government spokesman said: “Both the education committee and the Scottish government have been clear that outstanding issues on the affordability of the bill, impact on the education workforce and ensuring provision is equitable for children across Scotland, need to be addressed   before a decision can be taken to lodge a motion for a financial resolution.”
     The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (Cosla) also has concerns about the practicalities, questioning the impact on staffing, the costs of transport and what it would mean for schools' ability to take part in other trips relating to geography, history or the arts. But the Outward Bound Trust believes it would be an investment. It has highlighted the findings of a global study across eight countries, including the UK, which concluded that for every £1 invested in Outward Bound programmes, there is a return of between £5 and £15 in societal value.
     Chief Executive Martin Davidson said: “Outward Bound doesn't teach young people to canoe or to climb, what we teach young people is about themselves. “But we do that through fantastic adventures and outdoor activities that help them learn about themselves and working with others.” The Scottish Parliament will continue to grapple with the issues in both the chamber and in committee over the next couple of days. But time is running out. If the funding issues aren't resolved by the end of the month, the legislation will fall, despite having the backing of most MSPs.

Available on https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4rnjxwjyyo
Based on Martin Davidson's statement, what is the fundamental purpose of the outdoor activities facilitated by the Outward Bound Trust? 
Alternativas
Q4257974 Inglês
Should all pupils get the right to an outdoor education week?

Kirsten Campbell


    In a matter of days the government will make a decision that could affect generations of children to come. For many, the Primary 7 outdoor residential trip is one of the highlights of their school days. For some, it is inspirational, even lifechanging. A members bill making its way through the Scottish Parliament would guarantee a week of residential outdoor education for every pupil. When it was put first put forward by Conservative MSP Liz Smith, the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) bill won majority support, but it faces what could prove to be an insurmountable obstacle. Without government financial backing it looks doomed to fall. And at a time when budgets are already tight, not everyone is convinced such a commitment is the best use of resources.
    Liz Smith, herself a former teacher, says she has seen the benefits of outdoor education first hand and wants to ensure every child gets the opportunity during their time at school. Her proposed new law would mean every pupil in Scotland is entitled to four nights and five days of outdoor education. But while it was backed in principle in March, it cannot proceed unless the government tables a financial resolution - and so far that hasn't happened. Smith believes the experience of outdoor education can be transformative for children. “I think we should be trying to level up, to ensure that young people, whoever they are, whatever their background, whatever their family circumstances, they should have that opportunity.” She argues the benefits are powerful - and backed up by evidence. “The statistics we have show that if they have participated in residential outdoor education, their attendance is better, their behaviour is better, their self-discipline is better.”
    “What could be better than that?”
    But there is a postcode lottery in provision of residential outdoor education, with research for the University of Edinburgh stating that just a third of secondary schools and only a quarter of primary schools offer this type of experience. Thirty minutes from Glasgow, Dounans outdoor education centre, in the Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park, gives school groups a taste of the outdoors. A Primary 7 group from Fife is spending a week taking part in activities like canoeing, tree climbing and raft-building. Harris, 11, was first to climb to the top of a tall tree as his classmates looked on. “When everyone was cheering me on that helped,” he said. “I was proud of myself for doing that because it was really high.” Ten-year-old Orla was next. “I was nervous and shivery and thought it did look pretty high. It was like a feeling of accomplishment - I felt super happy and joyful.”
    One of the biggest problems though is that the experience doesn't come cheap. Liz Smith estimates the policy would cost between £25m and £40m a year. The minister for children, Natalie Don-Innes, told MSPs that was unaffordable and ringfencing cash for outdoor education could be to the detriment of other activities. She said: “Where would you seek to cut funding from in education? Would it be our teachers, our schools, would it be nurseries or our colleges?”
   A Scottish government spokesman said: “Both the education committee and the Scottish government have been clear that outstanding issues on the affordability of the bill, impact on the education workforce and ensuring provision is equitable for children across Scotland, need to be addressed   before a decision can be taken to lodge a motion for a financial resolution.”
     The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (Cosla) also has concerns about the practicalities, questioning the impact on staffing, the costs of transport and what it would mean for schools' ability to take part in other trips relating to geography, history or the arts. But the Outward Bound Trust believes it would be an investment. It has highlighted the findings of a global study across eight countries, including the UK, which concluded that for every £1 invested in Outward Bound programmes, there is a return of between £5 and £15 in societal value.
     Chief Executive Martin Davidson said: “Outward Bound doesn't teach young people to canoe or to climb, what we teach young people is about themselves. “But we do that through fantastic adventures and outdoor activities that help them learn about themselves and working with others.” The Scottish Parliament will continue to grapple with the issues in both the chamber and in committee over the next couple of days. But time is running out. If the funding issues aren't resolved by the end of the month, the legislation will fall, despite having the backing of most MSPs.

Available on https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4rnjxwjyyo
In the sentence, “The Scottish Parliament will continue to grapple with the issues...”, the use of the Future Continuous tense (“will continue to grapple”) serves to emphasize:  
Alternativas
Q4257973 Inglês
Should all pupils get the right to an outdoor education week?

Kirsten Campbell


    In a matter of days the government will make a decision that could affect generations of children to come. For many, the Primary 7 outdoor residential trip is one of the highlights of their school days. For some, it is inspirational, even lifechanging. A members bill making its way through the Scottish Parliament would guarantee a week of residential outdoor education for every pupil. When it was put first put forward by Conservative MSP Liz Smith, the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) bill won majority support, but it faces what could prove to be an insurmountable obstacle. Without government financial backing it looks doomed to fall. And at a time when budgets are already tight, not everyone is convinced such a commitment is the best use of resources.
    Liz Smith, herself a former teacher, says she has seen the benefits of outdoor education first hand and wants to ensure every child gets the opportunity during their time at school. Her proposed new law would mean every pupil in Scotland is entitled to four nights and five days of outdoor education. But while it was backed in principle in March, it cannot proceed unless the government tables a financial resolution - and so far that hasn't happened. Smith believes the experience of outdoor education can be transformative for children. “I think we should be trying to level up, to ensure that young people, whoever they are, whatever their background, whatever their family circumstances, they should have that opportunity.” She argues the benefits are powerful - and backed up by evidence. “The statistics we have show that if they have participated in residential outdoor education, their attendance is better, their behaviour is better, their self-discipline is better.”
    “What could be better than that?”
    But there is a postcode lottery in provision of residential outdoor education, with research for the University of Edinburgh stating that just a third of secondary schools and only a quarter of primary schools offer this type of experience. Thirty minutes from Glasgow, Dounans outdoor education centre, in the Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park, gives school groups a taste of the outdoors. A Primary 7 group from Fife is spending a week taking part in activities like canoeing, tree climbing and raft-building. Harris, 11, was first to climb to the top of a tall tree as his classmates looked on. “When everyone was cheering me on that helped,” he said. “I was proud of myself for doing that because it was really high.” Ten-year-old Orla was next. “I was nervous and shivery and thought it did look pretty high. It was like a feeling of accomplishment - I felt super happy and joyful.”
    One of the biggest problems though is that the experience doesn't come cheap. Liz Smith estimates the policy would cost between £25m and £40m a year. The minister for children, Natalie Don-Innes, told MSPs that was unaffordable and ringfencing cash for outdoor education could be to the detriment of other activities. She said: “Where would you seek to cut funding from in education? Would it be our teachers, our schools, would it be nurseries or our colleges?”
   A Scottish government spokesman said: “Both the education committee and the Scottish government have been clear that outstanding issues on the affordability of the bill, impact on the education workforce and ensuring provision is equitable for children across Scotland, need to be addressed   before a decision can be taken to lodge a motion for a financial resolution.”
     The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (Cosla) also has concerns about the practicalities, questioning the impact on staffing, the costs of transport and what it would mean for schools' ability to take part in other trips relating to geography, history or the arts. But the Outward Bound Trust believes it would be an investment. It has highlighted the findings of a global study across eight countries, including the UK, which concluded that for every £1 invested in Outward Bound programmes, there is a return of between £5 and £15 in societal value.
     Chief Executive Martin Davidson said: “Outward Bound doesn't teach young people to canoe or to climb, what we teach young people is about themselves. “But we do that through fantastic adventures and outdoor activities that help them learn about themselves and working with others.” The Scottish Parliament will continue to grapple with the issues in both the chamber and in committee over the next couple of days. But time is running out. If the funding issues aren't resolved by the end of the month, the legislation will fall, despite having the backing of most MSPs.

Available on https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4rnjxwjyyo
How does the perspective of the Outward Bound Trust on the bill's cost contrast with the concerns of minister Natalie Don-Innes? 
Alternativas
Respostas
841: B
842: A
843: C
844: A
845: B
846: E
847: C
848: C
849: D
850: A
851: C
852: D
853: C
854: C
855: A
856: B
857: A
858: B
859: E
860: B