Questões de Vestibular Comentadas sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 2.761 questões
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMERICAN AND BRITISH
VERSIONS OF HARRY POTTER SERIES
Philosopher’s vs. Sorcerer
When Scholastic was publishing Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone in America, they decided to rename the book Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. They claimed that the American and British uses of the word philosopher were a bit different, so therefore sorcerer was a more appropriate word. Any true Harry Potter fan, American or British, Australian or Hungarian, I’m sure will agree with MuggleMix when we say that decision should not have been made the reasons are:
1) J.K. Rowling said so therefore it must be true. She says that if she was in a better position, she would have disagreed at the time.
2) It belittles Americans, making it seem as if they do not understand what the word “philosopher” means. Americans are smarter than that.
3) Sorcerer is unspecific. The stone could have belonged to anybody with magical powers in the book. But the British name defines who the stone belongs to and gives the name an entirely different meaning. Sorcerer is a very different word to philosopher.
4) The stone is referred to as the “Philosopher’s Stone” throughout J.K. Rowling’s original version, never the “Sorcerer’s Stone”, so why should the most central object of the book be labeled something completely different in the book title, even if its just being published in a different place?
5) How is the word “philosopher” in Britain different from the word “sorcerer” in America?
6) Philosopher’s Stone is actually a historical object that people used to search for, while the Sorcerer’s Stone has no factual background in real life.
Ah well…
Other terminology
There are some other minor changes that occurred in case Americans got confused. Some ones, such as turning “mum” into “mom” and “trainers” into “sneakers”, J.K. Rowling refused to let happen. However, she allowed some changes to be made that, if they were not made, would befuddle the readers:
UK: Skip – US: Dumpster
UK: Minister for Magic – US: Minister of Magic
[…]
UK: Car park – US: Parking lot
[…]
Disponível em http://w w w .fanpop.com/clubs/harry-potter/articles/4309/title/difference-between-american-british-versions-harry-potter-series. Acesso em nov. 2015.
Com base no texto, analise as afirmativas.
I. A palavra ‘filosofal’ aparece como ‘sorcerer’, na edição americana do livro “Harry Potter e a pedra filosofal” (editora Scholastic), e ‘philosopher’, na edição britânica (editora Bloomsbury), porque a editora americana achou que a palavra ‘sorcerer’ daria mais credibilidade à obra.
II. Um dos argumentos do texto contrários à mudança do título em inglês, de ‘philosopher’ para ‘sorcerer’, é a de que os editores estariam menosprezando a capacidade de compreensão dos americanos, já que a alegação foi a de que o uso da palavra ‘philosopher’ tem pequenas variações no inglês britânico e no norteamericano.
III. A autora do livro, J.K. Rowling, confirmou que a mudança ocorreu porque o uso da palavra ‘philosopher’ difere na cultura norte-americana e na britânica e que, por esse motivo, ela concordou com a editora Scholastic.
IV. O autor do artigo argumenta que o termo ‘sorcerer’ (em inglês americano) deixa em aberto quem seria o dono da pedra na estória, enquanto o termo ‘philosopher’ (em inglês britânico) é mais específico, definindo, deste modo, quem é o dono da pedra.
V. Houve trocas de algumas outras palavras no livro, porque são usadas de modo diferente pelos norte-americanos e pelos ingleses, por exemplo, cab (Br) mudou para taxi (Am), sneakers (Br) mudou para tennis shoes (Am), dust (Br) mudou para garbage (Am), etc.
Com base no texto e nas afirmativas, assinale a
alternativa correta.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMERICAN AND BRITISH
VERSIONS OF HARRY POTTER SERIES
Philosopher’s vs. Sorcerer
When Scholastic was publishing Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone in America, they decided to rename the book Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. They claimed that the American and British uses of the word philosopher were a bit different, so therefore sorcerer was a more appropriate word. Any true Harry Potter fan, American or British, Australian or Hungarian, I’m sure will agree with MuggleMix when we say that decision should not have been made the reasons are:
1) J.K. Rowling said so therefore it must be true. She says that if she was in a better position, she would have disagreed at the time.
2) It belittles Americans, making it seem as if they do not understand what the word “philosopher” means. Americans are smarter than that.
3) Sorcerer is unspecific. The stone could have belonged to anybody with magical powers in the book. But the British name defines who the stone belongs to and gives the name an entirely different meaning. Sorcerer is a very different word to philosopher.
4) The stone is referred to as the “Philosopher’s Stone” throughout J.K. Rowling’s original version, never the “Sorcerer’s Stone”, so why should the most central object of the book be labeled something completely different in the book title, even if its just being published in a different place?
5) How is the word “philosopher” in Britain different from the word “sorcerer” in America?
6) Philosopher’s Stone is actually a historical object that people used to search for, while the Sorcerer’s Stone has no factual background in real life.
Ah well…
Other terminology
There are some other minor changes that occurred in case Americans got confused. Some ones, such as turning “mum” into “mom” and “trainers” into “sneakers”, J.K. Rowling refused to let happen. However, she allowed some changes to be made that, if they were not made, would befuddle the readers:
UK: Skip – US: Dumpster
UK: Minister for Magic – US: Minister of Magic
[…]
UK: Car park – US: Parking lot
[…]
Disponível em http://w w w .fanpop.com/clubs/harry-potter/articles/4309/title/difference-between-american-british-versions-harry-potter-series. Acesso em nov. 2015.












Compared to the previous text “Why so few nurses are men”, the cartoon
Why so few nurses are men

Ask health professionals in any country what the biggest problem in their health-care system is and one of the most common answers is the shortage of nurses. In ageing rich countries, demand for nursing care is becoming increasingly insatiable. Britain’s National Health Service, for example, has 40,000-odd nurse vacancies. Poor countries struggle with the emigration of nurses for greener pastures. One obvious solution seems neglected: recruit more men. Typically, just 5-10% of nurses registered in a given country are men. Why so few?
Views of nursing as a “woman’s job” have deep roots. Florence Nightingale, who established the principles of modern nursing in the 1860s, insisted that men’s “hard and horny” hands were “not fitted to touch, bathe and dress wounded limbs”. In Britain the Royal College of Nursing, the profession’s union, did not even admit men as members until 1960. Some nursing schools in America started admitting men only in 1982, after a Supreme Court ruling forced them to. Senior nurse titles such as “sister” (a ward manager) and “matron” (which in some countries is used for men as well) do not help matters. Unsurprisingly, some older people do not even know that men can be nurses too. Male nurses often encounter patients who assume they are doctors.
Another problem is that beliefs about what a nursing job entails are often outdated – in ways that may be particularly off-putting for men. In films, nurses are commonly portrayed as the helpers of heroic male doctors. In fact, nurses do most of their work independently and are the first responders to patients in crisis. To dispel myths, nurse-recruitment campaigns display nursing as a professional job with career progression, specialisms like anaesthetics, cardiology or emergency care, and use for skills related to technology, innovation and leadership. However, attracting men without playing to gender stereotypes can be tricky. “Are you man enough to be a nurse?”, the slogan of an American campaign, was involved in controversy.
Nursing is not a career many boys aspire to, or are encouraged to consider. Only two-fifths of British parents say they would be proud if their son became a nurse. Because of all this, men who go into nursing are usually already closely familiar with the job. Some are following in the career footsteps of their mothers. Others decide that the job would suit them after they see a male nurse care for a relative or they themselves get care from a male nurse when hospitalised. Although many gender stereotypes about jobs and caring have crumbled, nursing has, so far, remained unaffected.
(www.economist.com, 22.08.2018. Adaptado.)

