Questões de Concursos

Read the text to answer the question from.

It happens that the publication of this edition of the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary comes 250 years after the appearance of the first comprehensive dictionary of the English language, compiled by Samuel Johnson. Much has changed since then. The English that Johnson described in 1755 was relatively well defined, still essentially the national property of the British. Since then, it has dispersed and diversified, has been adopted and adapted as an international means of communication by communities all over the globe. English is now the name given to an immensely diverse variety of different usages. This obviously poses a problem of selection for the dictionary maker: which words are to be included in a dictionary, and thus granted recognition as more centrally or essentially English than the words that are left out?

Johnson did not have to deal with such diversity, but he too was exercised with this question. In his Plan of an English Dictionary, published in 1747, he considers which words it is proper to include in his dictionary; whether ‘terms of particular professions’, for example, were eligible, particularly since many of them had been derived from other languages. ‘Of such words,’ he says, ‘all are not equally to be considered as parts of our language, for some of them are naturalized and incorporated, but others still continue aliens...’. Which words are deemed to be sufficiently naturalized or incorporated to count as ‘parts of our language’, ‘real’ or proper English, and thus worthy of inclusion in a dictionary of the language, remains, of course, a controversial matter. Interestingly enough, even for Johnson the status of a word in the language was not the only, nor indeed the most important consideration. For being alien did not itself disqualify words from inclusion; in a remark which has considerable current resonance he adds: ‘some seem necessary to be retained, because the purchaser of the dictionary will expect to find them’. And, crucially, the expectations that people have of a dictionary are based on what they want to use it for. What Johnson says of his own dictionary would apply very aptly to The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (OALD): ‘The value of a work must be estimated by its use: It is not enough that a dictionary delights the critic, unless at the same time it instructs the learner...’.

(Widdowson, H. Hornby, A.S. 2010. Adaptado)

Leia o texto, para responder à questão.

It is adequate do say that pedagogical practices “become less and less preoccupied with limited and unified actions typical of content transmission in teaching-learning processes, and increase the instances of social practices that create possibilities of student engagement in the world.” (Magalhães & Carrijo, 2019, p. 215). We could broaden this and state that it is essential that education be less concerned with limited and limiting actions that look at the other - the student in general - but especially the student who is somehow different from the educators’ or the policy makers’ expectations as just that: a monolith of difference. This notion of difference as a monolith makes us see all SIEN¹ students as one single individual or block of individuals (i.e., as if they all had the same features); all deaf students as another monolith; all students in the autism spectrum as still another. But we are not equal. People vary in every aspect of humanity (the way they dress, speak, eat, think, learn). As Adichie (2009) stated in her famous TED: “The single story has a consequence: It robs people of dignity. It makes our recognition of our equal humanity difficult.”

(Magalhães, M.C.C. et al. Viable-transformative inclusion: diverse means of agency by an adolescent with Specific Intellectual Educational Needs (SIEN) and his educators. In: Delta: Documentação de Estudos em Linguística Teórica e Aplicada, Volume: 38, Número: 1. 2022)

¹SIEN students: students with specific intellectual educational needs

Leia o texto, para responder à questão.

One pathway for converting explicit to implicit knowledge is suggested by skill acquisition theory, a branch of cognitive science studying how people develop skills. In this theory, knowledge is first seen to be declarative (conscious); then, through practice and the application of learning strategies, declarative knowledge becomes proceduralized so that it becomes automatic. Automatic processes are quick and do not require attention or conscious awareness. Many second/ foreign language learners memorize and practice vocabulary items or “chunks” of language such as greetings, idioms or collocations. Frequent practice in using these forms helps the language items to become automatic in the sense that the learner can use them quickly and unconsciously.

Pienemann (1989) proposes that second/ foreign language learners will not acquire a new structure until they are developmentallly ready to do so. If there were no connection between the development of explicit knowledge about a grammar point and the eventual restructuring of the unconscious linguistic system to accommodate the point in the learner’s interlanguage, then, indeed, grammar instruction would not be of much use. However, it has been suggested that there is a connection, so grammar instruction is ultimately useful. Further, practice of language points can lead to automatization, thus bypassing natural order teachability considerations.

(FOTOS, Sandra. Cognitive Approaches to Grammar Instruction.

In Marianne Celce-Murcia. 3rd ed. Teaching English as a second or foreign

language. 3rd edition. Boston, Massachusstes: Heinle&Heinle. 2002.

Adaptado274)

Read the text to answer question.

No one who speaks English has any difficulty understanding the meaning of a sentence like ‘It’s warm in here’. We all recognise that it is a comment on the temperature in some place or other. But why it is being said, and what the speaker wishes to convey by saying it, depends entirely on two things: the context in which it is said and what the speaker wants people to understand (...) The meaning of language depends on where it occurs within a larger stretch of discourse, and thus the relationship that the different language elements have with what comes before and after them. In other words, speakers and writers have to be able to operate with more than just words and grammar; they have to be able to string utterances together.

Our ability to function properly in conversation or writing depends not only on reacting to the context in which we are using the language, but also on the relationship between words and ideas in longer texts.

Words can also mean more than one thing, for example, ‘book’ (= something to read, to reserve, a list of bets, etc.), ‘beat’ (= to win, to hit, to mix, e.g. an egg, the ‘pulse’ of music/a heart) and ‘can’ (= ability, permission, probability – and a container made of metal). Notice that, in these examples, not only can the same form have many meanings, but it can also be different parts of speech.

With so many available meanings for words and grammatical forms, it is the context the word occurs in which determines which of these meanings is being referred to. If we say, ‘I beat him because I ran faster than he did’, ‘beat’ is likely to mean won rather than physically assaulted or mixed (though there is always the possibility of ambiguity, of course).

(Harmer, 1998. Adaptado)