Questões de Concurso

Giving Blood = Giving Life

Giving blood is an amazing thing a person can do. Why? Because people who have anaemia, cancer, blood disorders, sickle cell, and other illnesses need blood transfusion. Some people even need regular blood transfusion to live.

Think about it: giving blood as part ............ everyone’s life; something they done .............. a regular basis, like eating ........... a favourite restaurant. What kind of difference does that make? Well, a donation might make the difference between life and death for nearly five million people who receive blood transfusions every year.

Giving blood is simple and convenient. It only takes about an hour and you can make the donation at a donor center. Afterwards, you will feel good about yourself.

Most people don’t think they’ll never need a blood transfusion, but many do. Blood is something money can’t buy. One may give a newborn, a child, a mother or a father, a brother, or a sister another chance at life. In fact, this simple action may help to save lives.

The blood donation process is much quicker and easier than you think. Giving blood will not decrease your strength and it’s certainly the right thing to do.

TEXTO 01

O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder às questões de 01 a 05.

MEG PECKED

Harry WON'T make up with William despite Diana statue unveiling as he 'can't afford to upset Meghan', biographer claims

1§ Despite the brother's united front at the unveiling of the statue honouring their late mother Princess Diana, Harry made a sharp exit after the ceremony.

2§ The pair seemed in sync as they tugged the green curtain draped over the touching artwork but he left just 20 minutes later after raising a glass of bubbly to Di.

3§ He dashed back to the US to be with his wife Meghan Markle, Archie, and newborn daughter Lilibet - which royal commentator Angela Levin suggested is because "he does what he's told."

4§ But the author isn't holding her breath for a reconciliation, as she told The Andrew Pierce Show, "I think whatever Harry decides Meghan will change it."

5§ "She will make it a negative thing to happen, and I don't see that there will be a long-term progress there.

6§ "I think there will be some nasty comments about it, perhaps William pulled the green cloth harder than Harry," Ms Levin joked.

7§ "Seriously, it is a very big thing, what Harry has done, said about William, the Royal Family, and his father, and the Queen."

8§ Prince Harry and Wills have not seen each other since Prince Philip's funeral in April and have been embroiled in a bitter feud about Harry's bombshell comments about the Royal's in interviews with chat show host Oprah.

9§ "You can't just brush over that. You can put a plaster on it for half __ hour but you can't really get rid of that unless there's a huge amount of conversations over a long period of time."

10§ "And Harry does what he's told," Ms Levin continued.

11§ "If Meghan tells him how __ make a statement, he'll make it, and that's it.

12§ "He can't afford now to upset Meghan because he would feel such a failure and a misery and she'd give him what for, really. I think there's no chance __ that."

13§ Diana's sons were seen laughing and joking on Thursday afternoon surrounded by their late mother's family in the Sunken Garden for the unveiling.

14§ The pair even mirrored each other's body language as they strolled in, before being welcomed by Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, their former private secretary, who is godfather to Prince George.

15§ Sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley, the mastermind behind the bronze memorial said Diana "was an icon who touched the lives of people right around the world so it has been a privilege to work alongside Prince William and Prince Harry."

16§ Harry and William chose some of Diana's favourite flowers to be planted by the statue, including 100 forget-me-nots, 200 roses, 300 tulips and 500 lavender plants.

Source (adapted): mmaake-uu-wliamm-danna-saaue uupse-mmeghan/ry-wont-make-up-william-diana-statue-upset-meghan/

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15480142/harry-wont-make-up-william-diana-statue-upset-meghan/

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 47 a 50.

We commonly observe in second language learners a plethora of errors attributable to the negative transfer of the native language to the target language. There can be interlingual interference at the phonological, syntactic, lexical, and semantic levels of language. For example, one might find a beginner learner who says “I am in New York since January”. Examples of distinctions at the lexical level may be seen in false cognates.

The early stages of second language learning are characterized by a predominance of interference (interlingual transfer), but once learners have begun to acquire parts of the new system, more and more intralingual transfer – generalization within the target language – is manifested. Negative intralingual transfer or overgeneralization is seen in such utterances as “Does John can sing?” or “He goed”.

A number of different categories for description of errors have been identified in research on learner language, among them:

I. The most generalized errors of addition, omission, substitution, and ordering. In English, for example, a definite article can be omitted (I went to movie), or an item substituted (/ lost my road), or a word order confused (I to the store went).

II. Within each category, levels of language can be considered: phonology or orthography, lexicon, grammar, and discourse. Often, of course, it is difficult to distinguish different levels of errors. A word with a faulty pronunciation, for example, might hide a syntactic or lexical error.

III. Errors may also be viewed as either global or local. Global errors hinder communication; they prevent the hearer from comprehending some aspect of the message. Local errors do not prevent the message from being heard, usually because there is only a minor violation of one segment of a sentence.

(BROWN, D. Principles of Language Learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents, 1994. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 36 a 42.

While the potential benefits or drawbacks of children playing video games receive a lot of attention, little notice is taken of the place of children within video games themselves.

A recent survey at the Anglia Ruskin University, Great Britain, investigated how children were represented in over 500 commercially successful video games, aimed both at adults and at children, published between 2009 and 2019. Although video games are often considered a children’s medium, it was found that, out of the 506 video games analysed, 331 did not contain any child characters at all. In the remaining titles that did feature a child character, less than half of them were significant characters.

How “the child” is treated in media like video games is a reflection of the morals of wider society. If a game treats children badly without explicitly condemning this treatment, it violates these morals. This accounts for the absence of child characters in controversial open-world games that predominantly invite players to steal cars, shoot people, and evade the police.

Children were also absent from games that aren’t particularly violent. Child characters did not feature in the majority of sports, racing or music games. Because the majority of children are excluded from the world of work, games that simulate aspects of real industries represent virtual environments that are only populated with adults.

Child characters in video games can also tell us about how society visualises the figure of the child. Adult characters in video games are more likely to be white and male. This same pattern was observed in the research on child characters. Where playable child characters were given a gender, 25 were male and six were female. The lack of playable girl characters reinforces the idea that boys are at the centre of the action and girls exist only on the sidelines.

Animal or other non-human characters were more common than non-white child characters. This echoes a problem in western children’s literature: non-human characters appear less frequently than white child protagonists but significantly outnumber child protagonists of all other races. Examining the digital kids that populate virtual gameworlds is a great way to show that how societies perceive “the child” is often in a narrow and exclusionary way.

(Emma Joy Reay. www.theconversation.com, 01.06.2022. Adaptado)

Text CB1A7

      Whenever a global economic transformation takes place, a single city usually drives it forward. Ghent, in modern-day Belgium, was at the core of the burgeoning global wool trade in the 13th century. The first initial public offering took place in Amsterdam in 1602. London was the financial centre of the first wave of globalisation during the 19th century. Today the city is San Francisco.

      California’s commercial capital has no serious rival in generative artificial intelligence (AI), a breakthrough technology that has caused a bull market in American stocks and which, many economists hope, will power a global productivity surge. Almost all big AI start-up companies are based in the Bay Area, which comprises the city of San Francisco and Silicon Valley (largely based in Santa Clara county, to the south). OpenAI is there, of course; so are Anthropic, Databricks and Scale AI. Tech giants, including Meta and Microsoft, are also spending big on AI in San Francisco. According to Brookings Metro, a think tank, last year San Francisco accounted for close to a tenth of generative AI job postings in America, more than any other city of the country. New York, with four times as many residents, was second.

 Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).