Questões de Vestibular Sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 6.472 questões
Q2054670
Inglês
Texto associado
Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the
polarising disaster film
Critics haven’t been kind to Adam
McKay’s eco-satire, but many climate experts are
lauding it. Here four give their views
Rarely has a film been as divisive as
Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up.
Although it has been watched by millions, and is
already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the
response from critics was largely negative. Many
found its story of scientists who discover an
asteroid heading for Earth a clumsy allegory for
the climate crisis, while others just found it
boring. But many in the climate movement
have praised the film, and audience reviews have
been generally positive.
We asked four climate experts to give
their views on the film. Warning: spoilers ahead.
Ketan Joshi: ‘The main character of
the climate crisis is absent’
[…]
Fiona Harvey: ‘The role of the technoloon, played by Mark Rylance, struck a chord’
[…]
After 17 years of reporting on the climate
crisis, I doubted at first that the film had much to
tell me about the frustrations of communicating a
hypothetical catastrophe. As the film’s scientists
first struggled to clothe their data in sober,
measured terms, then broke into swearing, armwaving shrieks about provable imminent
apocalypse, I nodded along. Yes, that’s what it
feels like, and no, no one listens, not until it is too
late.
Yet it was illuminating in unexpected ways
– something I’ve always struggled with is how
rational people can fail to grasp the scale of
climate breakdown, how we could leave it so late.
As the film shows, it’s partly because vested
interests keep it that way, but it’s also just
because we’re human. Believing in disaster
before it strikes is fundamentally not how we
work.
The role of the techno-loon, played by
Mark Rylance, struck another chord. Cop26 was
not a failure, though on the surface that was the
obvious conclusion – it was more nuanced than
that. Soon after the Cop26 circus left Glasgow,
the danger of painting the outcome in such blackand-white terms became apparent, as wellmeaning experts concluded – in all seriousness –
as talking didn’t work, our best hope would be for
billionaires to bypass the UN and geoengineer
the climate from space. Because obviously the
answer to a vast uncontrolled experiment on the
atmosphere is to conduct a vast uncontrolled
experiment on the atmosphere.
[…]
Nina Lakhani: ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s
character will resonate with many female
climate scientists’
[…]
How Kate Dibiasky, the postgraduate
student played by Jennifer Lawrence who
discovered the comet, is portrayed as an
unhinged hysterical woman, will resonate with
many female climate scientists and activists
whose crucial knowledge has been sidelined.
The scene where her parents declare that they’re
in favour of the jobs the comet will provide will
resonate with millions of people, including me,
trying to deal with relatives who have bought into
political lies.
[…]
Damian Carrington: ‘It highlights the
absurdity of staring disaster in the face, then
looking away’
I loved Don’t Look Up, both as an
entertainment and as a climate crisis parable. But
the movie has been panned by many critics, with
the main charge being that it is heavy-handed,
blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the
point.
Scientists have been issuing blunt
warnings about obvious dangers of global
heating for years and have been ignored –
carbon emissions are still rising. The film
perfectly skewers the key ways in which they
have been ignored: for short-term political
expediency and short-term corporate profit.
In particular, the movie beautifully
portrays the incredulity of scientists that their
carefully constructed evidence can be dismissed
with bluster such as “we’ll sit tight and assess” by
leaders more concerned about today’s political
weather and a media more interested in the
minutiae of celebrities’ lives.
[…]
The point of the film is savagely
highlighting the absurdity of staring disaster in
the face, then looking away rather than acting. In
that respect, it is a triumph.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/08/dont-look-upfour-climate-experts-on-the-polarising-disaster-film. Access:
08/01/2022.
Considering Damian Carrington’s opinion on
the movie Don’t look up, mark the
INCORRECT option.
Q2054669
Inglês
Texto associado
Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the
polarising disaster film
Critics haven’t been kind to Adam
McKay’s eco-satire, but many climate experts are
lauding it. Here four give their views
Rarely has a film been as divisive as
Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up.
Although it has been watched by millions, and is
already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the
response from critics was largely negative. Many
found its story of scientists who discover an
asteroid heading for Earth a clumsy allegory for
the climate crisis, while others just found it
boring. But many in the climate movement
have praised the film, and audience reviews have
been generally positive.
We asked four climate experts to give
their views on the film. Warning: spoilers ahead.
Ketan Joshi: ‘The main character of
the climate crisis is absent’
[…]
Fiona Harvey: ‘The role of the technoloon, played by Mark Rylance, struck a chord’
[…]
After 17 years of reporting on the climate
crisis, I doubted at first that the film had much to
tell me about the frustrations of communicating a
hypothetical catastrophe. As the film’s scientists
first struggled to clothe their data in sober,
measured terms, then broke into swearing, armwaving shrieks about provable imminent
apocalypse, I nodded along. Yes, that’s what it
feels like, and no, no one listens, not until it is too
late.
Yet it was illuminating in unexpected ways
– something I’ve always struggled with is how
rational people can fail to grasp the scale of
climate breakdown, how we could leave it so late.
As the film shows, it’s partly because vested
interests keep it that way, but it’s also just
because we’re human. Believing in disaster
before it strikes is fundamentally not how we
work.
The role of the techno-loon, played by
Mark Rylance, struck another chord. Cop26 was
not a failure, though on the surface that was the
obvious conclusion – it was more nuanced than
that. Soon after the Cop26 circus left Glasgow,
the danger of painting the outcome in such blackand-white terms became apparent, as wellmeaning experts concluded – in all seriousness –
as talking didn’t work, our best hope would be for
billionaires to bypass the UN and geoengineer
the climate from space. Because obviously the
answer to a vast uncontrolled experiment on the
atmosphere is to conduct a vast uncontrolled
experiment on the atmosphere.
[…]
Nina Lakhani: ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s
character will resonate with many female
climate scientists’
[…]
How Kate Dibiasky, the postgraduate
student played by Jennifer Lawrence who
discovered the comet, is portrayed as an
unhinged hysterical woman, will resonate with
many female climate scientists and activists
whose crucial knowledge has been sidelined.
The scene where her parents declare that they’re
in favour of the jobs the comet will provide will
resonate with millions of people, including me,
trying to deal with relatives who have bought into
political lies.
[…]
Damian Carrington: ‘It highlights the
absurdity of staring disaster in the face, then
looking away’
I loved Don’t Look Up, both as an
entertainment and as a climate crisis parable. But
the movie has been panned by many critics, with
the main charge being that it is heavy-handed,
blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the
point.
Scientists have been issuing blunt
warnings about obvious dangers of global
heating for years and have been ignored –
carbon emissions are still rising. The film
perfectly skewers the key ways in which they
have been ignored: for short-term political
expediency and short-term corporate profit.
In particular, the movie beautifully
portrays the incredulity of scientists that their
carefully constructed evidence can be dismissed
with bluster such as “we’ll sit tight and assess” by
leaders more concerned about today’s political
weather and a media more interested in the
minutiae of celebrities’ lives.
[…]
The point of the film is savagely
highlighting the absurdity of staring disaster in
the face, then looking away rather than acting. In
that respect, it is a triumph.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/08/dont-look-upfour-climate-experts-on-the-polarising-disaster-film. Access:
08/01/2022.
The climate expert Nina Lakhani thinks that
“Jennifer Lawrence’s character will resonate
with many female climate scientists”. Mark
the option which best describes the meaning
of Nina’s statement.
Q2054668
Inglês
Texto associado
Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the
polarising disaster film
Critics haven’t been kind to Adam
McKay’s eco-satire, but many climate experts are
lauding it. Here four give their views
Rarely has a film been as divisive as
Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up.
Although it has been watched by millions, and is
already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the
response from critics was largely negative. Many
found its story of scientists who discover an
asteroid heading for Earth a clumsy allegory for
the climate crisis, while others just found it
boring. But many in the climate movement
have praised the film, and audience reviews have
been generally positive.
We asked four climate experts to give
their views on the film. Warning: spoilers ahead.
Ketan Joshi: ‘The main character of
the climate crisis is absent’
[…]
Fiona Harvey: ‘The role of the technoloon, played by Mark Rylance, struck a chord’
[…]
After 17 years of reporting on the climate
crisis, I doubted at first that the film had much to
tell me about the frustrations of communicating a
hypothetical catastrophe. As the film’s scientists
first struggled to clothe their data in sober,
measured terms, then broke into swearing, armwaving shrieks about provable imminent
apocalypse, I nodded along. Yes, that’s what it
feels like, and no, no one listens, not until it is too
late.
Yet it was illuminating in unexpected ways
– something I’ve always struggled with is how
rational people can fail to grasp the scale of
climate breakdown, how we could leave it so late.
As the film shows, it’s partly because vested
interests keep it that way, but it’s also just
because we’re human. Believing in disaster
before it strikes is fundamentally not how we
work.
The role of the techno-loon, played by
Mark Rylance, struck another chord. Cop26 was
not a failure, though on the surface that was the
obvious conclusion – it was more nuanced than
that. Soon after the Cop26 circus left Glasgow,
the danger of painting the outcome in such blackand-white terms became apparent, as wellmeaning experts concluded – in all seriousness –
as talking didn’t work, our best hope would be for
billionaires to bypass the UN and geoengineer
the climate from space. Because obviously the
answer to a vast uncontrolled experiment on the
atmosphere is to conduct a vast uncontrolled
experiment on the atmosphere.
[…]
Nina Lakhani: ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s
character will resonate with many female
climate scientists’
[…]
How Kate Dibiasky, the postgraduate
student played by Jennifer Lawrence who
discovered the comet, is portrayed as an
unhinged hysterical woman, will resonate with
many female climate scientists and activists
whose crucial knowledge has been sidelined.
The scene where her parents declare that they’re
in favour of the jobs the comet will provide will
resonate with millions of people, including me,
trying to deal with relatives who have bought into
political lies.
[…]
Damian Carrington: ‘It highlights the
absurdity of staring disaster in the face, then
looking away’
I loved Don’t Look Up, both as an
entertainment and as a climate crisis parable. But
the movie has been panned by many critics, with
the main charge being that it is heavy-handed,
blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the
point.
Scientists have been issuing blunt
warnings about obvious dangers of global
heating for years and have been ignored –
carbon emissions are still rising. The film
perfectly skewers the key ways in which they
have been ignored: for short-term political
expediency and short-term corporate profit.
In particular, the movie beautifully
portrays the incredulity of scientists that their
carefully constructed evidence can be dismissed
with bluster such as “we’ll sit tight and assess” by
leaders more concerned about today’s political
weather and a media more interested in the
minutiae of celebrities’ lives.
[…]
The point of the film is savagely
highlighting the absurdity of staring disaster in
the face, then looking away rather than acting. In
that respect, it is a triumph.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/08/dont-look-upfour-climate-experts-on-the-polarising-disaster-film. Access:
08/01/2022.
Consider the following excerpt: “The role of
the techno-loon, played by Mark Rylance,
struck another chord”. Taking into account
the context the excerpt was taken from, mark
the option which best defines the expression
“to strike a chord”.
Q2054667
Inglês
Texto associado
Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the
polarising disaster film
Critics haven’t been kind to Adam
McKay’s eco-satire, but many climate experts are
lauding it. Here four give their views
Rarely has a film been as divisive as
Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up.
Although it has been watched by millions, and is
already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the
response from critics was largely negative. Many
found its story of scientists who discover an
asteroid heading for Earth a clumsy allegory for
the climate crisis, while others just found it
boring. But many in the climate movement
have praised the film, and audience reviews have
been generally positive.
We asked four climate experts to give
their views on the film. Warning: spoilers ahead.
Ketan Joshi: ‘The main character of
the climate crisis is absent’
[…]
Fiona Harvey: ‘The role of the technoloon, played by Mark Rylance, struck a chord’
[…]
After 17 years of reporting on the climate
crisis, I doubted at first that the film had much to
tell me about the frustrations of communicating a
hypothetical catastrophe. As the film’s scientists
first struggled to clothe their data in sober,
measured terms, then broke into swearing, armwaving shrieks about provable imminent
apocalypse, I nodded along. Yes, that’s what it
feels like, and no, no one listens, not until it is too
late.
Yet it was illuminating in unexpected ways
– something I’ve always struggled with is how
rational people can fail to grasp the scale of
climate breakdown, how we could leave it so late.
As the film shows, it’s partly because vested
interests keep it that way, but it’s also just
because we’re human. Believing in disaster
before it strikes is fundamentally not how we
work.
The role of the techno-loon, played by
Mark Rylance, struck another chord. Cop26 was
not a failure, though on the surface that was the
obvious conclusion – it was more nuanced than
that. Soon after the Cop26 circus left Glasgow,
the danger of painting the outcome in such blackand-white terms became apparent, as wellmeaning experts concluded – in all seriousness –
as talking didn’t work, our best hope would be for
billionaires to bypass the UN and geoengineer
the climate from space. Because obviously the
answer to a vast uncontrolled experiment on the
atmosphere is to conduct a vast uncontrolled
experiment on the atmosphere.
[…]
Nina Lakhani: ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s
character will resonate with many female
climate scientists’
[…]
How Kate Dibiasky, the postgraduate
student played by Jennifer Lawrence who
discovered the comet, is portrayed as an
unhinged hysterical woman, will resonate with
many female climate scientists and activists
whose crucial knowledge has been sidelined.
The scene where her parents declare that they’re
in favour of the jobs the comet will provide will
resonate with millions of people, including me,
trying to deal with relatives who have bought into
political lies.
[…]
Damian Carrington: ‘It highlights the
absurdity of staring disaster in the face, then
looking away’
I loved Don’t Look Up, both as an
entertainment and as a climate crisis parable. But
the movie has been panned by many critics, with
the main charge being that it is heavy-handed,
blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the
point.
Scientists have been issuing blunt
warnings about obvious dangers of global
heating for years and have been ignored –
carbon emissions are still rising. The film
perfectly skewers the key ways in which they
have been ignored: for short-term political
expediency and short-term corporate profit.
In particular, the movie beautifully
portrays the incredulity of scientists that their
carefully constructed evidence can be dismissed
with bluster such as “we’ll sit tight and assess” by
leaders more concerned about today’s political
weather and a media more interested in the
minutiae of celebrities’ lives.
[…]
The point of the film is savagely
highlighting the absurdity of staring disaster in
the face, then looking away rather than acting. In
that respect, it is a triumph.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/08/dont-look-upfour-climate-experts-on-the-polarising-disaster-film. Access:
08/01/2022.
Consider the following excerpts taken from
the text and mark the option which presents a
verb form in the passive voice.
Q2054666
Inglês
Texto associado
Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the
polarising disaster film
Critics haven’t been kind to Adam
McKay’s eco-satire, but many climate experts are
lauding it. Here four give their views
Rarely has a film been as divisive as
Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up.
Although it has been watched by millions, and is
already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the
response from critics was largely negative. Many
found its story of scientists who discover an
asteroid heading for Earth a clumsy allegory for
the climate crisis, while others just found it
boring. But many in the climate movement
have praised the film, and audience reviews have
been generally positive.
We asked four climate experts to give
their views on the film. Warning: spoilers ahead.
Ketan Joshi: ‘The main character of
the climate crisis is absent’
[…]
Fiona Harvey: ‘The role of the technoloon, played by Mark Rylance, struck a chord’
[…]
After 17 years of reporting on the climate
crisis, I doubted at first that the film had much to
tell me about the frustrations of communicating a
hypothetical catastrophe. As the film’s scientists
first struggled to clothe their data in sober,
measured terms, then broke into swearing, armwaving shrieks about provable imminent
apocalypse, I nodded along. Yes, that’s what it
feels like, and no, no one listens, not until it is too
late.
Yet it was illuminating in unexpected ways
– something I’ve always struggled with is how
rational people can fail to grasp the scale of
climate breakdown, how we could leave it so late.
As the film shows, it’s partly because vested
interests keep it that way, but it’s also just
because we’re human. Believing in disaster
before it strikes is fundamentally not how we
work.
The role of the techno-loon, played by
Mark Rylance, struck another chord. Cop26 was
not a failure, though on the surface that was the
obvious conclusion – it was more nuanced than
that. Soon after the Cop26 circus left Glasgow,
the danger of painting the outcome in such blackand-white terms became apparent, as wellmeaning experts concluded – in all seriousness –
as talking didn’t work, our best hope would be for
billionaires to bypass the UN and geoengineer
the climate from space. Because obviously the
answer to a vast uncontrolled experiment on the
atmosphere is to conduct a vast uncontrolled
experiment on the atmosphere.
[…]
Nina Lakhani: ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s
character will resonate with many female
climate scientists’
[…]
How Kate Dibiasky, the postgraduate
student played by Jennifer Lawrence who
discovered the comet, is portrayed as an
unhinged hysterical woman, will resonate with
many female climate scientists and activists
whose crucial knowledge has been sidelined.
The scene where her parents declare that they’re
in favour of the jobs the comet will provide will
resonate with millions of people, including me,
trying to deal with relatives who have bought into
political lies.
[…]
Damian Carrington: ‘It highlights the
absurdity of staring disaster in the face, then
looking away’
I loved Don’t Look Up, both as an
entertainment and as a climate crisis parable. But
the movie has been panned by many critics, with
the main charge being that it is heavy-handed,
blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the
point.
Scientists have been issuing blunt
warnings about obvious dangers of global
heating for years and have been ignored –
carbon emissions are still rising. The film
perfectly skewers the key ways in which they
have been ignored: for short-term political
expediency and short-term corporate profit.
In particular, the movie beautifully
portrays the incredulity of scientists that their
carefully constructed evidence can be dismissed
with bluster such as “we’ll sit tight and assess” by
leaders more concerned about today’s political
weather and a media more interested in the
minutiae of celebrities’ lives.
[…]
The point of the film is savagely
highlighting the absurdity of staring disaster in
the face, then looking away rather than acting. In
that respect, it is a triumph.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/08/dont-look-upfour-climate-experts-on-the-polarising-disaster-film. Access:
08/01/2022.
Concerning the excerpt: “Critics haven’t been
kind to Adam McKay’s eco-satire, but many
climate experts are lauding it”, and the
context it was taken from, mark the correct
option regarding the usage of the pronoun
“it”.
Q2054665
Inglês
Texto associado
Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the
polarising disaster film
Critics haven’t been kind to Adam
McKay’s eco-satire, but many climate experts are
lauding it. Here four give their views
Rarely has a film been as divisive as
Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up.
Although it has been watched by millions, and is
already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the
response from critics was largely negative. Many
found its story of scientists who discover an
asteroid heading for Earth a clumsy allegory for
the climate crisis, while others just found it
boring. But many in the climate movement
have praised the film, and audience reviews have
been generally positive.
We asked four climate experts to give
their views on the film. Warning: spoilers ahead.
Ketan Joshi: ‘The main character of
the climate crisis is absent’
[…]
Fiona Harvey: ‘The role of the technoloon, played by Mark Rylance, struck a chord’
[…]
After 17 years of reporting on the climate
crisis, I doubted at first that the film had much to
tell me about the frustrations of communicating a
hypothetical catastrophe. As the film’s scientists
first struggled to clothe their data in sober,
measured terms, then broke into swearing, armwaving shrieks about provable imminent
apocalypse, I nodded along. Yes, that’s what it
feels like, and no, no one listens, not until it is too
late.
Yet it was illuminating in unexpected ways
– something I’ve always struggled with is how
rational people can fail to grasp the scale of
climate breakdown, how we could leave it so late.
As the film shows, it’s partly because vested
interests keep it that way, but it’s also just
because we’re human. Believing in disaster
before it strikes is fundamentally not how we
work.
The role of the techno-loon, played by
Mark Rylance, struck another chord. Cop26 was
not a failure, though on the surface that was the
obvious conclusion – it was more nuanced than
that. Soon after the Cop26 circus left Glasgow,
the danger of painting the outcome in such blackand-white terms became apparent, as wellmeaning experts concluded – in all seriousness –
as talking didn’t work, our best hope would be for
billionaires to bypass the UN and geoengineer
the climate from space. Because obviously the
answer to a vast uncontrolled experiment on the
atmosphere is to conduct a vast uncontrolled
experiment on the atmosphere.
[…]
Nina Lakhani: ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s
character will resonate with many female
climate scientists’
[…]
How Kate Dibiasky, the postgraduate
student played by Jennifer Lawrence who
discovered the comet, is portrayed as an
unhinged hysterical woman, will resonate with
many female climate scientists and activists
whose crucial knowledge has been sidelined.
The scene where her parents declare that they’re
in favour of the jobs the comet will provide will
resonate with millions of people, including me,
trying to deal with relatives who have bought into
political lies.
[…]
Damian Carrington: ‘It highlights the
absurdity of staring disaster in the face, then
looking away’
I loved Don’t Look Up, both as an
entertainment and as a climate crisis parable. But
the movie has been panned by many critics, with
the main charge being that it is heavy-handed,
blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the
point.
Scientists have been issuing blunt
warnings about obvious dangers of global
heating for years and have been ignored –
carbon emissions are still rising. The film
perfectly skewers the key ways in which they
have been ignored: for short-term political
expediency and short-term corporate profit.
In particular, the movie beautifully
portrays the incredulity of scientists that their
carefully constructed evidence can be dismissed
with bluster such as “we’ll sit tight and assess” by
leaders more concerned about today’s political
weather and a media more interested in the
minutiae of celebrities’ lives.
[…]
The point of the film is savagely
highlighting the absurdity of staring disaster in
the face, then looking away rather than acting. In
that respect, it is a triumph.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/08/dont-look-upfour-climate-experts-on-the-polarising-disaster-film. Access:
08/01/2022.
The text talks about Netflix climate satire
Don’t look up. Mark the correct option
concerning how the movie was received by
critics.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032753
Inglês
Read the following cartoon.
Internet: <www.baileyaplangandcomp.wordpress.com>.
The cartoon above conveys the idea that, in general, people.
are fooled as to their notion of freedom.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032752
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the following infographic.
Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
Based on the infographic presented, judge the follow item.
The text suggests that both professional help and changes at home are important to have better health and keep one’s independence.
The text suggests that both professional help and changes at home are important to have better health and keep one’s independence.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032751
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the following infographic.
Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
Based on the infographic presented, judge the follow item.
In section 1, it would be correct to use Exercising instead of “Exercise”, which, despite causing a slight difference in meaning, would not change the message conveyed.
In section 1, it would be correct to use Exercising instead of “Exercise”, which, despite causing a slight difference in meaning, would not change the message conveyed.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032750
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the following infographic.
Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
Based on the infographic presented, judge the follow item.
The infographic is meant to help people with serious illnesses to be more independent.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032749
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the following infographic.
Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
Based on the infographic presented, judge the follow item.
Section 3 is concerned with hygiene and cleanliness in people’s houses, which is why words such as “rugs”, “carpets” and “clutter” are mentioned.
Section 3 is concerned with hygiene and cleanliness in people’s houses, which is why words such as “rugs”, “carpets” and “clutter” are mentioned.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032748
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the following infographic.
Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
Based on the infographic presented, judge the follow item.
In the sentence at the top of the infographic, the word “relinquish” could be correctly replaced with give up, which is more informal.
In the sentence at the top of the infographic, the word “relinquish” could be correctly replaced with give up, which is more informal.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032747
Inglês
Texto associado
Read the following infographic.
Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
Based on the infographic presented, judge the follow item.
In the expression “As we age”, in the title of the infographic, “As” is used to present a reason or a justification.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032746
Inglês
Texto associado
Freedom is a general term, like liberty, independence,
autonomy, and equality. In reality, freedom cannot be absolute;
no one can be completely free. Your talents, family situation, job,
wealth, cultural norms, and laws against murder, for example,
constrain and circumscribe your choices. And then there is the
freedom of others, which necessarily limits yours.
Broadly speaking, your rights, whatever they may be,
define the limits to your freedom. In the Western tradition of
freedom, these are your civil and political rights, including your
freedom of speech, religion, and association. Some philosophers
see these not only as morally justified rights in themselves, but
also as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like
happiness.
The international justification for your freedom is by
reference to human rights, those due to you as a human being and
object of international conventions. The most basic of all these
rights are those defining what governments cannot do to you. In
effect, these human rights define what many mean by democratic
freedom. Your freedom of thought, expression, religion,
association, is basic, as are the secret ballot, periodic elections,
and the right to representation. In short, these rights say that you
have a right to be free. This is universal: we all have
internationally defined and protected human rights.
Rudolph Joseph Rummel. Why should you be
free?.Internet:<www.hawaii.edu> (adapted).
Judge the follow item concerning the ideas and linguistic features of the previous text.
The last paragraph points out that a geopolitically construed notion of freedom has become a universally accepted one through international law.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032745
Inglês
Texto associado
Freedom is a general term, like liberty, independence,
autonomy, and equality. In reality, freedom cannot be absolute;
no one can be completely free. Your talents, family situation, job,
wealth, cultural norms, and laws against murder, for example,
constrain and circumscribe your choices. And then there is the
freedom of others, which necessarily limits yours.
Broadly speaking, your rights, whatever they may be,
define the limits to your freedom. In the Western tradition of
freedom, these are your civil and political rights, including your
freedom of speech, religion, and association. Some philosophers
see these not only as morally justified rights in themselves, but
also as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like
happiness.
The international justification for your freedom is by
reference to human rights, those due to you as a human being and
object of international conventions. The most basic of all these
rights are those defining what governments cannot do to you. In
effect, these human rights define what many mean by democratic
freedom. Your freedom of thought, expression, religion,
association, is basic, as are the secret ballot, periodic elections,
and the right to representation. In short, these rights say that you
have a right to be free. This is universal: we all have
internationally defined and protected human rights.
Rudolph Joseph Rummel. Why should you be
free?.Internet:<www.hawaii.edu> (adapted).
Judge the follow item concerning the ideas and linguistic features of the previous text.
In the excerpt “as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like happiness” (in the last sentence of the second paragraph), the presence of “the” indicates that people’s happiness depends on them having their civil and political rights respected and guaranteed.
In the excerpt “as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like happiness” (in the last sentence of the second paragraph), the presence of “the” indicates that people’s happiness depends on them having their civil and political rights respected and guaranteed.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032741
Inglês
Texto associado
Freedom is a general term, like liberty, independence,
autonomy, and equality. In reality, freedom cannot be absolute;
no one can be completely free. Your talents, family situation, job,
wealth, cultural norms, and laws against murder, for example,
constrain and circumscribe your choices. And then there is the
freedom of others, which necessarily limits yours.
Broadly speaking, your rights, whatever they may be,
define the limits to your freedom. In the Western tradition of
freedom, these are your civil and political rights, including your
freedom of speech, religion, and association. Some philosophers
see these not only as morally justified rights in themselves, but
also as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like
happiness.
The international justification for your freedom is by
reference to human rights, those due to you as a human being and
object of international conventions. The most basic of all these
rights are those defining what governments cannot do to you. In
effect, these human rights define what many mean by democratic
freedom. Your freedom of thought, expression, religion,
association, is basic, as are the secret ballot, periodic elections,
and the right to representation. In short, these rights say that you
have a right to be free. This is universal: we all have
internationally defined and protected human rights.
Rudolph Joseph Rummel. Why should you be
free?.Internet:<www.hawaii.edu> (adapted).
Judge the follow item concerning the ideas and linguistic features of the previous text.
If the ideas defended in the text were applied to the global context of relations among countries, it would be correct to conclude that countries, in general, are never completely independent.
If the ideas defended in the text were applied to the global context of relations among countries, it would be correct to conclude that countries, in general, are never completely independent.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032740
Inglês
Texto associado
Freedom is a general term, like liberty, independence,
autonomy, and equality. In reality, freedom cannot be absolute;
no one can be completely free. Your talents, family situation, job,
wealth, cultural norms, and laws against murder, for example,
constrain and circumscribe your choices. And then there is the
freedom of others, which necessarily limits yours.
Broadly speaking, your rights, whatever they may be,
define the limits to your freedom. In the Western tradition of
freedom, these are your civil and political rights, including your
freedom of speech, religion, and association. Some philosophers
see these not only as morally justified rights in themselves, but
also as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like
happiness.
The international justification for your freedom is by
reference to human rights, those due to you as a human being and
object of international conventions. The most basic of all these
rights are those defining what governments cannot do to you. In
effect, these human rights define what many mean by democratic
freedom. Your freedom of thought, expression, religion,
association, is basic, as are the secret ballot, periodic elections,
and the right to representation. In short, these rights say that you
have a right to be free. This is universal: we all have
internationally defined and protected human rights.
Rudolph Joseph Rummel. Why should you be
free?.Internet:<www.hawaii.edu> (adapted).
Judge the follow item concerning the ideas and linguistic features of the previous text.
For the author, given their universal and absolute character, human rights are one of the few exceptions to the limits imposed by the freedom of others.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032737
Inglês
Texto associado
The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway
in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time.
It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and
Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the
start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807
prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the
emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate
itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The
independence process was strongly marked by progressive
distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the
self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process
fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the
time, full of conceptual innovations.
The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still
the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil
neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the
vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly
concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming
focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of
Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in
the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the
first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history
gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the
simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social
hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation
and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the
history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse
voices and actors who had been growing increasingly
accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the
previous century.
João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item.
The passage “the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations” (in the last sentence of the first paragraph) could be correctly rewritten as a context of greater political and intellectual changes happening during an era when all innovations were of an abstract nature, without changing its meaning.
The passage “the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations” (in the last sentence of the first paragraph) could be correctly rewritten as a context of greater political and intellectual changes happening during an era when all innovations were of an abstract nature, without changing its meaning.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032736
Inglês
Texto associado
The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway
in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time.
It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and
Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the
start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807
prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the
emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate
itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The
independence process was strongly marked by progressive
distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the
self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process
fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the
time, full of conceptual innovations.
The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still
the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil
neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the
vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly
concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming
focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of
Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in
the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the
first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history
gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the
simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social
hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation
and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the
history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse
voices and actors who had been growing increasingly
accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the
previous century.
João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item.
The last sentence of the text would still be correct and maintain its original meaning if a comma were placed before “who”, and another after “politics”.
Ano: 2022
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
UNB
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032734
Inglês
Texto associado
The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway
in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time.
It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and
Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the
start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807
prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the
emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate
itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The
independence process was strongly marked by progressive
distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the
self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process
fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the
time, full of conceptual innovations.
The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still
the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil
neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the
vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly
concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming
focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of
Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in
the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the
first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history
gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the
simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social
hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation
and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the
history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse
voices and actors who had been growing increasingly
accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the
previous century.
João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item.
Not only does the text oppose the ideas of continuity and innovation in the context of Brazilian independence, but it also indicates that historians do not have a unanimous view on the topic.
Not only does the text oppose the ideas of continuity and innovation in the context of Brazilian independence, but it also indicates that historians do not have a unanimous view on the topic.
Conheça nossos planos