In the last paragraph, the underlined verbs "have to", "can"...

Próximas questões
Com base no mesmo assunto
Q4231864 Inglês

Read text VI to answer question.


The internet went into overdrive when the song "Heart on My Sleeve" first dropped in 2023. Fans were on cloud nine, fully convinced that Drake and The Weeknd had just casually dropped a surprise collaboration. Social media lit up with excitement as listeners praised the track, thinking it was another hit from two of music's biggest creators - and could a whole album be on the way?


But as the song racked up millions of streams on TikTok, the truth surfaced this wasn't a new Drake and The Weeknd collab. In fact, it wasn't them at all. The track was created by a TikTok user, Ghostwriter977, using artificial intelligence to perfectly mimic the two artists' voices. The revelation sent shockwaves across the industry, raising eyebrows and questions about the role of AI in music.


AI-generated music is a polarizing topic; depending on who you ask, it's either the next big innovation or a cultural catastrophe waiting to happen. There's no doubt that artificial intelligence is changing the music industry, but the question remains: is it a tool to unlock new creative frontiers, or is it a threat to the authenticity and soul of music as we know it?


These technologically capable algorithms compose everything from background music to full-fledged songs. Some argue it's an incredible tool for musicians and producers, offering new ways to experiment with sound, composition, and genre - even overcoming writer's block. AI can generate infinite variations of a melody, compose background scores for films, or even write lyrics based on given parameters. AI is more than just a tool for those pushing boundaries - it's a creative partner. It allows artists to break away from traditional musical structures and unlocks a world of possibilities.


But here's the flip side: AI doesn't understand human emotion. It doesn't have the lived experiences that often give music its soul. While an AI can generate a technically proficient melody, can it truly capture the emotional depth of a musician pouring their heart into a track? Critics argue that AI-generated music can feel hollow, lacking the emotion and intention that comes from a human touch. Sure, AI can replicate patterns, styles, and formulas, but does it truly understand why certain notes make us feel a certain way? Many fear that relying too heavily on AI will lead to a flood of cookie-cutter music devoid of real emotion or authenticity.


Looking out for tomorrow, what does AI mean for the future of creativity? Are we moving toward a world where algorithms outpace human artists, churning out music by the minute? This raises concerns for musicians, producers, and even DJs, who worry about their roles being replaced by technology, much like other industries where automation has taken over.


As AI continues to evolve, artists and creators will have to find ways to use AI as a tool while ensuring that the heart of music its ability to move, inspire, and connect remains in human hands. Ultimately, AI-generated music can be a powerful partner, but without careful consideration, it may turn the art of music into just another algorithmic output.


Adapted from https://council.rollingstone.com/blog/

In the last paragraph, the underlined verbs "have to", "can" and "may" are used to convey the idea of:
Alternativas

Gabarito comentado

Confira o gabarito comentado por um dos nossos professores

Gabarito: A

Fundamento decisivo: A decisão estava na leitura contextual dos modais no último parágrafo do texto.

Tema central: valores dos modais
Análise das alternativas
A
Certa
A alternativa A corresponde à sequência semântica do trecho final: “have to” indica necessidade; “can” indica possibilidade/potencial; e “may” indica possibilidade/probabilidade. Essa combinação é a única compatível com o enunciado.
B
Errada
Está errada no terceiro termo. Em “it may turn...”, “may” não expressa permission; no contexto, expressa possibilidade/probabilidade de um risco futuro.
C
Errada
Está errada no segundo termo. Em “can be a powerful partner”, “can” não significa permission; significa possibilidade ou potencial.
D
Errada
Está errada principalmente no segundo termo, porque “can” não é permission nesse trecho. Além disso, o terceiro termo não resolve o problema, porque “may” ali vale como possibilidade/probabilidade.
E
Errada
Está errada no segundo termo. “Can” em “can be a powerful partner” não expressa necessity, mas possibilidade/potencial.
Pegadinha da questão
A confusão real era ler “can” e “may” com o sentido automático de permissão e ler “have to” apenas como rótulo gramatical de obrigação, sem considerar que o gabarito oficial exige a leitura contextual de necessidade no trecho final.
Dica para questões semelhantes
  • Em questão de modal, decida pelo sentido que o verbo assume na frase concreta, não pelo primeiro valor que ele pode ter na gramática.
  • Se o modal introduz hipótese ou risco futuro, como em “may turn...”, a leitura tende a ser possibilidade/probabilidade, não permissão.
  • Quando “can” qualifica algo como “a powerful partner”, o valor é de possibilidade ou potencial, não de autorização.
  • Com “have to”, verifique se o foco está em dever imposto por regra ou em necessidade prática imposta pelo contexto; aqui, o gabarito se sustenta pela segunda leitura.

Clique para visualizar este gabarito

Visualize o gabarito desta questão clicando no botão abaixo