Questões de Concurso Comentadas sobre inglês

Foram encontradas 19.378 questões

Q3592291 Inglês
Will Vladimir Putin ever face a war crimes trial?

Published by Robert Plummer

BBC News


Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued a warrant for President Vladimir Putin's arrest, it is no more than the first step in a very long process.

The United Nations clearly believes there is sufficient evidence to accuse the Russian leader of war crimes in Ukraine.

However the practical and logistical problems in pursuing such a case are immense.

This is what the process of bringing Mr Putin to justice could look like.

Can President Putin be arrested?

At present, the Russian leader enjoys unchallenged power in his native land, so there is no prospect of the Kremlin handing him over to the ICC.

As long as he stays put in Russia, he faces no risk of being arrested.

Mr Putin could be detained if he leaves the country. But, given the fact that his freedom of movement is already severely limited by international sanctions against him, he is unlikely to show up in a country that would want to put him on trial.

Since Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, he has visited just eight countries. Seven of those would be considered by him to be part of Russia's "near abroad" - that is, they were constituent parts of the Soviet Union before it collapsed at the end of 1991.

His only recent destination that does not fall into this category is Iran, which he visited in July last year to meet the theocracy's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.

Since Iran has helped the Russian war effort by supplying drones and other military hardware, any repeat visit to Tehran would be unlikely to place Mr Putin in any jeopardy.

What war crimes is Russia accused of?

Will Putin actually face trial?

There are at least two big obstacles to that. Firstly, Russia does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC.

The court was established in 2002 by a treaty known as the Rome Statute.

This statute lays down that it is the duty of every state to exercise its own criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes. The ICC can only intervene where a state is unable or unwilling to carry out the investigation and prosecute perpetrators.

In all, 123 states have agreed to abide by it, but there are some significant exceptions, including Russia. 

Some countries, including Ukraine, have signed the treaty, but not ratified it. You can see a full list of countries that are party to the Rome Statute here.

So you can see that the legal position is already getting shaky.

And secondly, although it's not unknown for trials to be held without the defendant in the dock, that's not an option here. The ICC does not conduct trials in absentia, so that avenue is closed off too.

Who else has faced this kind of trial?

The idea of trying people for crimes against humanity pre-dates the existence of the ICC.

It began in 1945 after World War Two with the Nuremberg Trials, which were held to punish key members of the hierarchy in Nazi Germany for the Holocaust and other atrocities.

Those included Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's deputy Rudolf Hess, who was sentenced to life imprisonment and died by his own hand in 1987.

Of course, Mr Putin has not actually been charged with crimes against humanity, even though US Vice-President Kamala Harris has argued that he should be.

And if he were, that would pose another legal dilemma as the UN itself says, "crimes against humanity have not yet been codified in a dedicated treaty of international law, unlike genocide and war crimes, although there are efforts to do so."

Other bespoke bodies have sought to convict those accused of war crimes. That includes the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a UN organisation that existed from 1993 to 2017.

During that time, it convicted and sentenced 90 people. But arguably the most notorious of those indicted, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, died of a heart attack in 2006 while in detention.

As for the ICC itself, it has so far indicted 40 individuals apart from Mr Putin, all from African countries. Of those, 17 people have been detained at The Hague, 10 have been convicted of crimes and four have been acquitted.

What does this mean for the war in Ukraine?

The arrest warrant is being seen as a signal from the international community that what is taking place in Ukraine is against international law.

The court says the reason it is going public with these warrants is that these crimes are continuing. In doing so, it is trying to deter further crimes taking place.

But, the main reaction from Russia so far has been to dismiss the warrants as meaningless.

In fact, the Kremlin denies its forces have committed any atrocities in Ukraine, and Mr Putin's spokesman called the ICC's decision "outrageous and unacceptable".

Faced with such defiance, it seems unlikely that the ICC's actions will have any impact on Russia's war in Ukraine - and Mr Putin's "special military operation" will continue to grind mercilessly on.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-64994992
Na oração "His only recent destination that does not fall into this category is Iran.", a palavra "His" é um:
Alternativas
Q3592290 Inglês
Will Vladimir Putin ever face a war crimes trial?

Published by Robert Plummer

BBC News


Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued a warrant for President Vladimir Putin's arrest, it is no more than the first step in a very long process.

The United Nations clearly believes there is sufficient evidence to accuse the Russian leader of war crimes in Ukraine.

However the practical and logistical problems in pursuing such a case are immense.

This is what the process of bringing Mr Putin to justice could look like.

Can President Putin be arrested?

At present, the Russian leader enjoys unchallenged power in his native land, so there is no prospect of the Kremlin handing him over to the ICC.

As long as he stays put in Russia, he faces no risk of being arrested.

Mr Putin could be detained if he leaves the country. But, given the fact that his freedom of movement is already severely limited by international sanctions against him, he is unlikely to show up in a country that would want to put him on trial.

Since Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, he has visited just eight countries. Seven of those would be considered by him to be part of Russia's "near abroad" - that is, they were constituent parts of the Soviet Union before it collapsed at the end of 1991.

His only recent destination that does not fall into this category is Iran, which he visited in July last year to meet the theocracy's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.

Since Iran has helped the Russian war effort by supplying drones and other military hardware, any repeat visit to Tehran would be unlikely to place Mr Putin in any jeopardy.

What war crimes is Russia accused of?

Will Putin actually face trial?

There are at least two big obstacles to that. Firstly, Russia does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC.

The court was established in 2002 by a treaty known as the Rome Statute.

This statute lays down that it is the duty of every state to exercise its own criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes. The ICC can only intervene where a state is unable or unwilling to carry out the investigation and prosecute perpetrators.

In all, 123 states have agreed to abide by it, but there are some significant exceptions, including Russia. 

Some countries, including Ukraine, have signed the treaty, but not ratified it. You can see a full list of countries that are party to the Rome Statute here.

So you can see that the legal position is already getting shaky.

And secondly, although it's not unknown for trials to be held without the defendant in the dock, that's not an option here. The ICC does not conduct trials in absentia, so that avenue is closed off too.

Who else has faced this kind of trial?

The idea of trying people for crimes against humanity pre-dates the existence of the ICC.

It began in 1945 after World War Two with the Nuremberg Trials, which were held to punish key members of the hierarchy in Nazi Germany for the Holocaust and other atrocities.

Those included Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's deputy Rudolf Hess, who was sentenced to life imprisonment and died by his own hand in 1987.

Of course, Mr Putin has not actually been charged with crimes against humanity, even though US Vice-President Kamala Harris has argued that he should be.

And if he were, that would pose another legal dilemma as the UN itself says, "crimes against humanity have not yet been codified in a dedicated treaty of international law, unlike genocide and war crimes, although there are efforts to do so."

Other bespoke bodies have sought to convict those accused of war crimes. That includes the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a UN organisation that existed from 1993 to 2017.

During that time, it convicted and sentenced 90 people. But arguably the most notorious of those indicted, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, died of a heart attack in 2006 while in detention.

As for the ICC itself, it has so far indicted 40 individuals apart from Mr Putin, all from African countries. Of those, 17 people have been detained at The Hague, 10 have been convicted of crimes and four have been acquitted.

What does this mean for the war in Ukraine?

The arrest warrant is being seen as a signal from the international community that what is taking place in Ukraine is against international law.

The court says the reason it is going public with these warrants is that these crimes are continuing. In doing so, it is trying to deter further crimes taking place.

But, the main reaction from Russia so far has been to dismiss the warrants as meaningless.

In fact, the Kremlin denies its forces have committed any atrocities in Ukraine, and Mr Putin's spokesman called the ICC's decision "outrageous and unacceptable".

Faced with such defiance, it seems unlikely that the ICC's actions will have any impact on Russia's war in Ukraine - and Mr Putin's "special military operation" will continue to grind mercilessly on.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-64994992
Após a leitura do texto, assinale a alternativa incorreta.
Alternativas
Q3592289 Inglês
Will Vladimir Putin ever face a war crimes trial?

Published by Robert Plummer

BBC News


Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued a warrant for President Vladimir Putin's arrest, it is no more than the first step in a very long process.

The United Nations clearly believes there is sufficient evidence to accuse the Russian leader of war crimes in Ukraine.

However the practical and logistical problems in pursuing such a case are immense.

This is what the process of bringing Mr Putin to justice could look like.

Can President Putin be arrested?

At present, the Russian leader enjoys unchallenged power in his native land, so there is no prospect of the Kremlin handing him over to the ICC.

As long as he stays put in Russia, he faces no risk of being arrested.

Mr Putin could be detained if he leaves the country. But, given the fact that his freedom of movement is already severely limited by international sanctions against him, he is unlikely to show up in a country that would want to put him on trial.

Since Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, he has visited just eight countries. Seven of those would be considered by him to be part of Russia's "near abroad" - that is, they were constituent parts of the Soviet Union before it collapsed at the end of 1991.

His only recent destination that does not fall into this category is Iran, which he visited in July last year to meet the theocracy's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.

Since Iran has helped the Russian war effort by supplying drones and other military hardware, any repeat visit to Tehran would be unlikely to place Mr Putin in any jeopardy.

What war crimes is Russia accused of?

Will Putin actually face trial?

There are at least two big obstacles to that. Firstly, Russia does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC.

The court was established in 2002 by a treaty known as the Rome Statute.

This statute lays down that it is the duty of every state to exercise its own criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes. The ICC can only intervene where a state is unable or unwilling to carry out the investigation and prosecute perpetrators.

In all, 123 states have agreed to abide by it, but there are some significant exceptions, including Russia. 

Some countries, including Ukraine, have signed the treaty, but not ratified it. You can see a full list of countries that are party to the Rome Statute here.

So you can see that the legal position is already getting shaky.

And secondly, although it's not unknown for trials to be held without the defendant in the dock, that's not an option here. The ICC does not conduct trials in absentia, so that avenue is closed off too.

Who else has faced this kind of trial?

The idea of trying people for crimes against humanity pre-dates the existence of the ICC.

It began in 1945 after World War Two with the Nuremberg Trials, which were held to punish key members of the hierarchy in Nazi Germany for the Holocaust and other atrocities.

Those included Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's deputy Rudolf Hess, who was sentenced to life imprisonment and died by his own hand in 1987.

Of course, Mr Putin has not actually been charged with crimes against humanity, even though US Vice-President Kamala Harris has argued that he should be.

And if he were, that would pose another legal dilemma as the UN itself says, "crimes against humanity have not yet been codified in a dedicated treaty of international law, unlike genocide and war crimes, although there are efforts to do so."

Other bespoke bodies have sought to convict those accused of war crimes. That includes the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a UN organisation that existed from 1993 to 2017.

During that time, it convicted and sentenced 90 people. But arguably the most notorious of those indicted, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, died of a heart attack in 2006 while in detention.

As for the ICC itself, it has so far indicted 40 individuals apart from Mr Putin, all from African countries. Of those, 17 people have been detained at The Hague, 10 have been convicted of crimes and four have been acquitted.

What does this mean for the war in Ukraine?

The arrest warrant is being seen as a signal from the international community that what is taking place in Ukraine is against international law.

The court says the reason it is going public with these warrants is that these crimes are continuing. In doing so, it is trying to deter further crimes taking place.

But, the main reaction from Russia so far has been to dismiss the warrants as meaningless.

In fact, the Kremlin denies its forces have committed any atrocities in Ukraine, and Mr Putin's spokesman called the ICC's decision "outrageous and unacceptable".

Faced with such defiance, it seems unlikely that the ICC's actions will have any impact on Russia's war in Ukraine - and Mr Putin's "special military operation" will continue to grind mercilessly on.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-64994992
A oração "Some countries, including Ukraine, have signed the treaty" encontra-se no:
Alternativas
Q3592288 Inglês
Will Vladimir Putin ever face a war crimes trial?

Published by Robert Plummer

BBC News


Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued a warrant for President Vladimir Putin's arrest, it is no more than the first step in a very long process.

The United Nations clearly believes there is sufficient evidence to accuse the Russian leader of war crimes in Ukraine.

However the practical and logistical problems in pursuing such a case are immense.

This is what the process of bringing Mr Putin to justice could look like.

Can President Putin be arrested?

At present, the Russian leader enjoys unchallenged power in his native land, so there is no prospect of the Kremlin handing him over to the ICC.

As long as he stays put in Russia, he faces no risk of being arrested.

Mr Putin could be detained if he leaves the country. But, given the fact that his freedom of movement is already severely limited by international sanctions against him, he is unlikely to show up in a country that would want to put him on trial.

Since Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, he has visited just eight countries. Seven of those would be considered by him to be part of Russia's "near abroad" - that is, they were constituent parts of the Soviet Union before it collapsed at the end of 1991.

His only recent destination that does not fall into this category is Iran, which he visited in July last year to meet the theocracy's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.

Since Iran has helped the Russian war effort by supplying drones and other military hardware, any repeat visit to Tehran would be unlikely to place Mr Putin in any jeopardy.

What war crimes is Russia accused of?

Will Putin actually face trial?

There are at least two big obstacles to that. Firstly, Russia does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC.

The court was established in 2002 by a treaty known as the Rome Statute.

This statute lays down that it is the duty of every state to exercise its own criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes. The ICC can only intervene where a state is unable or unwilling to carry out the investigation and prosecute perpetrators.

In all, 123 states have agreed to abide by it, but there are some significant exceptions, including Russia. 

Some countries, including Ukraine, have signed the treaty, but not ratified it. You can see a full list of countries that are party to the Rome Statute here.

So you can see that the legal position is already getting shaky.

And secondly, although it's not unknown for trials to be held without the defendant in the dock, that's not an option here. The ICC does not conduct trials in absentia, so that avenue is closed off too.

Who else has faced this kind of trial?

The idea of trying people for crimes against humanity pre-dates the existence of the ICC.

It began in 1945 after World War Two with the Nuremberg Trials, which were held to punish key members of the hierarchy in Nazi Germany for the Holocaust and other atrocities.

Those included Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's deputy Rudolf Hess, who was sentenced to life imprisonment and died by his own hand in 1987.

Of course, Mr Putin has not actually been charged with crimes against humanity, even though US Vice-President Kamala Harris has argued that he should be.

And if he were, that would pose another legal dilemma as the UN itself says, "crimes against humanity have not yet been codified in a dedicated treaty of international law, unlike genocide and war crimes, although there are efforts to do so."

Other bespoke bodies have sought to convict those accused of war crimes. That includes the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a UN organisation that existed from 1993 to 2017.

During that time, it convicted and sentenced 90 people. But arguably the most notorious of those indicted, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, died of a heart attack in 2006 while in detention.

As for the ICC itself, it has so far indicted 40 individuals apart from Mr Putin, all from African countries. Of those, 17 people have been detained at The Hague, 10 have been convicted of crimes and four have been acquitted.

What does this mean for the war in Ukraine?

The arrest warrant is being seen as a signal from the international community that what is taking place in Ukraine is against international law.

The court says the reason it is going public with these warrants is that these crimes are continuing. In doing so, it is trying to deter further crimes taking place.

But, the main reaction from Russia so far has been to dismiss the warrants as meaningless.

In fact, the Kremlin denies its forces have committed any atrocities in Ukraine, and Mr Putin's spokesman called the ICC's decision "outrageous and unacceptable".

Faced with such defiance, it seems unlikely that the ICC's actions will have any impact on Russia's war in Ukraine - and Mr Putin's "special military operation" will continue to grind mercilessly on.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-64994992
Após a leitura do texto, pode-se afirmar que:
Alternativas
Q3592287 Inglês
Will Vladimir Putin ever face a war crimes trial?

Published by Robert Plummer

BBC News


Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued a warrant for President Vladimir Putin's arrest, it is no more than the first step in a very long process.

The United Nations clearly believes there is sufficient evidence to accuse the Russian leader of war crimes in Ukraine.

However the practical and logistical problems in pursuing such a case are immense.

This is what the process of bringing Mr Putin to justice could look like.

Can President Putin be arrested?

At present, the Russian leader enjoys unchallenged power in his native land, so there is no prospect of the Kremlin handing him over to the ICC.

As long as he stays put in Russia, he faces no risk of being arrested.

Mr Putin could be detained if he leaves the country. But, given the fact that his freedom of movement is already severely limited by international sanctions against him, he is unlikely to show up in a country that would want to put him on trial.

Since Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, he has visited just eight countries. Seven of those would be considered by him to be part of Russia's "near abroad" - that is, they were constituent parts of the Soviet Union before it collapsed at the end of 1991.

His only recent destination that does not fall into this category is Iran, which he visited in July last year to meet the theocracy's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.

Since Iran has helped the Russian war effort by supplying drones and other military hardware, any repeat visit to Tehran would be unlikely to place Mr Putin in any jeopardy.

What war crimes is Russia accused of?

Will Putin actually face trial?

There are at least two big obstacles to that. Firstly, Russia does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC.

The court was established in 2002 by a treaty known as the Rome Statute.

This statute lays down that it is the duty of every state to exercise its own criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes. The ICC can only intervene where a state is unable or unwilling to carry out the investigation and prosecute perpetrators.

In all, 123 states have agreed to abide by it, but there are some significant exceptions, including Russia. 

Some countries, including Ukraine, have signed the treaty, but not ratified it. You can see a full list of countries that are party to the Rome Statute here.

So you can see that the legal position is already getting shaky.

And secondly, although it's not unknown for trials to be held without the defendant in the dock, that's not an option here. The ICC does not conduct trials in absentia, so that avenue is closed off too.

Who else has faced this kind of trial?

The idea of trying people for crimes against humanity pre-dates the existence of the ICC.

It began in 1945 after World War Two with the Nuremberg Trials, which were held to punish key members of the hierarchy in Nazi Germany for the Holocaust and other atrocities.

Those included Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's deputy Rudolf Hess, who was sentenced to life imprisonment and died by his own hand in 1987.

Of course, Mr Putin has not actually been charged with crimes against humanity, even though US Vice-President Kamala Harris has argued that he should be.

And if he were, that would pose another legal dilemma as the UN itself says, "crimes against humanity have not yet been codified in a dedicated treaty of international law, unlike genocide and war crimes, although there are efforts to do so."

Other bespoke bodies have sought to convict those accused of war crimes. That includes the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a UN organisation that existed from 1993 to 2017.

During that time, it convicted and sentenced 90 people. But arguably the most notorious of those indicted, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, died of a heart attack in 2006 while in detention.

As for the ICC itself, it has so far indicted 40 individuals apart from Mr Putin, all from African countries. Of those, 17 people have been detained at The Hague, 10 have been convicted of crimes and four have been acquitted.

What does this mean for the war in Ukraine?

The arrest warrant is being seen as a signal from the international community that what is taking place in Ukraine is against international law.

The court says the reason it is going public with these warrants is that these crimes are continuing. In doing so, it is trying to deter further crimes taking place.

But, the main reaction from Russia so far has been to dismiss the warrants as meaningless.

In fact, the Kremlin denies its forces have committed any atrocities in Ukraine, and Mr Putin's spokesman called the ICC's decision "outrageous and unacceptable".

Faced with such defiance, it seems unlikely that the ICC's actions will have any impact on Russia's war in Ukraine - and Mr Putin's "special military operation" will continue to grind mercilessly on.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-64994992
A partir da leitura do texto, pode-se afirmar que:
Alternativas
Q3587397 Inglês
Match the sentences with its syntactical classification:

(1) - Time clause;
(2) - Causal clause;
(3) - Concession clause;
(4) - Consecutive clause;
(5) - Final clause.

(__) - She has the visa. She isn’t able to pass, though.
(__) - This is a special service for delivering.
(__) - We crossed it by the time the bridge was risen.
(__) - The food was such salty, we couldn’t eat it.
(__) - Since I had the Green card, I was allowed to get in. 
Alternativas
Q3587396 Inglês
Analyze the sentences about question tags and choose the letter:

I- It’s a non-short question added to a statement;
II- A positive statement requires a negative question and a negative requires a positive;
III- The auxiliary verb needs be in the opposite tense from the statement;
IV- I’m, no doubt, your best friend.

Aren’t I?  
Alternativas
Q3587395 Inglês
The future expressed in lines 15 and 16, indicates that:
Alternativas
Q3587394 Inglês
About the use of patterns, mark the wrong question:
Alternativas
Q3587393 Inglês
Link the columns according the numbers below:

(1) - ‘teamed up’ (line 9) with no complement…
(2) - A short object (complement), usually…
(3) - On a separable phrasal verb, a long object…
(4) - Separable and Inseparable…
(5) - A phrasal verb…

(I) - … are the classifications of phrasal verb.
(II) - …comes before the adverb in a phrasal verb.
(III) - …it’s an inseparable phrasal verb.
(IV) - … goes after the adverb.
(V) - … is a verb + adverb. 
Alternativas
Q3587392 Inglês
Taking into account that (T) means True and (F) means False, the correct sequence of the propositions below about the underlined words in line 3 is, respectively:

(__) - The words just, already, always, for, since, yet, still can replace ‘never’, depending the kind of sentence;
(__) - Changing the underlined words into a question, it’s enough put the auxiliary verb before the subject;
(__) - The negative sentences also accepts ‘yet’ and ‘still’;
(__) - ‘for’ and ‘since’ indicates how long the action has been taking. 
Alternativas
Q3587391 Inglês

About passive voice, analyze the sentences e choose the right option:



I- Sometimes, the agent isn’t necessary;


II- We can change the ‘verb to be’ by ‘got’, without change the meaning;


III- If we put the sentence ‘The Cartoon Introduction to Climate Change was first published in 2014’ in active voice the subject would be Yoram and Grady;

Alternativas
Q3573279 Inglês

Dentre as seguintes opções, qual melhor exemplifica a influência da variação linguística da língua inglesa, seu papel como língua global e a evolução da comunicação online na forma de Netspeak?

Alternativas
Q3573277 Inglês

Julgue as sentenças abaixo como VERDADEIRAS ou FALSAS:



1.(__)Letramento em inglês envolve a habilidade de compreender textos autênticos, desde artigos acadêmicos e literatura até notícias e mídia digital. Professores podem adotar estratégias que incentivem a leitura crítica, como análise de contexto, interpretação simbólica e questionamento reflexivo.


2.(__)Aulas de língua inglesa devem focar na produção de diversos tipos de textos, desde ensaios argumentativos até criativos, estimulando a criatividade e o pensamento crítico. Escrever bem em inglês não apenas demonstra proficiência no idioma, mas também ajuda os alunos a estruturarem suas ideias de maneira organizada e coerente.


3.(__)Em um mundo cada vez mais digital, o letramento em inglês se estende ao domínio das habilidades digitais. Isso inclui a capacidade de compreender e criar textos em formatos digitais, como vídeos, podcasts, blogs e redes sociais.



A sequência CORRETA é:

Alternativas
Q3573274 Inglês

An archaeologist talks trash


Author, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman reframes history of waste in her new book


(1º§) Seeing constant images of floating trash islands and overwhelmed landfills can make it seem as though garbage has been a problem piling up for all of human existence.


(2º§) Book cover for Unmaking Waste by Sarah Newman. Cover has a blue background with grey and white images of trash items. However, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history. In "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," she argues that "waste is neither universal nor self-evident." The anthropological archaeologist claims that waste—what we deem "unwanted"—is a relatively recent idea.


(3º§) According to Newman, Western assumptions about waste begin with an imagined long, dirty stretch of "ancient past" broken up by a few expectations like a gleaming Rome (which Newman says is nastier than we think). In traditional histories of trash, this is followed by a filthy, unwashed Middle Ages leading into a dawning awareness of hygiene, public health and sanitation.


(4º§) Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear. Using examples and archeological evidence from before and during colonization, Newman shows that people have thought about—and used—"trash" in many different ways.


(5º§) Q: What drew you to study the history of waste?


(6º§) I got interested in the history of waste during graduate school, while I was working at an ancient Maya city called El Zotz, in northern Guatemala. Over a couple of field seasons, archaeologists from our team uncovered unusual, very dense deposits of artifacts in the palace at the city's center.


(7º§) Basically, they were things that seemed to be ancient trash because they were burnt, broken and scattered, but they were also things that didn't seem to be ancient trash because some of the materials were rare or valuable.


(8º§) This made me wonder not only how exactly other archaeologists and I were classifying ancient artifacts as trash or not-trash, but also whether people in the past even had something like the category of "waste" that we have today.


(9º§) Q: In what ways has "trash" defined archaeology and in what ways has our understanding of waste been defined by archaeologists?


(10º§) Archaeology has sometimes been called "the science of rubbish." Although meant to be something of a joke, this also reflects an assumption that archaeologists usually deal with things that people have left behind because they are unwanted or useless. That may be true in some cases, but people also leave things behind that are valuable or serve a specific purpose (such as a burial or an offering).


(11º§) Archaeologists are the ones who decide whether or not what we find is or is not trash, but we don't do that in a vacuum—we can't help but be influenced by the ways the societies that we come from decide what is or is not trash.


(12º§) For example, in the mid-20th century, when the U.S. was celebrating postwar production and consumerism, archaeologists tended to view ancient trash the same way most people viewed modern trash: as evidence of technological progress. With the rise of environmentalism, however, people (including archaeologists) were suddenly more conscious of the trash they themselves were making and we started to view ancient trash and ways of discarding it as reflections of broader social structures.


(13º§) I also think archaeology has had a role (even if an unintentional one) in making trash appear to be an inevitable, even natural fact of life—imagining that our ancestors have been making waste for many thousands of years gives us a convenient excuse for all the trash we make today.


(14º§) Q: You talk about how trash has some mirror-like qualities. What can our trash tell us about ourselves?


(15º§) If you were to imagine someone you know going through the contents of your trash can right now, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Think about all the things someone would learn about you—what you've eaten recently, what newspapers or magazines you've read, what kinds of health or beauty products you use, maybe even some financial details, just to name a few.


(16º§) When I'm teaching about trash, I often use an incredible series of photos by Gregg Segal called "7 Days of Garbage" to illustrate this point. Sometimes I remove the individuals in the portraits and ask my students to describe the missing people just from their trash. It's surprising how much the students can tell about the people—the products and packaging reveal details about family composition, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender roles, tastes and hobbies, etc.


(17º§) Q: What are some interesting ways that people have thought about or managed waste in the past?


(18º§) One of the things I write about in the book is the way that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán (now Mexico City) had a sophisticated system of waste management in place in the early sixteenth century—a time when many European cities were plagued by garbage-lined streets, clogged gutters, and the indiscriminate dumping of bodily wastes and animal remains.


(19º§) Spaniards described the size and structures of Tenochtitlán with wonder, but they also marveled at the order and cleanliness throughout the city. Several accounts note that an army of laborers were constantly at work sweeping and whitewashing the streets, temples, stairways, courtyards, and houses.


(20º§) One conquistador even describes a system of public latrines, hidden from sight with reeds or grass, from which excrement was collected and reused as agricultural fertilizer. The same account also mentions that canoes full of human waste were sold at the local marketplace, where it was then used in tanning animal hides. Bodily waste could also sometimes be used as a religious offering, especially in acts of penitence.


(21º§) Q: What are some of the common myths we have about trash?


(22º§) The biggest myth about trash is simply that we talk about throwing things "away." There is not, nor has there ever been, an "away" for things to go. As inhabitants of industrialized cities, we often think of landfills as places set apart for things to decay, deteriorate and vanish, but in reality, landfills tend to offer ideal conditions for preservation.


(23º§) Not only do materials refuse to disappear, but the things we think we discard make their way back to us, into our very bodies. Of all the plastic waste ever created—billions of metric tons—about 9% has been recycled. The rest has been found, often reduced to microplastics, everywhere from the Mariana Trench to the top of Mount Everest and from human breast milk to human blood.


(24º§) The title of my book is really about this myth—there is no unmaking our actual waste, but I think we can unmake the idea that it is an inevitable part of human life.




https://news.uchicago.edu/story/archaeologist-talks-trash

In Sarah Newman's book "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," the author sheds light on the intricate relationship between human societies and waste. What can be inferred from Newman's discussion about the myth of "throwing things away"?

Alternativas
Q3573273 Inglês

An archaeologist talks trash


Author, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman reframes history of waste in her new book


(1º§) Seeing constant images of floating trash islands and overwhelmed landfills can make it seem as though garbage has been a problem piling up for all of human existence.


(2º§) Book cover for Unmaking Waste by Sarah Newman. Cover has a blue background with grey and white images of trash items. However, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history. In "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," she argues that "waste is neither universal nor self-evident." The anthropological archaeologist claims that waste—what we deem "unwanted"—is a relatively recent idea.


(3º§) According to Newman, Western assumptions about waste begin with an imagined long, dirty stretch of "ancient past" broken up by a few expectations like a gleaming Rome (which Newman says is nastier than we think). In traditional histories of trash, this is followed by a filthy, unwashed Middle Ages leading into a dawning awareness of hygiene, public health and sanitation.


(4º§) Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear. Using examples and archeological evidence from before and during colonization, Newman shows that people have thought about—and used—"trash" in many different ways.


(5º§) Q: What drew you to study the history of waste?


(6º§) I got interested in the history of waste during graduate school, while I was working at an ancient Maya city called El Zotz, in northern Guatemala. Over a couple of field seasons, archaeologists from our team uncovered unusual, very dense deposits of artifacts in the palace at the city's center.


(7º§) Basically, they were things that seemed to be ancient trash because they were burnt, broken and scattered, but they were also things that didn't seem to be ancient trash because some of the materials were rare or valuable.


(8º§) This made me wonder not only how exactly other archaeologists and I were classifying ancient artifacts as trash or not-trash, but also whether people in the past even had something like the category of "waste" that we have today.


(9º§) Q: In what ways has "trash" defined archaeology and in what ways has our understanding of waste been defined by archaeologists?


(10º§) Archaeology has sometimes been called "the science of rubbish." Although meant to be something of a joke, this also reflects an assumption that archaeologists usually deal with things that people have left behind because they are unwanted or useless. That may be true in some cases, but people also leave things behind that are valuable or serve a specific purpose (such as a burial or an offering).


(11º§) Archaeologists are the ones who decide whether or not what we find is or is not trash, but we don't do that in a vacuum—we can't help but be influenced by the ways the societies that we come from decide what is or is not trash.


(12º§) For example, in the mid-20th century, when the U.S. was celebrating postwar production and consumerism, archaeologists tended to view ancient trash the same way most people viewed modern trash: as evidence of technological progress. With the rise of environmentalism, however, people (including archaeologists) were suddenly more conscious of the trash they themselves were making and we started to view ancient trash and ways of discarding it as reflections of broader social structures.


(13º§) I also think archaeology has had a role (even if an unintentional one) in making trash appear to be an inevitable, even natural fact of life—imagining that our ancestors have been making waste for many thousands of years gives us a convenient excuse for all the trash we make today.


(14º§) Q: You talk about how trash has some mirror-like qualities. What can our trash tell us about ourselves?


(15º§) If you were to imagine someone you know going through the contents of your trash can right now, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Think about all the things someone would learn about you—what you've eaten recently, what newspapers or magazines you've read, what kinds of health or beauty products you use, maybe even some financial details, just to name a few.


(16º§) When I'm teaching about trash, I often use an incredible series of photos by Gregg Segal called "7 Days of Garbage" to illustrate this point. Sometimes I remove the individuals in the portraits and ask my students to describe the missing people just from their trash. It's surprising how much the students can tell about the people—the products and packaging reveal details about family composition, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender roles, tastes and hobbies, etc.


(17º§) Q: What are some interesting ways that people have thought about or managed waste in the past?


(18º§) One of the things I write about in the book is the way that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán (now Mexico City) had a sophisticated system of waste management in place in the early sixteenth century—a time when many European cities were plagued by garbage-lined streets, clogged gutters, and the indiscriminate dumping of bodily wastes and animal remains.


(19º§) Spaniards described the size and structures of Tenochtitlán with wonder, but they also marveled at the order and cleanliness throughout the city. Several accounts note that an army of laborers were constantly at work sweeping and whitewashing the streets, temples, stairways, courtyards, and houses.


(20º§) One conquistador even describes a system of public latrines, hidden from sight with reeds or grass, from which excrement was collected and reused as agricultural fertilizer. The same account also mentions that canoes full of human waste were sold at the local marketplace, where it was then used in tanning animal hides. Bodily waste could also sometimes be used as a religious offering, especially in acts of penitence.


(21º§) Q: What are some of the common myths we have about trash?


(22º§) The biggest myth about trash is simply that we talk about throwing things "away." There is not, nor has there ever been, an "away" for things to go. As inhabitants of industrialized cities, we often think of landfills as places set apart for things to decay, deteriorate and vanish, but in reality, landfills tend to offer ideal conditions for preservation.


(23º§) Not only do materials refuse to disappear, but the things we think we discard make their way back to us, into our very bodies. Of all the plastic waste ever created—billions of metric tons—about 9% has been recycled. The rest has been found, often reduced to microplastics, everywhere from the Mariana Trench to the top of Mount Everest and from human breast milk to human blood.


(24º§) The title of my book is really about this myth—there is no unmaking our actual waste, but I think we can unmake the idea that it is an inevitable part of human life.




https://news.uchicago.edu/story/archaeologist-talks-trash

In the sentence "Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear, [...]" (4º§) what is the grammatical function o of waste is far from linear"?

Alternativas
Q3573272 Inglês

An archaeologist talks trash


Author, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman reframes history of waste in her new book


(1º§) Seeing constant images of floating trash islands and overwhelmed landfills can make it seem as though garbage has been a problem piling up for all of human existence.


(2º§) Book cover for Unmaking Waste by Sarah Newman. Cover has a blue background with grey and white images of trash items. However, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history. In "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," she argues that "waste is neither universal nor self-evident." The anthropological archaeologist claims that waste—what we deem "unwanted"—is a relatively recent idea.


(3º§) According to Newman, Western assumptions about waste begin with an imagined long, dirty stretch of "ancient past" broken up by a few expectations like a gleaming Rome (which Newman says is nastier than we think). In traditional histories of trash, this is followed by a filthy, unwashed Middle Ages leading into a dawning awareness of hygiene, public health and sanitation.


(4º§) Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear. Using examples and archeological evidence from before and during colonization, Newman shows that people have thought about—and used—"trash" in many different ways.


(5º§) Q: What drew you to study the history of waste?


(6º§) I got interested in the history of waste during graduate school, while I was working at an ancient Maya city called El Zotz, in northern Guatemala. Over a couple of field seasons, archaeologists from our team uncovered unusual, very dense deposits of artifacts in the palace at the city's center.


(7º§) Basically, they were things that seemed to be ancient trash because they were burnt, broken and scattered, but they were also things that didn't seem to be ancient trash because some of the materials were rare or valuable.


(8º§) This made me wonder not only how exactly other archaeologists and I were classifying ancient artifacts as trash or not-trash, but also whether people in the past even had something like the category of "waste" that we have today.


(9º§) Q: In what ways has "trash" defined archaeology and in what ways has our understanding of waste been defined by archaeologists?


(10º§) Archaeology has sometimes been called "the science of rubbish." Although meant to be something of a joke, this also reflects an assumption that archaeologists usually deal with things that people have left behind because they are unwanted or useless. That may be true in some cases, but people also leave things behind that are valuable or serve a specific purpose (such as a burial or an offering).


(11º§) Archaeologists are the ones who decide whether or not what we find is or is not trash, but we don't do that in a vacuum—we can't help but be influenced by the ways the societies that we come from decide what is or is not trash.


(12º§) For example, in the mid-20th century, when the U.S. was celebrating postwar production and consumerism, archaeologists tended to view ancient trash the same way most people viewed modern trash: as evidence of technological progress. With the rise of environmentalism, however, people (including archaeologists) were suddenly more conscious of the trash they themselves were making and we started to view ancient trash and ways of discarding it as reflections of broader social structures.


(13º§) I also think archaeology has had a role (even if an unintentional one) in making trash appear to be an inevitable, even natural fact of life—imagining that our ancestors have been making waste for many thousands of years gives us a convenient excuse for all the trash we make today.


(14º§) Q: You talk about how trash has some mirror-like qualities. What can our trash tell us about ourselves?


(15º§) If you were to imagine someone you know going through the contents of your trash can right now, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Think about all the things someone would learn about you—what you've eaten recently, what newspapers or magazines you've read, what kinds of health or beauty products you use, maybe even some financial details, just to name a few.


(16º§) When I'm teaching about trash, I often use an incredible series of photos by Gregg Segal called "7 Days of Garbage" to illustrate this point. Sometimes I remove the individuals in the portraits and ask my students to describe the missing people just from their trash. It's surprising how much the students can tell about the people—the products and packaging reveal details about family composition, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender roles, tastes and hobbies, etc.


(17º§) Q: What are some interesting ways that people have thought about or managed waste in the past?


(18º§) One of the things I write about in the book is the way that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán (now Mexico City) had a sophisticated system of waste management in place in the early sixteenth century—a time when many European cities were plagued by garbage-lined streets, clogged gutters, and the indiscriminate dumping of bodily wastes and animal remains.


(19º§) Spaniards described the size and structures of Tenochtitlán with wonder, but they also marveled at the order and cleanliness throughout the city. Several accounts note that an army of laborers were constantly at work sweeping and whitewashing the streets, temples, stairways, courtyards, and houses.


(20º§) One conquistador even describes a system of public latrines, hidden from sight with reeds or grass, from which excrement was collected and reused as agricultural fertilizer. The same account also mentions that canoes full of human waste were sold at the local marketplace, where it was then used in tanning animal hides. Bodily waste could also sometimes be used as a religious offering, especially in acts of penitence.


(21º§) Q: What are some of the common myths we have about trash?


(22º§) The biggest myth about trash is simply that we talk about throwing things "away." There is not, nor has there ever been, an "away" for things to go. As inhabitants of industrialized cities, we often think of landfills as places set apart for things to decay, deteriorate and vanish, but in reality, landfills tend to offer ideal conditions for preservation.


(23º§) Not only do materials refuse to disappear, but the things we think we discard make their way back to us, into our very bodies. Of all the plastic waste ever created—billions of metric tons—about 9% has been recycled. The rest has been found, often reduced to microplastics, everywhere from the Mariana Trench to the top of Mount Everest and from human breast milk to human blood.


(24º§) The title of my book is really about this myth—there is no unmaking our actual waste, but I think we can unmake the idea that it is an inevitable part of human life.




https://news.uchicago.edu/story/archaeologist-talks-trash

In Sarah Newman's exploration of waste history in her book "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," various aspects of waste are discussed. Based on the text, what can be inferred about the author's perspective on the concept of waste?

Alternativas
Q3573271 Inglês

An archaeologist talks trash


Author, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman reframes history of waste in her new book


(1º§) Seeing constant images of floating trash islands and overwhelmed landfills can make it seem as though garbage has been a problem piling up for all of human existence.


(2º§) Book cover for Unmaking Waste by Sarah Newman. Cover has a blue background with grey and white images of trash items. However, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history. In "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," she argues that "waste is neither universal nor self-evident." The anthropological archaeologist claims that waste—what we deem "unwanted"—is a relatively recent idea.


(3º§) According to Newman, Western assumptions about waste begin with an imagined long, dirty stretch of "ancient past" broken up by a few expectations like a gleaming Rome (which Newman says is nastier than we think). In traditional histories of trash, this is followed by a filthy, unwashed Middle Ages leading into a dawning awareness of hygiene, public health and sanitation.


(4º§) Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear. Using examples and archeological evidence from before and during colonization, Newman shows that people have thought about—and used—"trash" in many different ways.


(5º§) Q: What drew you to study the history of waste?


(6º§) I got interested in the history of waste during graduate school, while I was working at an ancient Maya city called El Zotz, in northern Guatemala. Over a couple of field seasons, archaeologists from our team uncovered unusual, very dense deposits of artifacts in the palace at the city's center.


(7º§) Basically, they were things that seemed to be ancient trash because they were burnt, broken and scattered, but they were also things that didn't seem to be ancient trash because some of the materials were rare or valuable.


(8º§) This made me wonder not only how exactly other archaeologists and I were classifying ancient artifacts as trash or not-trash, but also whether people in the past even had something like the category of "waste" that we have today.


(9º§) Q: In what ways has "trash" defined archaeology and in what ways has our understanding of waste been defined by archaeologists?


(10º§) Archaeology has sometimes been called "the science of rubbish." Although meant to be something of a joke, this also reflects an assumption that archaeologists usually deal with things that people have left behind because they are unwanted or useless. That may be true in some cases, but people also leave things behind that are valuable or serve a specific purpose (such as a burial or an offering).


(11º§) Archaeologists are the ones who decide whether or not what we find is or is not trash, but we don't do that in a vacuum—we can't help but be influenced by the ways the societies that we come from decide what is or is not trash.


(12º§) For example, in the mid-20th century, when the U.S. was celebrating postwar production and consumerism, archaeologists tended to view ancient trash the same way most people viewed modern trash: as evidence of technological progress. With the rise of environmentalism, however, people (including archaeologists) were suddenly more conscious of the trash they themselves were making and we started to view ancient trash and ways of discarding it as reflections of broader social structures.


(13º§) I also think archaeology has had a role (even if an unintentional one) in making trash appear to be an inevitable, even natural fact of life—imagining that our ancestors have been making waste for many thousands of years gives us a convenient excuse for all the trash we make today.


(14º§) Q: You talk about how trash has some mirror-like qualities. What can our trash tell us about ourselves?


(15º§) If you were to imagine someone you know going through the contents of your trash can right now, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Think about all the things someone would learn about you—what you've eaten recently, what newspapers or magazines you've read, what kinds of health or beauty products you use, maybe even some financial details, just to name a few.


(16º§) When I'm teaching about trash, I often use an incredible series of photos by Gregg Segal called "7 Days of Garbage" to illustrate this point. Sometimes I remove the individuals in the portraits and ask my students to describe the missing people just from their trash. It's surprising how much the students can tell about the people—the products and packaging reveal details about family composition, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender roles, tastes and hobbies, etc.


(17º§) Q: What are some interesting ways that people have thought about or managed waste in the past?


(18º§) One of the things I write about in the book is the way that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán (now Mexico City) had a sophisticated system of waste management in place in the early sixteenth century—a time when many European cities were plagued by garbage-lined streets, clogged gutters, and the indiscriminate dumping of bodily wastes and animal remains.


(19º§) Spaniards described the size and structures of Tenochtitlán with wonder, but they also marveled at the order and cleanliness throughout the city. Several accounts note that an army of laborers were constantly at work sweeping and whitewashing the streets, temples, stairways, courtyards, and houses.


(20º§) One conquistador even describes a system of public latrines, hidden from sight with reeds or grass, from which excrement was collected and reused as agricultural fertilizer. The same account also mentions that canoes full of human waste were sold at the local marketplace, where it was then used in tanning animal hides. Bodily waste could also sometimes be used as a religious offering, especially in acts of penitence.


(21º§) Q: What are some of the common myths we have about trash?


(22º§) The biggest myth about trash is simply that we talk about throwing things "away." There is not, nor has there ever been, an "away" for things to go. As inhabitants of industrialized cities, we often think of landfills as places set apart for things to decay, deteriorate and vanish, but in reality, landfills tend to offer ideal conditions for preservation.


(23º§) Not only do materials refuse to disappear, but the things we think we discard make their way back to us, into our very bodies. Of all the plastic waste ever created—billions of metric tons—about 9% has been recycled. The rest has been found, often reduced to microplastics, everywhere from the Mariana Trench to the top of Mount Everest and from human breast milk to human blood.


(24º§) The title of my book is really about this myth—there is no unmaking our actual waste, but I think we can unmake the idea that it is an inevitable part of human life.




https://news.uchicago.edu/story/archaeologist-talks-trash

In her book Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things , archaeologist Sarah Newman challenges conventional beliefs about waste. According to Newman, waste is not a universal or self-evident concept, contrary to common assumptions in Western societies. Instead, she explores diverse perspectives on waste, notably examining ancient Mesoamerica's unconventional approach to trash. What fundamental misconception does Sarah Newman challenge in her book regarding the history of waste?

Alternativas
Q3573270 Inglês

An archaeologist talks trash


Author, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman reframes history of waste in her new book


(1º§) Seeing constant images of floating trash islands and overwhelmed landfills can make it seem as though garbage has been a problem piling up for all of human existence.


(2º§) Book cover for Unmaking Waste by Sarah Newman. Cover has a blue background with grey and white images of trash items. However, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history. In "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," she argues that "waste is neither universal nor self-evident." The anthropological archaeologist claims that waste—what we deem "unwanted"—is a relatively recent idea.


(3º§) According to Newman, Western assumptions about waste begin with an imagined long, dirty stretch of "ancient past" broken up by a few expectations like a gleaming Rome (which Newman says is nastier than we think). In traditional histories of trash, this is followed by a filthy, unwashed Middle Ages leading into a dawning awareness of hygiene, public health and sanitation.


(4º§) Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear. Using examples and archeological evidence from before and during colonization, Newman shows that people have thought about—and used—"trash" in many different ways.


(5º§) Q: What drew you to study the history of waste?


(6º§) I got interested in the history of waste during graduate school, while I was working at an ancient Maya city called El Zotz, in northern Guatemala. Over a couple of field seasons, archaeologists from our team uncovered unusual, very dense deposits of artifacts in the palace at the city's center.


(7º§) Basically, they were things that seemed to be ancient trash because they were burnt, broken and scattered, but they were also things that didn't seem to be ancient trash because some of the materials were rare or valuable.


(8º§) This made me wonder not only how exactly other archaeologists and I were classifying ancient artifacts as trash or not-trash, but also whether people in the past even had something like the category of "waste" that we have today.


(9º§) Q: In what ways has "trash" defined archaeology and in what ways has our understanding of waste been defined by archaeologists?


(10º§) Archaeology has sometimes been called "the science of rubbish." Although meant to be something of a joke, this also reflects an assumption that archaeologists usually deal with things that people have left behind because they are unwanted or useless. That may be true in some cases, but people also leave things behind that are valuable or serve a specific purpose (such as a burial or an offering).


(11º§) Archaeologists are the ones who decide whether or not what we find is or is not trash, but we don't do that in a vacuum—we can't help but be influenced by the ways the societies that we come from decide what is or is not trash.


(12º§) For example, in the mid-20th century, when the U.S. was celebrating postwar production and consumerism, archaeologists tended to view ancient trash the same way most people viewed modern trash: as evidence of technological progress. With the rise of environmentalism, however, people (including archaeologists) were suddenly more conscious of the trash they themselves were making and we started to view ancient trash and ways of discarding it as reflections of broader social structures.


(13º§) I also think archaeology has had a role (even if an unintentional one) in making trash appear to be an inevitable, even natural fact of life—imagining that our ancestors have been making waste for many thousands of years gives us a convenient excuse for all the trash we make today.


(14º§) Q: You talk about how trash has some mirror-like qualities. What can our trash tell us about ourselves?


(15º§) If you were to imagine someone you know going through the contents of your trash can right now, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Think about all the things someone would learn about you—what you've eaten recently, what newspapers or magazines you've read, what kinds of health or beauty products you use, maybe even some financial details, just to name a few.


(16º§) When I'm teaching about trash, I often use an incredible series of photos by Gregg Segal called "7 Days of Garbage" to illustrate this point. Sometimes I remove the individuals in the portraits and ask my students to describe the missing people just from their trash. It's surprising how much the students can tell about the people—the products and packaging reveal details about family composition, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender roles, tastes and hobbies, etc.


(17º§) Q: What are some interesting ways that people have thought about or managed waste in the past?


(18º§) One of the things I write about in the book is the way that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán (now Mexico City) had a sophisticated system of waste management in place in the early sixteenth century—a time when many European cities were plagued by garbage-lined streets, clogged gutters, and the indiscriminate dumping of bodily wastes and animal remains.


(19º§) Spaniards described the size and structures of Tenochtitlán with wonder, but they also marveled at the order and cleanliness throughout the city. Several accounts note that an army of laborers were constantly at work sweeping and whitewashing the streets, temples, stairways, courtyards, and houses.


(20º§) One conquistador even describes a system of public latrines, hidden from sight with reeds or grass, from which excrement was collected and reused as agricultural fertilizer. The same account also mentions that canoes full of human waste were sold at the local marketplace, where it was then used in tanning animal hides. Bodily waste could also sometimes be used as a religious offering, especially in acts of penitence.


(21º§) Q: What are some of the common myths we have about trash?


(22º§) The biggest myth about trash is simply that we talk about throwing things "away." There is not, nor has there ever been, an "away" for things to go. As inhabitants of industrialized cities, we often think of landfills as places set apart for things to decay, deteriorate and vanish, but in reality, landfills tend to offer ideal conditions for preservation.


(23º§) Not only do materials refuse to disappear, but the things we think we discard make their way back to us, into our very bodies. Of all the plastic waste ever created—billions of metric tons—about 9% has been recycled. The rest has been found, often reduced to microplastics, everywhere from the Mariana Trench to the top of Mount Everest and from human breast milk to human blood.


(24º§) The title of my book is really about this myth—there is no unmaking our actual waste, but I think we can unmake the idea that it is an inevitable part of human life.




https://news.uchicago.edu/story/archaeologist-talks-trash

Identify the grammatical class of the word "Unmaking" in the book's title "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things" by Sarah Newman.

Alternativas
Q3573269 Inglês

An archaeologist talks trash


Author, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman reframes history of waste in her new book


(1º§) Seeing constant images of floating trash islands and overwhelmed landfills can make it seem as though garbage has been a problem piling up for all of human existence.


(2º§) Book cover for Unmaking Waste by Sarah Newman. Cover has a blue background with grey and white images of trash items. However, UChicago Asst. Prof. Sarah Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history. In "Unmaking Waste: New Histories of Old Things," she argues that "waste is neither universal nor self-evident." The anthropological archaeologist claims that waste—what we deem "unwanted"—is a relatively recent idea.


(3º§) According to Newman, Western assumptions about waste begin with an imagined long, dirty stretch of "ancient past" broken up by a few expectations like a gleaming Rome (which Newman says is nastier than we think). In traditional histories of trash, this is followed by a filthy, unwashed Middle Ages leading into a dawning awareness of hygiene, public health and sanitation.


(4º§) Newman moves away from this sanitized narrative and heads to ancient Mesoamerica where the story of waste is far from linear. Using examples and archeological evidence from before and during colonization, Newman shows that people have thought about—and used—"trash" in many different ways.


(5º§) Q: What drew you to study the history of waste?


(6º§) I got interested in the history of waste during graduate school, while I was working at an ancient Maya city called El Zotz, in northern Guatemala. Over a couple of field seasons, archaeologists from our team uncovered unusual, very dense deposits of artifacts in the palace at the city's center.


(7º§) Basically, they were things that seemed to be ancient trash because they were burnt, broken and scattered, but they were also things that didn't seem to be ancient trash because some of the materials were rare or valuable.


(8º§) This made me wonder not only how exactly other archaeologists and I were classifying ancient artifacts as trash or not-trash, but also whether people in the past even had something like the category of "waste" that we have today.


(9º§) Q: In what ways has "trash" defined archaeology and in what ways has our understanding of waste been defined by archaeologists?


(10º§) Archaeology has sometimes been called "the science of rubbish." Although meant to be something of a joke, this also reflects an assumption that archaeologists usually deal with things that people have left behind because they are unwanted or useless. That may be true in some cases, but people also leave things behind that are valuable or serve a specific purpose (such as a burial or an offering).


(11º§) Archaeologists are the ones who decide whether or not what we find is or is not trash, but we don't do that in a vacuum—we can't help but be influenced by the ways the societies that we come from decide what is or is not trash.


(12º§) For example, in the mid-20th century, when the U.S. was celebrating postwar production and consumerism, archaeologists tended to view ancient trash the same way most people viewed modern trash: as evidence of technological progress. With the rise of environmentalism, however, people (including archaeologists) were suddenly more conscious of the trash they themselves were making and we started to view ancient trash and ways of discarding it as reflections of broader social structures.


(13º§) I also think archaeology has had a role (even if an unintentional one) in making trash appear to be an inevitable, even natural fact of life—imagining that our ancestors have been making waste for many thousands of years gives us a convenient excuse for all the trash we make today.


(14º§) Q: You talk about how trash has some mirror-like qualities. What can our trash tell us about ourselves?


(15º§) If you were to imagine someone you know going through the contents of your trash can right now, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Think about all the things someone would learn about you—what you've eaten recently, what newspapers or magazines you've read, what kinds of health or beauty products you use, maybe even some financial details, just to name a few.


(16º§) When I'm teaching about trash, I often use an incredible series of photos by Gregg Segal called "7 Days of Garbage" to illustrate this point. Sometimes I remove the individuals in the portraits and ask my students to describe the missing people just from their trash. It's surprising how much the students can tell about the people—the products and packaging reveal details about family composition, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender roles, tastes and hobbies, etc.


(17º§) Q: What are some interesting ways that people have thought about or managed waste in the past?


(18º§) One of the things I write about in the book is the way that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán (now Mexico City) had a sophisticated system of waste management in place in the early sixteenth century—a time when many European cities were plagued by garbage-lined streets, clogged gutters, and the indiscriminate dumping of bodily wastes and animal remains.


(19º§) Spaniards described the size and structures of Tenochtitlán with wonder, but they also marveled at the order and cleanliness throughout the city. Several accounts note that an army of laborers were constantly at work sweeping and whitewashing the streets, temples, stairways, courtyards, and houses.


(20º§) One conquistador even describes a system of public latrines, hidden from sight with reeds or grass, from which excrement was collected and reused as agricultural fertilizer. The same account also mentions that canoes full of human waste were sold at the local marketplace, where it was then used in tanning animal hides. Bodily waste could also sometimes be used as a religious offering, especially in acts of penitence.


(21º§) Q: What are some of the common myths we have about trash?


(22º§) The biggest myth about trash is simply that we talk about throwing things "away." There is not, nor has there ever been, an "away" for things to go. As inhabitants of industrialized cities, we often think of landfills as places set apart for things to decay, deteriorate and vanish, but in reality, landfills tend to offer ideal conditions for preservation.


(23º§) Not only do materials refuse to disappear, but the things we think we discard make their way back to us, into our very bodies. Of all the plastic waste ever created—billions of metric tons—about 9% has been recycled. The rest has been found, often reduced to microplastics, everywhere from the Mariana Trench to the top of Mount Everest and from human breast milk to human blood.


(24º§) The title of my book is really about this myth—there is no unmaking our actual waste, but I think we can unmake the idea that it is an inevitable part of human life.




https://news.uchicago.edu/story/archaeologist-talks-trash

In the sentence "Newman wants to dispose of this simplified version of history,[...]" (2º§) what does the phrasal verb "dispose of" mean?

Alternativas
Respostas
8201: B
8202: C
8203: C
8204: B
8205: C
8206: E
8207: D
8208: B
8209: D
8210: B
8211: C
8212: D
8213: B
8214: D
8215: C
8216: A
8217: D
8218: B
8219: D
8220: D