Questões de Concurso
Sobre formação de palavras (prefixos e sufixos) | word formation (prefix and suffix) em inglês
Foram encontradas 166 questões
Instruction: Answer questions 31 to 35 based on the following text.
German student invents own language
- Fynn Schlemminger _____ exactly what he wanted to do for his A-levels special project:
- create a language from scratch. And that’s exactly what he did. The invented language is
- called Garadálava, and, according to its creator, it is unique. “The premise of creating
- Garadálava was to make it unlike any spoken language. I came up with a phonology people
- usually interpret as harsh or pointed, featuring some guttural sounds and a very unmelodious
- tone,” he explained.
- All languages are, to a point, constructed because they went through corrections and
- reforms over time. However, there is one main difference according to a professor of linguistics
- at Wellesley College. Angela Carpenter, who has been teaching a course on invented languages
- since 2010, said the main difference is that “an invented language originates in someone's
- mind and is developed and expanded upon mostly by that person. A natural language ______
- within a speech community, usually from another language, dialect or creole, over a period of
- time.”
- When Schlemminger began working on Garadálava, he started with a sketch, an idea of
- how the language should sound and feel like.
- “You begin with the more superficial things, the shape of the language so to speak, some
- basic words, a sound inventory, sentence order. After that you simply go into more detail and
- mostly rotate between making up words and grammar rules, until you are done,” he said to
- Euronews. To him, the experience of creating a language was not unlike making a sculpture,
- creating a work of art.
- “Inventing a language is a very creative process that also requires knowledge of linguistic
- structures to make it a viable language. Having to create your own language really ______
- you to understand linguistic structure and the complex nature of language communication,”
- explained Carpenter.
Fonte: adaptado de http://www.euronews.com/2018/04/25/from-klingon-to-dothraki-is-inventing-your-own-language-that-hard-
Analyse the following statements about word formation.
I. ‘unmelodious’ (l.05) and ‘viable’ (l.22) are formed by suffixation.
II. Both ‘mostly’ (l.11) and ‘simply’ (l.17) are formed by only adding the suffix –ly.
III. The suffix –ly only forms adverbs.
Which ones are INCORRECT?
News trom China
Outcry as Chinese school makes iPads compulsory
Apple produets are incredibly popular in China, but not everyone can afford them A school in northern China has been criticised for enforcing iPad learning as part of its new curriculum, it's reported.
According to China Economic Daily, the Danfeng High School in Shaanxi province recently issued a notice saying that, “as part of a teaching requirement, students are required to bring their own iPad” when they start the new school year in September. Stafftold the paper that using an iPad would “improve classroom efficiency”, and that the school would manage an internet firewall, so that parents would not have to worry about students using the device for other means.
However, China Economic Daily says that after criticism from parents, who felt that it would be an “unnecessary financial burden”, headmaster Yao Hushan said that having an iPad was no longer a mandatory requirement. Mr Yao added that children who don't have a device could still enrol, but that he recommended students bring an iPad as part of a “process of promoting the digital classroom”.
The incident led to lively discussion on the Sina Weibo social media platform. “Those parents that can't afford one will have to sell a kidney!” one user quipped.
Others expressed concerns about the health implications of long-term electronic device use. “I worry about their Vision,” one user said, and another said they would all become “short-sighted and have to wear glasses.”
But others felt that it was a good move in line with new modem ways of teaching. “They are affordable for the average family,” one said, “they don't necessarily need to buy the latest model.”
Reporting by KerryAllen
Taken from: www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere
The word 'unnecessary' in “it would be an unnecessary financial burden” is formed by the prefix -un.
The prefix -un has been added to the words below.
Choose the only correct word;
I. It’s classified as a noun. II. It’s compound noun formed by an adverb and a verb. III. The stress is on the second word.
Which ones are INCORRECT?
Available at:< https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/magazine/a-diagnosis-update-a-young-womans-extreme-muscle-pain-persists.html>.
Acess on: Aug. 10, 2018
Leia o trecho:
“Today, Angel has had dozens [... ] these painful crises. Sometimes it seems to be set off by illness. But other times, Angel has been ill and hasn’t been crippled by subsequent muscle pain” (l. 19-21).
Os vocábulos PAINFUL e ILLNESS, sublinhados no texto, são respectivamente:
A thousand-mile race that's said to be the toughest race in the world
Each year, in the middle of February, up to thirty-five teams of men and animals set out from the town of Fairbanks, Alaska, or from Whitehorse, Canada, at the start of what is described as the "toughest race in the world". The Yukon Quest is the most exciting of several North American dog-sled races, taking participants over a gruelling 1000 mile course through Alaska and northern Canada.
Imagine mushing along broken snowy trails behind some of the toughest, sure-footed little athletes in the world; the only sounds to be heard are those of crunching snow, the hiss of the sled's runners, and the puffing of the team of dogs out front. This is life on the Yukon Quest, a ten-to-fourteen day dog-sled race across one of the coldest parts of the world - the northern parts of North America.
As the teams battle across the frozen wastes, temperatures can vary from freezing on the warmest of days, down to -62°C if cold weather really sets in. Hard packed snow, rough gravel, frozen rivers and mountain terrain can make the trail fast at times, or else slow to a crawl.
There are other long-distance sled-dog races; but none quite like the Yukon Quest, which follows a trail across some of the most sparsely populated and undeveloped terrain in North America. Named after the Yukon river, the Quest takes teams from Fairbanks, Alaska, to Whitehorse, Canada in even-numbered years, and the other way round over the same route in odd-numbered years - a trail once followed by miners and trappers on their way to and from the icy North.
Teams come from all over North America to take part in this the hardest of sled-dog races. Depending on the year, up to 35 teams take part - each team being composed of a "musher" and up to 14 dogs.
Training for the race is long and hard, and the teams that start out on the Quest in mid February have been training since August. Dogs and men have to be in tip-top condition, to confront the 1000 miles of the race, which take them almost up to the Arctic Circle.
Running 1000 miles - about the same as running 3 marathons a day for 11 days in a row - would be impossible for humans; but this is the challenge that faces the dogs. In order to cover up to 100 miles some days, much of the time in darkness, the teams generally alternate six to eight hour periods of running and resting - mushers sleeping on their sleds, the dogs in the snow.
Since the race was first run in 1984, teams and equipment have improved; in 1984, the winning team completed the race in just 12 days. For the next twenty-five years, winning times were mostly ten or eleven days, depending on the weather conditions. But then, in 2009 Canadian musher Sebastian Schnuelle first finished in less than 10 days; then five years later American musher Allen Moore had a winning time of under 8 days and 15 hours.
Though physical fitness is of paramount importance both for dogs and mushers, a musher needs to know his dogs perfectly before taking them out on such a gruelling test of endurance. Performance, nutritional needs, stress symptoms and other aspects of the dogs' physical and mental conditions need to be precisely assessed.
Starting with a maximum of 14 dogs, each musher has to reach the end with no fewer than 6. Vets are on hand at check-points along the route to keep detailed track of each animal's condition; but between check points, it's the musher himself who has the job of making sure that his animals remain in good form. Blood tests, urine samples, measurements of weight gain or loss and body temperature are all carefully examined, to make sure that each animal remains fit and healthy. Dogs are constantly checked for dehydration and fatigue - and if there is any doubt about an animal's ability to continue the race or not, it is dropped off at the first available opportunity.
The interdependence between a musher and his animals is total - the dogs relying totally on their musher to take care of them, and the musher depending totally on the dogs to get the sled across the snowy miles, and ultimately to the distant destination.
The Yukon Quest is probably not the only claimant to the title of "the toughest race in the world". There can be few others however - if any at all - that can have such a valid claim to this superlative.
(https://linguapress.com/advanced/yukon-quest.htm)
The underlined words in "Dogs are constantly checked for dehydration and fatigue - and if there is any doubt about an animal's ability to continue the race or not, it is dropped off at the first available opportunity" (10ᵗʰ paragraph) are formed by
Texto 04
Gottman, John. The Relationship Cure. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Strengthening Relationships at Work
There is a number of things managers can do to strengthen relationships with workers. Strengthening connections with workers can lead to a win-win situation, in that workers may feel respected and valued, and can become much more engaged and productive in their work. And, managers may find that it is much easier to deal with a worker’s negative emotions or psychological health struggles when the foundation of their relationship with the worker is strong.
We can effectively build connections with workers by verbally or nonverbally seeking contact with them (i.e., making what psychologist Dr. John Gottman calls “connection bids”). A connection bid is an attempt to create connections between two people, and is essential for building, maintaining and improving relationships. A connection bid can be anything that we do to seek contact with another person:
- Asking for information: e.g., asking a worker how to solve a work problem. “Would you mind helping me with interpreting this spreadsheet? I’m struggling to get my head around the numbers.”
- Showing interest: e.g., asking workers about their hobbies or recent holidays. “Have you been doing any hiking lately?”
- Expressing affirmation and approval: e.g., complimenting a worker on his latest accomplishment. “Your presentation yesterday was excellent!”
- Expressing caring or support: e.g., demonstrating concern about a worker’s health condition. “Your cough sounds awful. You should think about going home to recover.”
- Offering assistance: e.g., offering support to a worker who is overloaded with tasks. “Would you like me to ask Jocelyn to help you with that project?”
- Making a humorous comment: e.g., lighthearted joking with a worker about a mistake you made. “Sometimes the hurrier I go, the behinder I get!”
- Sending non-verbal signals: e.g., a smile, a wink, a wave, a pat on the back or a thumbs up.
[…]
The way we respond to workers has a sizable impact on the nature of the relationships that result. If we repeatedly turn against or turn away from workers, they may eventually stop reaching out. On the contrary, if we turn toward a person as often as we can, the relationship can be strengthened and become more positive and supportive.
(Disponível em: www.workplacestrategiesformentalhealth.com/mmhm)
Texto 04
Gottman, John. The Relationship Cure. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Strengthening Relationships at Work
There is a number of things managers can do to strengthen relationships with workers. Strengthening connections with workers can lead to a win-win situation, in that workers may feel respected and valued, and can become much more engaged and productive in their work. And, managers may find that it is much easier to deal with a worker’s negative emotions or psychological health struggles when the foundation of their relationship with the worker is strong.
We can effectively build connections with workers by verbally or nonverbally seeking contact with them (i.e., making what psychologist Dr. John Gottman calls “connection bids”). A connection bid is an attempt to create connections between two people, and is essential for building, maintaining and improving relationships. A connection bid can be anything that we do to seek contact with another person:
- Asking for information: e.g., asking a worker how to solve a work problem. “Would you mind helping me with interpreting this spreadsheet? I’m struggling to get my head around the numbers.”
- Showing interest: e.g., asking workers about their hobbies or recent holidays. “Have you been doing any hiking lately?”
- Expressing affirmation and approval: e.g., complimenting a worker on his latest accomplishment. “Your presentation yesterday was excellent!”
- Expressing caring or support: e.g., demonstrating concern about a worker’s health condition. “Your cough sounds awful. You should think about going home to recover.”
- Offering assistance: e.g., offering support to a worker who is overloaded with tasks. “Would you like me to ask Jocelyn to help you with that project?”
- Making a humorous comment: e.g., lighthearted joking with a worker about a mistake you made. “Sometimes the hurrier I go, the behinder I get!”
- Sending non-verbal signals: e.g., a smile, a wink, a wave, a pat on the back or a thumbs up.
[…]
The way we respond to workers has a sizable impact on the nature of the relationships that result. If we repeatedly turn against or turn away from workers, they may eventually stop reaching out. On the contrary, if we turn toward a person as often as we can, the relationship can be strengthened and become more positive and supportive.
(Disponível em: www.workplacestrategiesformentalhealth.com/mmhm)
Texto 04
Gottman, John. The Relationship Cure. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Strengthening Relationships at Work
There is a number of things managers can do to strengthen relationships with workers. Strengthening connections with workers can lead to a win-win situation, in that workers may feel respected and valued, and can become much more engaged and productive in their work. And, managers may find that it is much easier to deal with a worker’s negative emotions or psychological health struggles when the foundation of their relationship with the worker is strong.
We can effectively build connections with workers by verbally or nonverbally seeking contact with them (i.e., making what psychologist Dr. John Gottman calls “connection bids”). A connection bid is an attempt to create connections between two people, and is essential for building, maintaining and improving relationships. A connection bid can be anything that we do to seek contact with another person:
- Asking for information: e.g., asking a worker how to solve a work problem. “Would you mind helping me with interpreting this spreadsheet? I’m struggling to get my head around the numbers.”
- Showing interest: e.g., asking workers about their hobbies or recent holidays. “Have you been doing any hiking lately?”
- Expressing affirmation and approval: e.g., complimenting a worker on his latest accomplishment. “Your presentation yesterday was excellent!”
- Expressing caring or support: e.g., demonstrating concern about a worker’s health condition. “Your cough sounds awful. You should think about going home to recover.”
- Offering assistance: e.g., offering support to a worker who is overloaded with tasks. “Would you like me to ask Jocelyn to help you with that project?”
- Making a humorous comment: e.g., lighthearted joking with a worker about a mistake you made. “Sometimes the hurrier I go, the behinder I get!”
- Sending non-verbal signals: e.g., a smile, a wink, a wave, a pat on the back or a thumbs up.
[…]
The way we respond to workers has a sizable impact on the nature of the relationships that result. If we repeatedly turn against or turn away from workers, they may eventually stop reaching out. On the contrary, if we turn toward a person as often as we can, the relationship can be strengthened and become more positive and supportive.
(Disponível em: www.workplacestrategiesformentalhealth.com/mmhm)
Texto 03
How is English Used as a Lingua Franca Today?
By Maria Khodorkovsky on August 19, 2013
The term lingua franca was first coined in the beginning of the 17th century by the Italians. At that time, it represented a conglomeration of mostly Italian, with a smattering of French, Portuguese, Spanish, Turkish, Greek, and Arabic, and was used primarily as the language of commerce. The term literally means “Frankish language”, as “Frank” was a common designation for all western Europeans since approximately the 12th century.
Today, English is a common lingua franca across the globe. According to some estimates, almost 80 percent of English speakers in the world are non-native speakers. Below you will find more information about a phenomenon that bears on language, culture, commerce, and diplomacy.
Where is it used?
Apart from serving as a useful heuristic in Europe, where a Spaniard, a Frenchmen, and a German might all carry on a conversation in English, English as a lingua franca (ELF) plays an important role in former Anglophone colonies such as India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Uganda, and Zimbabwe, among many others.
How is it used?
ELF differs from Standard English in a number of ways. Several documented overarching similarities are variances in article usage (or no article usage at all), variances in preposition usage, and novel use of morphemes (such as importancy and smoothfully). Many instances of ELF also incorporate across-the-board third-person singular usage (such as “He go to the store.”), using “who” and “which” interchangeably, and a lack of gerunds. Verbally, noted differences include the omission of some consonants and addition of extra vowels, as well as a general tendency towards efficient communication over grammatically normative English.
Criticisms
While ELF is a widespread and useful mode of communication for many, some scholars and linguists have criticized its proliferation as a form of linguistic imperialism. This term became popular in 1992 with the publication of Robert Phillipson’s influential book of the same name. In it, Phillipson argues that English has long been a tool of submission and cultural domination of colonies. Contemporary critics of ELF cite the problems associated with studying a language in a disorganized, unstructured way. Speakers of ELF may eventually speak both their native language and English imperfectly, leading to issues with effective communication. In spite of these criticisms, ELF continues to flourish in many countries, oftentimes enriching the language with colorful aphorisms and unique turns of phrase.
(Disponível em https://www.altalang.com/beyond-words/how-is-english-used-as-a-lingua-franca-today/)
Texto 03
How is English Used as a Lingua Franca Today?
By Maria Khodorkovsky on August 19, 2013
The term lingua franca was first coined in the beginning of the 17th century by the Italians. At that time, it represented a conglomeration of mostly Italian, with a smattering of French, Portuguese, Spanish, Turkish, Greek, and Arabic, and was used primarily as the language of commerce. The term literally means “Frankish language”, as “Frank” was a common designation for all western Europeans since approximately the 12th century.
Today, English is a common lingua franca across the globe. According to some estimates, almost 80 percent of English speakers in the world are non-native speakers. Below you will find more information about a phenomenon that bears on language, culture, commerce, and diplomacy.
Where is it used?
Apart from serving as a useful heuristic in Europe, where a Spaniard, a Frenchmen, and a German might all carry on a conversation in English, English as a lingua franca (ELF) plays an important role in former Anglophone colonies such as India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Uganda, and Zimbabwe, among many others.
How is it used?
ELF differs from Standard English in a number of ways. Several documented overarching similarities are variances in article usage (or no article usage at all), variances in preposition usage, and novel use of morphemes (such as importancy and smoothfully). Many instances of ELF also incorporate across-the-board third-person singular usage (such as “He go to the store.”), using “who” and “which” interchangeably, and a lack of gerunds. Verbally, noted differences include the omission of some consonants and addition of extra vowels, as well as a general tendency towards efficient communication over grammatically normative English.
Criticisms
While ELF is a widespread and useful mode of communication for many, some scholars and linguists have criticized its proliferation as a form of linguistic imperialism. This term became popular in 1992 with the publication of Robert Phillipson’s influential book of the same name. In it, Phillipson argues that English has long been a tool of submission and cultural domination of colonies. Contemporary critics of ELF cite the problems associated with studying a language in a disorganized, unstructured way. Speakers of ELF may eventually speak both their native language and English imperfectly, leading to issues with effective communication. In spite of these criticisms, ELF continues to flourish in many countries, oftentimes enriching the language with colorful aphorisms and unique turns of phrase.
(Disponível em https://www.altalang.com/beyond-words/how-is-english-used-as-a-lingua-franca-today/)
Texto 02
Standard Englishes and World Englishes: Living with a Polymorph Business Language
By Jeanette Gilsdorf
Many who teach business communication observe gradual changes in Standard English. As do other languages, English changes through contact with other languages and through several other wellunderstood avenues of language evolution, such as compounding, adding affixes, functional shift, coinage, and so on. As the third millennium begins, new factors are converging to influence Standard English: U.S. work environments are becoming more richly intercultural, newcomers to the United States are increasing their fluency in English, and international business is using English increasingly as a global language of business. Throughout these remarks, my perspective is that of a native-born Anglo-American speaker of English. Speakers of other Englishes will have different but comparable perspectives.
Helping my English as Second Language (L2) students gradually master English, I’ve seen my practical understanding of L2 learning grow, along with my respect for the major language task these students have taken on. I’ve also sensed Americans’ unmerited good luck that English has become the language of international business. Yet the internationality of English is to us a mixed blessing because of our presumptions about what comes with it. As Dennett says, “English may be the language of the global village but the villagers are far from agreement on what is good use of the language” (1992, p. 13). Many communicators mistakenly assume a commonality of understanding when both speakers use the same English words. We know that even two speakers born to the same language experience only approximate commonality of meaning; yet we routinely forget to compensate for that fact and end up with cases of bypassing. Internationally, the commonality of understanding can be far more sketchy, and the contextual issues much more complex, than most of us realize.
A truism says that staying with good Standard English will hold problems to a minimum. But what is Standard English, and what is the place of Standard English in teaching business communication in contexts that are more and more international? How, as teachers, do we make our peace with the multiple, competing standards and values affecting what is “acceptable English”? These questions trouble us in part because business persons approve of others’ use of English—or disparage it— depending on their view of what English is and what it’s supposed to be used for. Most U.S. business persons say that they expect people who work for them to be highly competent in Standard English. It seems a simple issue to these business persons. To teachers it is far from simple.
[…]
(Disponível em http://web.csulb.edu/~gilsdorf/st%20eng%20world%20eng%20jbc.htm / Journal of Business Communication, volume 39, number 3, July 2002, pages 364-378).
Texto 02
Standard Englishes and World Englishes: Living with a Polymorph Business Language
By Jeanette Gilsdorf
Many who teach business communication observe gradual changes in Standard English. As do other languages, English changes through contact with other languages and through several other wellunderstood avenues of language evolution, such as compounding, adding affixes, functional shift, coinage, and so on. As the third millennium begins, new factors are converging to influence Standard English: U.S. work environments are becoming more richly intercultural, newcomers to the United States are increasing their fluency in English, and international business is using English increasingly as a global language of business. Throughout these remarks, my perspective is that of a native-born Anglo-American speaker of English. Speakers of other Englishes will have different but comparable perspectives.
Helping my English as Second Language (L2) students gradually master English, I’ve seen my practical understanding of L2 learning grow, along with my respect for the major language task these students have taken on. I’ve also sensed Americans’ unmerited good luck that English has become the language of international business. Yet the internationality of English is to us a mixed blessing because of our presumptions about what comes with it. As Dennett says, “English may be the language of the global village but the villagers are far from agreement on what is good use of the language” (1992, p. 13). Many communicators mistakenly assume a commonality of understanding when both speakers use the same English words. We know that even two speakers born to the same language experience only approximate commonality of meaning; yet we routinely forget to compensate for that fact and end up with cases of bypassing. Internationally, the commonality of understanding can be far more sketchy, and the contextual issues much more complex, than most of us realize.
A truism says that staying with good Standard English will hold problems to a minimum. But what is Standard English, and what is the place of Standard English in teaching business communication in contexts that are more and more international? How, as teachers, do we make our peace with the multiple, competing standards and values affecting what is “acceptable English”? These questions trouble us in part because business persons approve of others’ use of English—or disparage it— depending on their view of what English is and what it’s supposed to be used for. Most U.S. business persons say that they expect people who work for them to be highly competent in Standard English. It seems a simple issue to these business persons. To teachers it is far from simple.
[…]
(Disponível em http://web.csulb.edu/~gilsdorf/st%20eng%20world%20eng%20jbc.htm / Journal of Business Communication, volume 39, number 3, July 2002, pages 364-378).
Texto 01
Going Mobile, Going Further!
By Anderson Francisco Guimarães Maia – October 28, 2016
So what happens to “learning” if we add the word “mobile” to it? The increasing and rapidly developing use of mobile technology by English language learners is an unquestionable aspect of today’s classroom. However, the attitude EFL teachers develop towards the use of mobile devices as an aid for language teaching varies greatly.
The unique benefits of mobile learning for EFL teachers include the ability to bridge formal and informal learning, which for language learners may be realized through supplementary out-of-classroom practice, translation support when communicating with target language speakers and the capture of difficulties and discoveries which can be instantly shared as well as being brought back into the classroom. Mobile learning can deliver, supplement and extend formal language learning; or it can be the primary way for learners to explore a target language informally and direct their own development through immediacy of encounter and challenge within a social setting. We still miss sufficient explicit connection between these two modes of learning, one of which is mainly formal and the other informal. Consequently, there are missed opportunities in terms of mutual benefit: formal education remains somewhat detached from rapid socio-technological change, and informal learning is frequently sidelined or ignored when it could be used as a resource and a way to discover more about evolving personal and social motivations for learning.
One example of how mobile devices can bridge formal and informal learning is through instantmessaging applications. Both synchronous and asynchronous activities can be developed for language practice outside the classroom. For example, in a discussion group on Whatsapp, students can discuss short videos, practice vocabulary with picture collages, share recent news, create captions and punch lines for memes, and take turns to create a multimodal story. Teachers can also create applications specifically to practice new vocabulary and grammar to support classroom learning.
Digital and mobile media are changing and extending language use to new environments as well as creating opportunities to learn in different ways. Mobile technology enables us to get physically closer to social contexts of language use which will ultimately influence the ways that language is used and learned. Therefore, let us incorporate mobile learning into our EFL lessons and literally “have the world in our hands”.
(Disponível em http://www.richmondshare.com.br/going-mobile-going-further/)
TEXTO II
It has become more or less a cliché these days to refer to English as a world language. At the 1984 conference to celebrate the SOth anniversary of the British Council there was a debate between Sir Randolph Quirk and Professor Braj Kachru on the (literally) million dollar question of 'who owns English’, and hence whose English must be adopted as the model for teaching the language worldwide (Quirk and Widdowson 198S). Since then, much has been written on the role of English as a language of international communication, and the desirability or otherwise of adopting one of the Inner Circle varieties of English (to all intents and purposes, either British or American) as the canonical model for teaching it as a second or foreign language. The position vigorously defended by Quirk in that debate— succinctly captured in the phrase 'a single monochrome standard’ (Quirk 198S: 6)— no longer appeals to the majority of those who are involved in the ELT enterprise in one way or another. Instead, Kachru’s equally spirited insistence that 'the native speakers [of English] seem to have lost the exclusive prerogative to control its standardisation’ (Kachru 198S: 3O), and his plea for a paradigm shift in linguistic and pedagogical research so as to bring it more in tune with the changing landscape, have continued to strike a favourable chord with most ELT professionals. And the idea that English belongs to everyone who speaks it has been steadily gaining ground.
Though still resisted in some quarters, the very idea of World English (henceforward, W E) makes the whole question of the 'ownership’ of English problematic, not to say completely anachronistic. Widdowson expressed the idea in a very telling manner when he wrote 'It is a matter of considerable pride and satisfaction for native speakers of English that their language is an international means of communication. But the point is that it is only international to the extent that it is not their language.’ (italics mine) (Widdowson 1994: 38S).
(...)
Lest I should be misunderstood here, please note what it is that I am not claiming. I am not saying that there are no native speakers of English any more— if by native speakers we mean persons who were born and brought up in monolingual households with no contact with other languages. Indeed, that would be an absurd thing to say. As with every other language, there will— for the immediately foreseeable future at least— continue to be children born into monolingual English-speaking households who will, under the familiar criteria established for the purpose (Davies 1991), qualify as native speakers of English. But what we are interested in at the moment is W E, not the English language as it is spoken in Englishspeaking households, or the Houses of Parliament in Britain. W E is a language (for want of a better term, that is) spoken across the world— routinely at the check-in desks and in the corridors and departure lounges of some of the world’s busiest airports, typically during multinational business encounters, periodically during the Olympics or World Cup Football seasons, international trade fairs, academic conferences, and so on [...].
RAJAGOPALAN, K. The concept of ‘World English’ and its
implications for ELT. ELT Journal Volume S8I2 April 2004.
Instrução: A questão refere-se ao texto abaixo.
ADAPTED FROM: Zittrain, Jonathan. Mark Zuckerberg Can
Still Fix This Mess.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/07/opinion/sunday/zuckerberg-facebook-privacy-congress.html
Acesso :25/04/2018
Conheça nossos planos