Questões de Concurso Para diplomata

Com base nos aspectos linguísticos e semânticos do texto, julgue (C ou E) o item a seguir.
Em textos literários, por vezes infringem-se as regras da gramática normativa. No mencionado texto, um exemplo de não observância das regras gramaticais pode ser encontrado na linha 13, no uso da vírgula após “Mas”, e outro exemplo pode ser encontrado na linha 32, na ausência de vírgulas que isolem a conjunção “pois”.

It has become clear that preventive diplomacy is only one of a class of actions that can be taken to prevent disputes from turning into armed conflict. Others in this class are preventive deployment of military and(or) police personnel; preventive humanitarian action, for example, to manage and resolve a refugee situation in a sensitive frontier area; and preventive peace-building, which itself comprises an extensive menu of possible actions in the political, economic and social fields, applicable especially to possible internal conflicts.   All these preventive actions share the following characteristics: they all depend on early warning that the risk of conflict exists; they require information about the causes and likely nature of the potential conflict so that the appropriate preventive action can be identified; and they require the consent of the party or parties within whose jurisdiction the preventive action is to take place.   The element of timing is crucial. The potential conflict should be ripe for the preventive action proposed. Timing is also an important consideration in peace-making and peace-keeping. The prevention, control and resolution of a conflict is like the prevention, control and cure of a disease. If treatment is prescribed at the wrong moment in the evolution of a disease, the patient does not improve, and the credibility of both the treatment and the physician who prescribed it is compromised. Internet:                   <http://www.un.org/Docs/SG/SG-Rpt/ch4b.htm> (with adaptations)
Based on text, it can be concluded that
preventive diplomacy usually deals with armed conflicts.

Fritz, casado com Helga, é, há cinco anos, cônsul da República da Gemênia no Brasil. Ambos são gemênicos, ou seja, têm a nacionalidade daquele país e têm um filho de quatro anos, chamado Hans, nascido em território brasileiro. Para cuidar do filho Hans, o casal contratou, em julho de 2003, uma empregada, chamada Helen, que passou a fazer o trabalho de babá na residência do cônsul. Helen, atualmente com 17 anos de idade, nascida na Gemênia, casada no Brasil, é filha de pais brasileiros, sendo que nenhum deles esteve naquele país a serviço da República Federativa do Brasil. Em fevereiro de 2004, Helen vendeu a Helga um relógio alegando ser de ouro legítimo. Posteriormente, Helga descobriu que o relógio era falsificado e não era, sequer, de ouro de baixa qualidade. Helen, ao efetuar a venda, tinha pleno conhecimento de que o relógio era falso. Foi, então, demitida do seu emprego no consulado, sem receber seus direitos trabalhistas.
Ante a situação hipotética descrita acima e considerando que a República da Gemênia não seja um país de língua portuguesa e adota o jus sanguinis como critério de atribuição da nacionalidade originária, julgue o item a seguir.
Presentes o elemento objetivo e o elemento subjetivo, caracterizadores do vício do consentimento, o negócio jurídico configurado pela compra e venda do relógio é anulável em decorrência de dolo negativo, reticente ou por omissão, cabendo a Helen responder pelas perdas e danos que advierem do negócio.

Text 4
           Bertrand Russell once predicted that the socialization of reproduction — the supersession of the family by the state — would “make sex love itself more trivial,” encourage “a certain triviality in all personal relations,” and “make it far more difficult to take an interest in anything after one’s own death.” At first glance, recent developments appear to have refuted the first part of this prediction. Americans today invest personal relations, particularly the relations between men and women, with undiminished emotional importance. The decline of childrearing as a major preoccupation has freed sex from its bondage to procreation and made it possible for people to value erotic life for its own sake. As the family shrinks to the marital unit, it can be argued that men and women respond more readily to each other’s emotional needs, instead of living vicariously through their offspring. The marriage contract having lost its binding character, couples now find it possible, according to many observers, to ground sexual relations in something more solid than legal compulsion. In short, the growing determination to live for the moment, whatever it may have done to the relations between parents and children, appears to have established the preconditions of a new intimacy between men and women.          This appearance is an illusion. The cult of intimacy conceals a growing despair of finding it. Personal relations crumble under the emotional weight with which they are burdened.            The inability “to take an interest in anything after one’s own death,” which gives such urgency to the pursuit of close personal encounters in the present, makes intimacy more elusive than ever. The same developments that have weakened the tie between parents and children have also undermined relations between men and women. Indeed the deterioration of marriage contributes in its own right to the deterioration of care for the young.            This last point is so obvious that only a strenuous propaganda on behalf of “open marriage” and “creative divorce” prevents us from grasping it. It is clear, for example, that the growing incidence of divorce, together with the ever-present possibility that any given marriage will end in collapse, adds to the instability of family life and deprives the child of a measure of emotional security. Enlightened opinion diverts attention from this general fact by insisting that in specific cases, parents may do more harm to their children by holding a marriage together than by dissolving it. More often the husband abandons his children to the wife whose company he finds unbearable, and the wife smothers the children with incessant yet perfunctory attentions. This particular solution to the problem of marital strain has become so common that the absence of the father impresses many observers as the most striking fact about the contemporary family. Under these conditions, a divorce in which the mother retains custody of her children merely ratifies the existing state of affairs — the effective emotional desertion of his family by the father. But the reflection that divorce often does no more damage to children than marriage itself hardly inspires rejoicing.
                                  Christopher Lasch. The Cult of Narcissism. Abacus, Londres, 1980 p. 320-322 (adapted)
Based on the text, decide if the following statement is correct (C) or wrong (E).
Living one’s children’s lives and dreams used to be a far more widespread feature of traditional families in the US than it is nowadays.

Text 4            Bertrand Russell once predicted that the socialization of reproduction — the supersession of the family by the state — would “make sex love itself more trivial,” encourage “a certain triviality in all personal relations,” and “make it far more difficult to take an interest in anything after one’s own death.” At first glance, recent developments appear to have refuted the first part of this prediction. Americans today invest personal relations, particularly the relations between men and women, with undiminished emotional importance. The decline of childrearing as a major preoccupation has freed sex from its bondage to procreation and made it possible for people to value erotic life for its own sake. As the family shrinks to the marital unit, it can be argued that men and women respond more readily to each other’s emotional needs, instead of living vicariously through their offspring. The marriage contract having lost its binding character, couples now find it possible, according to many observers, to ground sexual relations in something more solid than legal compulsion. In short, the growing determination to live for the moment, whatever it may have done to the relations between parents and children, appears to have established the preconditions of a new intimacy between men and women.         This appearance is an illusion. The cult of intimacy conceals a growing despair of finding it. Personal relations crumble under the emotional weight with which they are burdened.         The inability “to take an interest in anything after one’s own death,” which gives such urgency to the pursuit of close personal encounters in the present, makes intimacy more elusive than ever. The same developments that have weakened the tie between parents and children have also undermined relations between men and women. Indeed the deterioration of marriage contributes in its own right to the deterioration of care for the young.           This last point is so obvious that only a strenuous propaganda on behalf of “open marriage” and “creative divorce” prevents us from grasping it. It is clear, for example, that the growing incidence of divorce, together with the ever-present possibility that any given marriage will end in collapse, adds to the instability of family life and deprives the child of a measure of emotional security. Enlightened opinion diverts attention from this general fact by insisting that in specific cases, parents may do more harm to their children by holding a marriage together than by dissolving it. More often the husband abandons his children to the wife whose company he finds unbearable, and the wife smothers the children with incessant yet perfunctory attentions. This particular solution to the problem of marital strain has become so common that the absence of the father impresses many observers as the most striking fact about the contemporary family. Under these conditions, a divorce in which the mother retains custody of her children merely ratifies the existing state of affairs — the effective emotional desertion of his family by the father. But the reflection that divorce often does no more damage to children than marriage itself hardly inspires rejoicing.                                   Christopher Lasch. The Cult of Narcissism. Abacus, Londres, 1980 p. 320-322 (adapted) Based on the text, decide if the following statement is correct (C) or wrong (E).
Men and women in the US have become increasingly aware that it takes money to improve their personal relations.