In the clause "disease ravaged both staple and cash
crops," the active voice foregrounds the agent and the
action simultaneously. If transformed into a passive
construction without altering meaning, which alternative
preserves both grammatical accuracy and semantic
equivalence?

Question

O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder às
questão.ItaliansThe peak period of Italian immigration to the United
States occurred between 1880 and 1921, when
approximately 4.2 million Italians came to America. The
vast majority of these immigrants, about 80 percent,
hailed from the Mezzogiorno in southern Italy, a region in
the midst of great tumult and hardship. Having only been
officially unified in 1860, political tension between the
government in the north and the rural peasants in the
south increased in the 1870s, when the government
placed an onerous tax on wheat and salt, which were
necessities for southern farmers and fishermen. In the
1880s, disease ravaged both staple and cash crops;
malaria and other epidemics also devastated southern
Italy during this period. Additionally, a series of
earthquakes and the eruptions of Mount Etna and Mount
Vesuvius in the early 1900s destroyed cities and killed
tens of thousands of people.Conditions in the United States during this era appeared
 to be very favorable to many in southern Italy. Wages for
both skilled and unskilled laborers in the industrialized US
could be three times greater than wages for the same
work in the depressed Italian economy. Even illiterate day
laborers could find better paying jobs with better working
conditions in cities like Boston. In the late nineteenth
century, Italian immigrants were often referred to as
"birds of passage"−young men who migrated alone,
earning money to buy land and support their families at
home and eventually returning to Italy. After World War I,
however, immigration patterns changed and more Italian
immigrants began to bring their families over and put
down permanent roots in the region.Patterns of SettlementBoston's North End neighborhood became the locus of
Italian settlement in eastern New England. Once the
home of English colonists and revolutionaries like Paul
Revere, Irish and Jewish immigrants settled in the North
End before the wave of Italian immigration in the late
1800s. By the early 20th century, the North End was
densely filled with tenements, in which tens of thousands
 of Italians lived. Much of the appeal of the North End for
immigrant groups was its proximity to work opportunities
on the waterfront and in downtown Boston. By 1920, over
50 percent of Italian immigrants in Boston lived in the
North End. Those who could afford more spacious
dwellings moved across the harbor to East Boston, which
by the mid-twentieth century became the city's largest
Italian-American community. Others moved to nearby
suburbs such as Somerville, Revere and Saugus,
especially after World War II. But even as immigrants and
their children moved to these areas, many Italian small
businesses and restaurants remained in the North End, and it is still an important center of Italian culture in New
England.
Workforce ParticipationMost Italian immigrants in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries worked menial, unskilled jobs upon
their arrival in Boston, as day laborers, dockworkers, or
fruit sellers. Others opened shops and small businesses,
and some skilled workers (like tailors) found
higher-paying jobs. In neighborhoods like the North End
and East Boston, immigrants operated Italian restaurants
that attracted a growing clientele from across the city. For
the earlier "birds of passage," though, assimilating into
the wider American culture was not a priority; for more
permanent Italian settlers, cultural obstacles such as the
language barrier and lower levels of education made
upward mobility difficult. Within a few generations,
however, Italian Americans in Boston became better
educated and were able to move into middle-class and
professional occupations, including some of the highest
echelons of business and politics.https://globalboston.bc.edu/index.php/home/ethnic-groups/italians/  In the clause "disease ravaged both staple and cash
crops," the active voice foregrounds the agent and the
action simultaneously. If transformed into a passive
construction without altering meaning, which alternative
preserves both grammatical accuracy and semantic
equivalence? Alternativa A: Both staple and cash crops are ravages by disease. Ou Alternativa B: Both staple and cash crops were ravaged by disease. Ou Alternativa C: Both staple and cash crops ravaged by disease. Ou Alternativa D: Disease was ravaged by both staple and cash crops.

Qconcursos · Accepted Answer

Alternativa [B] Both staple and cash crops were ravaged by disease. Gabarito: BFundamento decisivo: A questão não envolve ponto jurídico, mas regra gramatical de voz passiva em inglês: na passagem da ativa para a passiva, o objeto direto da oração original torna-se sujeito paciente, o verbo auxiliar "to be" deve preservar o tempo verbal e o verbo principal vai ao particípio passado. Como a oração dada está no simple past ("ravaged") e o objeto direto é "both staple and cash crops", a forma equivalente correta é "Both staple and cash crops were ravaged by disease."Tema central: Voz passiva em inglêsAnálise das alternativasAErradaEstá incorreta porque não preserva o tempo verbal da oração original: usa "are", forma de presente, quando a ativa está no passado simples. Além disso, emprega forma verbal inadequada, "ravages", em vez do particípio passado "ravaged", violando a estrutura obrigatória da passiva.BCertaA alternativa B observa integralmente a regra de conversão da ativa para a passiva. O objeto direto da ativa, "both staple and cash crops", passa a ocupar a posição de sujeito paciente; o tempo verbal da oração original é mantido no passado simples por meio de "were"; o verbo principal aparece corretamente no particípio passado, "ravaged"; e o agente da ação é preservado com "by disease". Por isso, há correção gramatical e equivalência semântica.CErradaEstá incorreta porque a construção passiva ficou incompleta. Falta o auxiliar "to be", indispensável na formação da voz passiva em inglês, que exige a estrutura "be + past participle".DErradaEstá incorreta porque altera a relação semântica da oração original. "Disease", que na ativa é o agente da ação, foi transformado em sujeito paciente, invertendo indevidamente os papéis de agente e paciente e rompendo a equivalência de sentido.Pegadinha da questãoA banca explorou quatro confusões reais: errar a manutenção do passado simples, trocar o particípio passado por outra forma verbal, omitir o auxiliar "to be" e montar uma frase com aparência de passiva, mas com inversão do agente e do paciente.Dica para questões semelhantesIdentifique primeiro o objeto direto da ativa; ele será o sujeito paciente da passiva.Mantenha o mesmo tempo verbal da oração original ao escolher a forma de "to be".Confirme se a estrutura ficou completa: "be + past participle".Verifique se o agente da ação continua sendo o mesmo da oração original, sem inversão de sentido.

🚀 Mais performance?

🚀 Mais performance?

In the clause "disease ravaged both staple and cash crops,"...

Gabarito comentado

Gabarito: B

Clique para visualizar este gabarito

Resumos relacionados

Advérbios e conjunções em inglês para concursos públicos

Artigos (Articles) em inglês: uso em concursos públicos

Questões de assuntos semelhantes

Provas relacionadas