Questões de Concurso Sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 25.446 questões
Ano: 2012
Banca:
IBFC
Órgão:
INEP
Prova:
IBFC - 2012 - INEP - Pesquisador-Tecnologista em Informações e Avaliações Educacionais - Área III |
Q297294
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the text and answer questions 19), 20), 21), 22), 23) and 24).
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
The alternative that brings the best synonym to the bold underline idiom in the passage “Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010" is
Ano: 2012
Banca:
IBFC
Órgão:
INEP
Prova:
IBFC - 2012 - INEP - Pesquisador-Tecnologista em Informações e Avaliações Educacionais - Área III |
Q297293
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the text and answer questions 19), 20), 21), 22), 23) and 24).
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
Read the following passages:
The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake.
The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a little- known dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation.
The underlined bold words are
The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake.
The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a little- known dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation.
The underlined bold words are
Ano: 2012
Banca:
IBFC
Órgão:
INEP
Prova:
IBFC - 2012 - INEP - Pesquisador-Tecnologista em Informações e Avaliações Educacionais - Área III |
Q297292
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the text and answer questions 19), 20), 21), 22), 23) and 24).
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
According to the text, it's not correct to say that
Ano: 2012
Banca:
IBFC
Órgão:
INEP
Prova:
IBFC - 2012 - INEP - Pesquisador-Tecnologista em Informações e Avaliações Educacionais - Área III |
Q297291
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the text and answer questions 19), 20), 21), 22), 23) and 24).
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
The suing against Knoedler & Company gallery was established by
Ano: 2012
Banca:
IBFC
Órgão:
INEP
Prova:
IBFC - 2012 - INEP - Pesquisador-Tecnologista em Informações e Avaliações Educacionais - Área III |
Q297290
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the text and answer questions 19), 20), 21), 22), 23) and 24).
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
Lawsuits claim Knoedler made huge profits on fakes
For more than a dozen years the Upper East Side gallery Knoedler & Company was “substantially dependent” on profits it made from selling a mysterious collection of artwork that is at the center of a federal forgery investigation, former clients of this former gallery have charged in court papers. The analysis is based on financial records turned over as part of a lawsuit against the gallery filed by Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. The Rothko is one of approximately 40 works that Knoedler, which closed last year, obtained from Glafira Rosales, a littleknown dealer whose collection of works attributed to Modernist masters has no documented provenance and is the subject of an F.B.I. investigation. Between 1996 and 2008, the suit asserts, Knoedler earned approximately $60 million from works that Ms. Rosales provided on consignment or sold outright to the gallery and cleared $40 million in profits. In one year, 2002, for example, the complaint says the gallery’s entire profit — $5.6 million — was derived from the sale of Ms. Rosales’s works. “Knoedler’s viability as a business was substantially — and, in some years, almost entirely — dependent on sales from the Rosales Collection,” the De Soles claimed last month in an amended version of the suit they filed this year. While the forgery allegations are well known and have been the subject of three federal lawsuits against Knoedler, the recent filings expand the known number of Rosales artworks that were handled by the gallery, which was in business for 165 years, and assert that they played a pivotal role in the gallery’s success. After the F.B.I. issued subpoenas to the gallery in the fall of 2009, Michael Hammer, Knoedler’s owner, halted the sale of any Rosales works. Knoedler ended up losing money that year and in 2010, the court papers say. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/arts/design/knoe...
The alternative that brings the most comprehensive idea about the text is
Q291548
Inglês
In Text II, the word those (line 43) refers to
Q291547
Inglês
n Text II, the idea expressed by the word in boldface type is described in
Q291546
Inglês
According to Text II, Dr. Adam Bernstein affirmed that
Q291545
Inglês
One negative effect of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and one negative effect of diet soft drink consumption are respectively
Q291544
Inglês
According to Text II, a detrimental habit among Americans is a(n)
Q291543
Inglês
In Text I, the idea expressed by the word in boldface type is described in
Q291542
Inglês
According to Text I, the platform will NOT provide
Q291541
Inglês
According to Text I, if the Shtokman project goes ahead, it
Q291540
Inglês
According to Text I, Infield Systems Ltd has
Q291539
Inglês
According to Text I, it is clear that
Ano: 2012
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANAC
Provas:
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Área 5
|
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Conhecimentos Básicos |
Q289202
Inglês
Texto associado
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
The team of researchers first tested the new procedure on lab animals.
Ano: 2012
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANAC
Provas:
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Área 5
|
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Conhecimentos Básicos |
Q289201
Inglês
Texto associado
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
The word “literally” is used in line three because the process of cutting out a piece of skin is painful and bloody.
Ano: 2012
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANAC
Provas:
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Área 5
|
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Conhecimentos Básicos |
Q289200
Inglês
Texto associado
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
There is an indication that the procedure may do more than simply identifying skin cancer.
Ano: 2012
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANAC
Provas:
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Área 5
|
CESPE - 2012 - ANAC - Especialista em Regulação de Aviação Civil - Conhecimentos Básicos |
Q289199
Inglês
Texto associado
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
Based on the text above, judge the items from 16 to 20.
The experiment with samples of different skin conditions turned out to be unsuccessful.
Ano: 2012
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
TCE-ES
Prova:
CESPE - 2012 - TCE-ES - Auditor de Controle Externo - Conhecimentos Básicos - Todos os Cargos |
Q286777
Inglês
Texto associado
Judge the following items according to the text.
Judge the following items according to the text.
The relative pronoun “that” (L.6) can be correctly replaced by whose.
Conheça nossos planos