Questões de Concurso Sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 25.501 questões
Caring for Puppies
Larry was a kind-hearted boy. He was known for his compassion and love for animals. One sunny morning, he found a cardboard box near the park. To his surprise, it was filled with a litter of adorable puppies. The puppies were shivering and hungry, their eyes barely open. Without hesitation, Larry scooped them up and took them home. He knew he had to care for them. As the time passed by, Larry's bond with the puppies deepened. He spent hours playing with them, making sure they were happy and healthy. He watched them grow. Each time he walked into the room, their tiny tails wagged in excitement. Word quickly spread about a boy caring for the abandoned puppies. Soon, the neighborhood kids joined in to help. They assisted Larry in finding loving homes for the puppies. When the day came to say goodbye, Larry felt a mix of emotions. He knew he would miss them dearly as the new owners took the puppies home. But he felt happy when he thought his small acts of love had made a difference in the world.
Fonte: www.eslfast.com/gradedread3/gr3/gr3011.htm
Assinale a alternativa que classifica CORRETAMENTE as palavras em destaque.
Com base na definição apresentada, analise a sentença a seguir:
John sent me a letter.
Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a estrutura CORRETA da sentença.
FÁBREGAS, A. Morphology in Linguistics. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2015.
Com base na informação fornecida, assinale a alternativa que apresenta um morfema derivacional.
I. Consists of having an idea about the content and goals of a reading text before starting to read. To do so, readers look at the title, subtitles, a picture or read the first sentence of each paragraph. II. Reading a text quickly to locate a specific fact or piece of information. This may be a date, a name or a figure. III. Readers relate the content of the passage to self, to other texts or to the world. IV. Making meaning of the text by reading between the lines and using personal knowledge. The aim is to construct meaning beyond what is literally expressed. V. Reading a text quickly to get its general idea of the content.
Fonte: https://www.myenglishpages.com (adaptado).
Assinale a alternativa que representa a ordem CORRETA das estratégias apresentadas nas afirmativas.
I. Audiolingual Approach está baseada em uma concepção estruturalista de linguagem e na visão behaviorista de aprendizagem (estímuloresposta). Sua técnica inclui exercícios orais de ouvir e repetir para se alcançar um nível de precisão das formas e padrões linguísticos. II. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) é uma abordagem centrada no desenvolvimento da competência comunicativa, ou seja, desenvolver a competência comunicativa dos alunos em todas as quatro habilidades. III. Natural Approach é uma abordagem usada para preparar os alunos para leitura de textos. Seu método e técnica dão pouca ênfase na fala, consistindo no aprendizado de regras gramaticais e lista de vocabulário aplicadas à tradução escrita de textos. IV. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) é uma abordagem que combina a aprendizagem de um assunto específico com a aprendizagem da língua-alvo. As atividades buscam integrar as quatro competências, levando o aluno ao uso significativo da linguagem e ao desenvolvimento de competências transferíveis para utilização no mundo real. V. Dogme é uma abordagem baseada na noção de que a linguagem compreende unidades lexicais (partes, frases fixas, colocações). Seu método concentra-se no aprendizado de vocabulário e quadros linguísticos em nível de frase que podem ser manipulados pelo aluno realizando substituições e adaptações.
Fonte: https://tefl-toolkit.com (adaptado).
Assinale a alternativa CORRETA.
[…]
Available at: https://www.britishcouncil.org.br/sites/default/files/leitura_critica_bncc_-_en_-_v4_final.pdf. [Fragment]. Accessed on May 6, 2024.
To develop the BNCC ability of identifying what a text is about and recognising its textual organization and cognate words, English teachers are recommended to exploit different textual genres in the language classroom. Examples of such texts range from a menu, a text message or a poem to a book review.
To develop the BNCC ability EF06LI08, which includes identifying what a text is about, an English teacher should make use of
Read the following text to answer the question.
By Leo Selivan
In this article, informed by the Lexical Approach, I reflect on grammar instruction in the classroom […]. I consider the problems with ‘traditional’ grammar teaching before arguing that what we actually need is more grammar input as well as showing how lexis can provide necessary ‘crutches’ for the learner.
Lexis = vocabulary + grammar
The shift in ELT from grammar to lexis mirrors a similar change in the attitude of linguists. In the past linguists were preoccupied with the grammar of language; however the advances in corpus linguistics have pushed lexis to the forefront. The term ‘lexis’, which was traditionally used by linguists, is a common word these days and frequently used even in textbooks.
Why use a technical term borrowed from the realm of linguistics instead of the word ‘vocabulary’? Quite simply because vocabulary is typically seen as individual words (often presented in lists) whereas lexis is a somewhat wider concept and consists of collocations, chunks and formulaic expressions. It also includes certain patterns that were traditionally associated with the grammar of a language, e.g. If I were you…, I haven’t seen you for ages etc.
Recognising certain grammar structures as lexical
items means that they can be introduced much earlier,
without structural analysis or elaboration. Indeed, since the
concept of notions and functions made its way into language
teaching, particularly as Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT) gained prominence, some structures associated with
grammar started to be taught lexically (or functionally). I’d like
to is not taught as ‹the conditional› but as a chunk expressing
desire. Similarly many other ‹traditional› grammar items can
be introduced lexically relatively early on.
Less grammar or more grammar?
You are, no doubt, all familiar with students who on one hand seem to know the ‘rules’ of grammar but still fail to produce grammatically correct sentences when speaking or, on the other, sound unnatural and foreign-like even when their sentences are grammatically correct. Michael Lewis, who might be considered the founder of the Lexical Approach, once claimed that there was no direct relationship between the knowledge of grammar and speaking. In contrast, the knowledge of formulaic language has been shown by research to have a significant bearing on the natural language production.
Furthermore, certain grammar rules are practically impossible to learn. Dave Willis cites the grammar of orientation (which includes the notoriously difficult present perfect and the uses of certain modal verbs) as particularly resistant to teaching. The only way to grasp their meaning is through continuous exposure and use.
Finally, even the most authoritative English grammars never claim to provide a comprehensive description of all the grammar, hence the word ‘introduction’ often used in their titles (for instance, Huddleston & Pullum’s A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar or Halliday’s An Introduction to Functional Grammar).
If grammarians do not even attempt to address all areas of grammar, how can we, practitioners, cover all the aspects of grammar in our teaching, especially if all we seem to focus on is a limited selection of discrete items, comprised mostly of tenses and a handful of modal verbs? It would seem that we need to expose our students to a lot of naturally occurring language and frequently draw their attention to various grammar points as they arise.
For example, while teaching the expression fall asleep / be asleep you can ask your students:
• Don’t make any noise – she’s fallen asleep.
• Don’t make any noise – she’s asleep.
What does’s stand for in each of these cases (is or has)?
One of the fathers of the Communicative Language Teaching Henry Widdowson advocated using lexical items as a starting point and then ‘showing how they need to be grammatically modified to be communicatively effective’ (1990:95). For example, when exploring a text with your students, you may come across a sentence like this:
• They’ve been married for seven years.
You can ask your students: When did they get married? How should you change the sentence if the couple you are talking about is no longer married?
The above demonstrates how the teacher should be constantly on the ball and take every opportunity to draw students’ attention to grammar. Such short but frequent ‘grammar spots’ will help to slowly raise students’ awareness and build their understanding of the English grammar system.
[…]
Conclusion
So is there room for grammar instruction in the classroom? Certainly yes. But the grammar practice should always start with the exploitation of lexical items. Exposing students to a lot of natural and contextualised examples will offer a lexical way into the grammar of the language.
To sum up, grammar should play some role in language teaching but should not occupy a big part of class time. Instead grammar should be delivered in small but frequent portions. Students should be encouraged to collect a lot of examples of a particular structure before being invited to analyse it. Hence, analysis should be preceded by synthesis.
Lastly, language practitioners should bear in mind that grammar acquisition is an incremental process which requires frequent focus and refocus on the items already studied.
Available at: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professionaldevelopment/teachers/knowing-subject/articles/grammar-vs-lexisor-grammar-through. Accessed on: April 29, 2024.
Read the following text to answer the question.
By Leo Selivan
In this article, informed by the Lexical Approach, I reflect on grammar instruction in the classroom […]. I consider the problems with ‘traditional’ grammar teaching before arguing that what we actually need is more grammar input as well as showing how lexis can provide necessary ‘crutches’ for the learner.
Lexis = vocabulary + grammar
The shift in ELT from grammar to lexis mirrors a similar change in the attitude of linguists. In the past linguists were preoccupied with the grammar of language; however the advances in corpus linguistics have pushed lexis to the forefront. The term ‘lexis’, which was traditionally used by linguists, is a common word these days and frequently used even in textbooks.
Why use a technical term borrowed from the realm of linguistics instead of the word ‘vocabulary’? Quite simply because vocabulary is typically seen as individual words (often presented in lists) whereas lexis is a somewhat wider concept and consists of collocations, chunks and formulaic expressions. It also includes certain patterns that were traditionally associated with the grammar of a language, e.g. If I were you…, I haven’t seen you for ages etc.
Recognising certain grammar structures as lexical
items means that they can be introduced much earlier,
without structural analysis or elaboration. Indeed, since the
concept of notions and functions made its way into language
teaching, particularly as Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT) gained prominence, some structures associated with
grammar started to be taught lexically (or functionally). I’d like
to is not taught as ‹the conditional› but as a chunk expressing
desire. Similarly many other ‹traditional› grammar items can
be introduced lexically relatively early on.
Less grammar or more grammar?
You are, no doubt, all familiar with students who on one hand seem to know the ‘rules’ of grammar but still fail to produce grammatically correct sentences when speaking or, on the other, sound unnatural and foreign-like even when their sentences are grammatically correct. Michael Lewis, who might be considered the founder of the Lexical Approach, once claimed that there was no direct relationship between the knowledge of grammar and speaking. In contrast, the knowledge of formulaic language has been shown by research to have a significant bearing on the natural language production.
Furthermore, certain grammar rules are practically impossible to learn. Dave Willis cites the grammar of orientation (which includes the notoriously difficult present perfect and the uses of certain modal verbs) as particularly resistant to teaching. The only way to grasp their meaning is through continuous exposure and use.
Finally, even the most authoritative English grammars never claim to provide a comprehensive description of all the grammar, hence the word ‘introduction’ often used in their titles (for instance, Huddleston & Pullum’s A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar or Halliday’s An Introduction to Functional Grammar).
If grammarians do not even attempt to address all areas of grammar, how can we, practitioners, cover all the aspects of grammar in our teaching, especially if all we seem to focus on is a limited selection of discrete items, comprised mostly of tenses and a handful of modal verbs? It would seem that we need to expose our students to a lot of naturally occurring language and frequently draw their attention to various grammar points as they arise.
For example, while teaching the expression fall asleep / be asleep you can ask your students:
• Don’t make any noise – she’s fallen asleep.
• Don’t make any noise – she’s asleep.
What does’s stand for in each of these cases (is or has)?
One of the fathers of the Communicative Language Teaching Henry Widdowson advocated using lexical items as a starting point and then ‘showing how they need to be grammatically modified to be communicatively effective’ (1990:95). For example, when exploring a text with your students, you may come across a sentence like this:
• They’ve been married for seven years.
You can ask your students: When did they get married? How should you change the sentence if the couple you are talking about is no longer married?
The above demonstrates how the teacher should be constantly on the ball and take every opportunity to draw students’ attention to grammar. Such short but frequent ‘grammar spots’ will help to slowly raise students’ awareness and build their understanding of the English grammar system.
[…]
Conclusion
So is there room for grammar instruction in the classroom? Certainly yes. But the grammar practice should always start with the exploitation of lexical items. Exposing students to a lot of natural and contextualised examples will offer a lexical way into the grammar of the language.
To sum up, grammar should play some role in language teaching but should not occupy a big part of class time. Instead grammar should be delivered in small but frequent portions. Students should be encouraged to collect a lot of examples of a particular structure before being invited to analyse it. Hence, analysis should be preceded by synthesis.
Lastly, language practitioners should bear in mind that grammar acquisition is an incremental process which requires frequent focus and refocus on the items already studied.
Available at: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professionaldevelopment/teachers/knowing-subject/articles/grammar-vs-lexisor-grammar-through. Accessed on: April 29, 2024.
Read the following text to answer the question.
By Leo Selivan
In this article, informed by the Lexical Approach, I reflect on grammar instruction in the classroom […]. I consider the problems with ‘traditional’ grammar teaching before arguing that what we actually need is more grammar input as well as showing how lexis can provide necessary ‘crutches’ for the learner.
Lexis = vocabulary + grammar
The shift in ELT from grammar to lexis mirrors a similar change in the attitude of linguists. In the past linguists were preoccupied with the grammar of language; however the advances in corpus linguistics have pushed lexis to the forefront. The term ‘lexis’, which was traditionally used by linguists, is a common word these days and frequently used even in textbooks.
Why use a technical term borrowed from the realm of linguistics instead of the word ‘vocabulary’? Quite simply because vocabulary is typically seen as individual words (often presented in lists) whereas lexis is a somewhat wider concept and consists of collocations, chunks and formulaic expressions. It also includes certain patterns that were traditionally associated with the grammar of a language, e.g. If I were you…, I haven’t seen you for ages etc.
Recognising certain grammar structures as lexical
items means that they can be introduced much earlier,
without structural analysis or elaboration. Indeed, since the
concept of notions and functions made its way into language
teaching, particularly as Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT) gained prominence, some structures associated with
grammar started to be taught lexically (or functionally). I’d like
to is not taught as ‹the conditional› but as a chunk expressing
desire. Similarly many other ‹traditional› grammar items can
be introduced lexically relatively early on.
Less grammar or more grammar?
You are, no doubt, all familiar with students who on one hand seem to know the ‘rules’ of grammar but still fail to produce grammatically correct sentences when speaking or, on the other, sound unnatural and foreign-like even when their sentences are grammatically correct. Michael Lewis, who might be considered the founder of the Lexical Approach, once claimed that there was no direct relationship between the knowledge of grammar and speaking. In contrast, the knowledge of formulaic language has been shown by research to have a significant bearing on the natural language production.
Furthermore, certain grammar rules are practically impossible to learn. Dave Willis cites the grammar of orientation (which includes the notoriously difficult present perfect and the uses of certain modal verbs) as particularly resistant to teaching. The only way to grasp their meaning is through continuous exposure and use.
Finally, even the most authoritative English grammars never claim to provide a comprehensive description of all the grammar, hence the word ‘introduction’ often used in their titles (for instance, Huddleston & Pullum’s A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar or Halliday’s An Introduction to Functional Grammar).
If grammarians do not even attempt to address all areas of grammar, how can we, practitioners, cover all the aspects of grammar in our teaching, especially if all we seem to focus on is a limited selection of discrete items, comprised mostly of tenses and a handful of modal verbs? It would seem that we need to expose our students to a lot of naturally occurring language and frequently draw their attention to various grammar points as they arise.
For example, while teaching the expression fall asleep / be asleep you can ask your students:
• Don’t make any noise – she’s fallen asleep.
• Don’t make any noise – she’s asleep.
What does’s stand for in each of these cases (is or has)?
One of the fathers of the Communicative Language Teaching Henry Widdowson advocated using lexical items as a starting point and then ‘showing how they need to be grammatically modified to be communicatively effective’ (1990:95). For example, when exploring a text with your students, you may come across a sentence like this:
• They’ve been married for seven years.
You can ask your students: When did they get married? How should you change the sentence if the couple you are talking about is no longer married?
The above demonstrates how the teacher should be constantly on the ball and take every opportunity to draw students’ attention to grammar. Such short but frequent ‘grammar spots’ will help to slowly raise students’ awareness and build their understanding of the English grammar system.
[…]
Conclusion
So is there room for grammar instruction in the classroom? Certainly yes. But the grammar practice should always start with the exploitation of lexical items. Exposing students to a lot of natural and contextualised examples will offer a lexical way into the grammar of the language.
To sum up, grammar should play some role in language teaching but should not occupy a big part of class time. Instead grammar should be delivered in small but frequent portions. Students should be encouraged to collect a lot of examples of a particular structure before being invited to analyse it. Hence, analysis should be preceded by synthesis.
Lastly, language practitioners should bear in mind that grammar acquisition is an incremental process which requires frequent focus and refocus on the items already studied.
Available at: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professionaldevelopment/teachers/knowing-subject/articles/grammar-vs-lexisor-grammar-through. Accessed on: April 29, 2024.
Read the following text to answer the question.
By Leo Selivan
In this article, informed by the Lexical Approach, I reflect on grammar instruction in the classroom […]. I consider the problems with ‘traditional’ grammar teaching before arguing that what we actually need is more grammar input as well as showing how lexis can provide necessary ‘crutches’ for the learner.
Lexis = vocabulary + grammar
The shift in ELT from grammar to lexis mirrors a similar change in the attitude of linguists. In the past linguists were preoccupied with the grammar of language; however the advances in corpus linguistics have pushed lexis to the forefront. The term ‘lexis’, which was traditionally used by linguists, is a common word these days and frequently used even in textbooks.
Why use a technical term borrowed from the realm of linguistics instead of the word ‘vocabulary’? Quite simply because vocabulary is typically seen as individual words (often presented in lists) whereas lexis is a somewhat wider concept and consists of collocations, chunks and formulaic expressions. It also includes certain patterns that were traditionally associated with the grammar of a language, e.g. If I were you…, I haven’t seen you for ages etc.
Recognising certain grammar structures as lexical
items means that they can be introduced much earlier,
without structural analysis or elaboration. Indeed, since the
concept of notions and functions made its way into language
teaching, particularly as Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT) gained prominence, some structures associated with
grammar started to be taught lexically (or functionally). I’d like
to is not taught as ‹the conditional› but as a chunk expressing
desire. Similarly many other ‹traditional› grammar items can
be introduced lexically relatively early on.
Less grammar or more grammar?
You are, no doubt, all familiar with students who on one hand seem to know the ‘rules’ of grammar but still fail to produce grammatically correct sentences when speaking or, on the other, sound unnatural and foreign-like even when their sentences are grammatically correct. Michael Lewis, who might be considered the founder of the Lexical Approach, once claimed that there was no direct relationship between the knowledge of grammar and speaking. In contrast, the knowledge of formulaic language has been shown by research to have a significant bearing on the natural language production.
Furthermore, certain grammar rules are practically impossible to learn. Dave Willis cites the grammar of orientation (which includes the notoriously difficult present perfect and the uses of certain modal verbs) as particularly resistant to teaching. The only way to grasp their meaning is through continuous exposure and use.
Finally, even the most authoritative English grammars never claim to provide a comprehensive description of all the grammar, hence the word ‘introduction’ often used in their titles (for instance, Huddleston & Pullum’s A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar or Halliday’s An Introduction to Functional Grammar).
If grammarians do not even attempt to address all areas of grammar, how can we, practitioners, cover all the aspects of grammar in our teaching, especially if all we seem to focus on is a limited selection of discrete items, comprised mostly of tenses and a handful of modal verbs? It would seem that we need to expose our students to a lot of naturally occurring language and frequently draw their attention to various grammar points as they arise.
For example, while teaching the expression fall asleep / be asleep you can ask your students:
• Don’t make any noise – she’s fallen asleep.
• Don’t make any noise – she’s asleep.
What does’s stand for in each of these cases (is or has)?
One of the fathers of the Communicative Language Teaching Henry Widdowson advocated using lexical items as a starting point and then ‘showing how they need to be grammatically modified to be communicatively effective’ (1990:95). For example, when exploring a text with your students, you may come across a sentence like this:
• They’ve been married for seven years.
You can ask your students: When did they get married? How should you change the sentence if the couple you are talking about is no longer married?
The above demonstrates how the teacher should be constantly on the ball and take every opportunity to draw students’ attention to grammar. Such short but frequent ‘grammar spots’ will help to slowly raise students’ awareness and build their understanding of the English grammar system.
[…]
Conclusion
So is there room for grammar instruction in the classroom? Certainly yes. But the grammar practice should always start with the exploitation of lexical items. Exposing students to a lot of natural and contextualised examples will offer a lexical way into the grammar of the language.
To sum up, grammar should play some role in language teaching but should not occupy a big part of class time. Instead grammar should be delivered in small but frequent portions. Students should be encouraged to collect a lot of examples of a particular structure before being invited to analyse it. Hence, analysis should be preceded by synthesis.
Lastly, language practitioners should bear in mind that grammar acquisition is an incremental process which requires frequent focus and refocus on the items already studied.
Available at: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professionaldevelopment/teachers/knowing-subject/articles/grammar-vs-lexisor-grammar-through. Accessed on: April 29, 2024.
Empowering language learning through assessment
Assessment of, as, and for learning
Empowering language learning through assessment
Assessment of, as, and for learning
The word reliability is closest in meaning to
Empowering language learning through assessment
Assessment of, as, and for learning
Empowering language learning through assessment
Assessment of, as, and for learning
Empowering language learning through assessment
Assessment of, as, and for learning
( ) To find the piece of ceramic, the scientist had to dig into the hot soil.
( ) Due to the drought, factories found themselves having to hire workers to unblock the long and narrow ridges.
( ) Thus far, the control over climate change has not been considered a given.
The statements are, respectively,
Conheça nossos planos