Questões de Concursos
Selecione os filtros para encontrar suas questões de concursos e clique no botão abaixo para filtrar e resolver.
Selecione os filtros para encontrar suas questões de concursos e clique no botão abaixo para filtrar e resolver.
Nada por aqui
Leia o texto para responder à questão.
In foreign language education, the teaching of culture remains a hotly debated issue. What is culture? What is its relation to language? Which and whose culture should be taught? What role should the learners’ culture play in the acquisition of knowledge of the target culture? How can we avoid essentializing cultures and teaching stereotypes? And how can we develop in the learners an intercultural competence that would shortchange neither their own culture nor the target culture, but would make them into cultural mediators in a globalized world? This paper explores these issues from the perspective of the large body of research done in Australia, Europe and the U.S. in the last twenty years. It links the study of culture to the study of discourse (see, e.g., Kramsch 1993, 1998, 2004) and to the concept of translingual and transcultural competence proposed by the Modern Language Association (e.g., Kramsch, 2010).
(https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1127430)
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)
Judge the following item, concerning the production of written texts as a process.
Planning is an important stage of the writing process because
it helps writers to organize their thoughts and ideas.
About cognate words and false cognates, as well as pedagogic trends, judge the item that follow.
The words experiences and report are two examples of
cognates in English and Portuguese.
Crazy Horse
Crazy Horse (Tasunke Witko, 1840-1877) was an Oglala Lakota Sioux warrior and warband leader considered among the greatest defenders of Sioux lands against the forces of the US government in the 19th century. He is one of the most famous Native American figures in history and among the Sioux's most honored heroes. Although he is often referred to as a "chief", Crazy Horse was actually a "Shirt Wearer" – a kind of "subchief" – who carried out the decisions of the council and also served as a war chief of a given band of warriors. Even so, Crazy Horse inspired such devotion in his followers that he was regarded as a "chief" and is referenced as such by others.
His name, Tasunke Witko (Crazy Horse), is accurately translated as "His Crazy Horse" or "His Horse is Crazy" and was his father's and grandfather's name, seemingly referencing a horse that behaved erratically. According to Black Elk, however, the name correlated to Crazy Horse's famous vision in which he saw his horse dancing as though "made only of shadow" in a strange or "crazy" way.
Crazy Horse dedicated himself to opposing the US military as early as 1854 following the Grattan Fight (Grattan Massacre) and the subsequent massacre of Little Thunder's camp in 1855 by Colonel William S. Harney. He continued his resistance over the next eleven years and was named a "Shirt Wearer" in 1865. He fought in the Battle of Plate River Bridge (1865), Red Cloud's War (1866-1868), the Battle of the Rosebud (1876), and the Battle of the Little Bighorn (1876). His last full-scale engagement with US forces was the Battle of Wolf Mountain in January 1877.
World History Encyclopedia. Adaptation.
Crazy Horse
Crazy Horse (Tasunke Witko, 1840-1877) was an Oglala Lakota Sioux warrior and warband leader considered among the greatest defenders of Sioux lands against the forces of the US government in the 19th century. He is one of the most famous Native American figures in history and among the Sioux's most honored heroes. Although he is often referred to as a "chief", Crazy Horse was actually a "Shirt Wearer" – a kind of "subchief" – who carried out the decisions of the council and also served as a war chief of a given band of warriors. Even so, Crazy Horse inspired such devotion in his followers that he was regarded as a "chief" and is referenced as such by others.
His name, Tasunke Witko (Crazy Horse), is accurately translated as "His Crazy Horse" or "His Horse is Crazy" and was his father's and grandfather's name, seemingly referencing a horse that behaved erratically. According to Black Elk, however, the name correlated to Crazy Horse's famous vision in which he saw his horse dancing as though "made only of shadow" in a strange or "crazy" way.
Crazy Horse dedicated himself to opposing the US military as early as 1854 following the Grattan Fight (Grattan Massacre) and the subsequent massacre of Little Thunder's camp in 1855 by Colonel William S. Harney. He continued his resistance over the next eleven years and was named a "Shirt Wearer" in 1865. He fought in the Battle of Plate River Bridge (1865), Red Cloud's War (1866-1868), the Battle of the Rosebud (1876), and the Battle of the Little Bighorn (1876). His last full-scale engagement with US forces was the Battle of Wolf Mountain in January 1877.
World History Encyclopedia. Adaptation.
Text 6
The sociolinguistics of English as Lingua Franca (EFL) pronunciation.
As far as sociolinguistics is concerned, the first task is to problematise the notion of standard accent. Essentially there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ accent, merely prestige accents, primarily RP and General American English (GA), stigmatised accents both native and (more often) non-native (see Lippi-Green, 1997; Bonfiglio, 2002), and a range of variously tolerated regional and social accents between the two extremes. The so-called BritishEnglish standard accent (RP) is claimed nowadays to be used by a mere fraction of British Native Speakers (NSs), possibly only three per cent in its unmodified form (see Trudgill, 2002: 171). The vast majority of NSs of English speak with regionallyand/or socially-modified accents, whether tolerated or stigmatised. Clearly, then, the RP accent cannot be ‘standard’ in the sense of being a widely-used norm. Instead, ‘standard’ refers accent-wise to a level of pronunciation assumed by many to be better in some way than the others, and is thus standard only in the sense of a level of excellence to be aspired to. Excellence, however, is not something that can be measured linguistically: it is not intrinsic to an accent, but merely reflects the value judgements of the elitist group who habitually use it or would if they could.
It should be a matter for teachers and their learners to decide whether they wish to subscribe to the (linguistically-unsound) belief in the superiority of RP. In some communication contexts an RP accent will undoubtedly provide them with a social advantage. This is more likely to be the case if learners intend to use their English to communicate and blend in largely with NSs, especially if the communication will take place in NS countries. Even here, though, their awareness should be raised to the fact that the majority of NSs with whom they communicate will not have an RP accent. At the most, it will probably be regionallymodified RP. On the other hand, having been apprised of the facts of sociolinguistic variation, learners may prefer to project their own (L2) regional and social identity through their accent. In this case their goal is more likely to be an accent that retains a clear trace of their L1, provided that it does not threaten the intelligibility of their pronunciation in their target (probably ELF) communication contexts.
JENKINS, J. Teaching Pronunciation for English as a Lingua Franca: A Sociopolitical Perspective. In GNUTZMANN, C.; INTEMANN, F. (Org.) The Globalization of English and the English Language Classroom. Oxford: OUP, 2005. p. 145-158.
Text 6
The sociolinguistics of English as Lingua Franca (EFL) pronunciation.
As far as sociolinguistics is concerned, the first task is to problematise the notion of standard accent. Essentially there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ accent, merely prestige accents, primarily RP and General American English (GA), stigmatised accents both native and (more often) non-native (see Lippi-Green, 1997; Bonfiglio, 2002), and a range of variously tolerated regional and social accents between the two extremes. The so-called BritishEnglish standard accent (RP) is claimed nowadays to be used by a mere fraction of British Native Speakers (NSs), possibly only three per cent in its unmodified form (see Trudgill, 2002: 171). The vast majority of NSs of English speak with regionallyand/or socially-modified accents, whether tolerated or stigmatised. Clearly, then, the RP accent cannot be ‘standard’ in the sense of being a widely-used norm. Instead, ‘standard’ refers accent-wise to a level of pronunciation assumed by many to be better in some way than the others, and is thus standard only in the sense of a level of excellence to be aspired to. Excellence, however, is not something that can be measured linguistically: it is not intrinsic to an accent, but merely reflects the value judgements of the elitist group who habitually use it or would if they could.
It should be a matter for teachers and their learners to decide whether they wish to subscribe to the (linguistically-unsound) belief in the superiority of RP. In some communication contexts an RP accent will undoubtedly provide them with a social advantage. This is more likely to be the case if learners intend to use their English to communicate and blend in largely with NSs, especially if the communication will take place in NS countries. Even here, though, their awareness should be raised to the fact that the majority of NSs with whom they communicate will not have an RP accent. At the most, it will probably be regionallymodified RP. On the other hand, having been apprised of the facts of sociolinguistic variation, learners may prefer to project their own (L2) regional and social identity through their accent. In this case their goal is more likely to be an accent that retains a clear trace of their L1, provided that it does not threaten the intelligibility of their pronunciation in their target (probably ELF) communication contexts.
JENKINS, J. Teaching Pronunciation for English as a Lingua Franca: A Sociopolitical Perspective. In GNUTZMANN, C.; INTEMANN, F. (Org.) The Globalization of English and the English Language Classroom. Oxford: OUP, 2005. p. 145-158.
Text 2
Pre-Communicative and Communicative Activities
[…] The development of communicative competence involves the acquisition and use of so-called language skills, which are promoted from the communicative approach in an integrated manner and with real communication purposes. To contribute to the development of these communicative language skills, the English teacher has a continuum of options ranging from so-called pre-communicative activities to proper communication activities. According to Littlewood (1998), the first are based on accuracy and present structures, functions, and vocabulary; the latter focus on fluency and involve information sharing and exchange.
The pre-communicative activities are subdivided into structural activities and quasi-communicative activities. Structural activities are described as machining and practical structures. Thequasi-communicativeones are based on communication and the structure of the language. […]
Study the sentences bellow from text 2.
1. Languages skills are used to develop communicative competence as well as their acquisition.
2. Pre-communicative activities are based on information sharing and exchange.
3. Structural activities are related to the structure of the language, machining and practical structures.
4. The language skill based on accuracy and proper communication activities is called Pre-Communicative.
Choose the alternative which contains the correct sentences.
Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
A language function is a purpose you wish to achieve when you say or write something. If you say ‘I invite you’, you are performing the function of inviting. Of course you could also say ‘D’you want to come to the cinema?’ to make an invitation. There are many ways of inviting, apologising, agreeing, giving advice, asking for information etc.
If our students want to express themselves in speaking or writing, they need to know to perform these functions – in other words, how to use grammar and vocabulary to express certain meanings/ purposes.
(Jeremy Harmer. How to teach English, 1998. Adaptado)