Questões para Concursos

Leia o texto para responder à questão. ELF: English as a lingua franca The Vienna Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE), a collection of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) currently under construction, defines lingua franca as an additionally acquired language system that serves as a means of communication for speakers from different speech communities, who use it to communicate with each other but for whom it is not their native language. Early findings from the VOICE corpus tentatively identify a number of features which point to systematic lexicogrammatical differences between native-speaker English and ELF, for example dropping the third person present tense ‘s’ (e.g. she wear), omitting definite and indefinite articles, insertion of prepositions (e.g. can we discuss about this issue). These features are not a threat to comprehension, as they involve typical errors that most English teachers would correct and remediate. However, Seidlhofer (2004) points out that they appear to be generally unproblematic and do not cause an obstacle to communicative success in ELF. The work of Jenkins (1996, 2000, 2004, 2005) has also been very influential in relation to the teaching of pronunciation for ELF. Her research finds that a number of items common to most native-speaker varieties of English were not necessary in successful ELF interactions; for example, the substitution of voiceless and voiced th with /t/ or /s/ and /d/ or /z/ (e.g. think became sink or tink , and this became dis or zis ). Jenkins argues that such features occur regularly in ELF interactions and do not cause intelligibility problems. Problems may arise in the (perhaps unfair) equation between a reduced or ‘stripped down’ ELF syllabus and an impoverished experience of the L2. Indeed, it could be argued that learners of any language always end up producing less than the input they are exposed to, and that if that input itself is deliberately restricted, then even less will be the outcome. (O’KEEFFE, A., MCCARTHY, M. & CARTER, R. From corpus to classroom. Language Use and Language Teaching. Cambridge, CUP. 2007. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. ELF: English as a lingua franca The Vienna Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE), a collection of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) currently under construction, defines lingua franca as an additionally acquired language system that serves as a means of communication for speakers from different speech communities, who use it to communicate with each other but for whom it is not their native language. Early findings from the VOICE corpus tentatively identify a number of features which point to systematic lexicogrammatical differences between native-speaker English and ELF, for example dropping the third person present tense ‘s’ (e.g. she wear), omitting definite and indefinite articles, insertion of prepositions (e.g. can we discuss about this issue). These features are not a threat to comprehension, as they involve typical errors that most English teachers would correct and remediate. However, Seidlhofer (2004) points out that they appear to be generally unproblematic and do not cause an obstacle to communicative success in ELF. The work of Jenkins (1996, 2000, 2004, 2005) has also been very influential in relation to the teaching of pronunciation for ELF. Her research finds that a number of items common to most native-speaker varieties of English were not necessary in successful ELF interactions; for example, the substitution of voiceless and voiced th with /t/ or /s/ and /d/ or /z/ (e.g. think became sink or tink , and this became dis or zis ). Jenkins argues that such features occur regularly in ELF interactions and do not cause intelligibility problems. Problems may arise in the (perhaps unfair) equation between a reduced or ‘stripped down’ ELF syllabus and an impoverished experience of the L2. Indeed, it could be argued that learners of any language always end up producing less than the input they are exposed to, and that if that input itself is deliberately restricted, then even less will be the outcome. (O’KEEFFE, A., MCCARTHY, M. & CARTER, R. From corpus to classroom. Language Use and Language Teaching. Cambridge, CUP. 2007. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. If styles are general characteristics that differentiate one individual from another, then strategies are those specific “attacks” that we make on a given problem, and that vary considerably within each individual. They are the momentby-moment techniques that we employ to solve “problems” posed by second language input and output. Chamot (2005, p. 112) defines strategies quite broadly as “procedures that facilitate a learning task. Strategies are most often conscious and goal driven.” As our knowledge of second language acquisition increased markedly during the 1970s, teachers and researchers came to realize that no single research finding and no single method of language teaching would usher in an era of universal success in teaching a second language. We saw that certain learners seemed to be successful regardless of methods or techniques of teaching. We began to see the importance of individual variation in language learning. Certain people appeared to be endowed with abilities to succeed; others lacked those abilities. This observation led Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) to describe “good” language learners in terms of personal traits, styles, and strategies. Rubin (Rubin & Thompson, 1982) later summarized fourteen such characteristics. Among other abilities, good language learners tend to: 1. Find their own way, taking charge of their learning 2. Be creative and develop a “feel” for the language by experimenting with its grammar and words 3. Make their own opportunities for practice in using the language inside and outside the classroom 4. Learn to live with uncertainty by continuing to talk or listen without understanding every word 5. Use linguistic knowledge, including knowledge of their first language, in learning a second language 6. Use contextual cues to help them in comprehension 7. Learn to make intelligent guesses 8. Learn chunks of language as wholes and formalized routines to help them perform “beyond their competence” 9. Learn different styles of speech and writing and learn to vary their language according to the formality of the situation. (, H.Douglas Brown. Principles of language learning and teaching . 5th ed. Longman, 2000. Adaptado) Confidencial até o momento da aplicação.

Leia o texto para responder à questão. If styles are general characteristics that differentiate one individual from another, then strategies are those specific “attacks” that we make on a given problem, and that vary considerably within each individual. They are the momentby-moment techniques that we employ to solve “problems” posed by second language input and output. Chamot (2005, p. 112) defines strategies quite broadly as “procedures that facilitate a learning task. Strategies are most often conscious and goal driven.” As our knowledge of second language acquisition increased markedly during the 1970s, teachers and researchers came to realize that no single research finding and no single method of language teaching would usher in an era of universal success in teaching a second language. We saw that certain learners seemed to be successful regardless of methods or techniques of teaching. We began to see the importance of individual variation in language learning. Certain people appeared to be endowed with abilities to succeed; others lacked those abilities. This observation led Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) to describe “good” language learners in terms of personal traits, styles, and strategies. Rubin (Rubin & Thompson, 1982) later summarized fourteen such characteristics. Among other abilities, good language learners tend to: 1. Find their own way, taking charge of their learning 2. Be creative and develop a “feel” for the language by experimenting with its grammar and words 3. Make their own opportunities for practice in using the language inside and outside the classroom 4. Learn to live with uncertainty by continuing to talk or listen without understanding every word 5. Use linguistic knowledge, including knowledge of their first language, in learning a second language 6. Use contextual cues to help them in comprehension 7. Learn to make intelligent guesses 8. Learn chunks of language as wholes and formalized routines to help them perform “beyond their competence” 9. Learn different styles of speech and writing and learn to vary their language according to the formality of the situation. (, H.Douglas Brown. Principles of language learning and teaching . 5th ed. Longman, 2000. Adaptado) Confidencial até o momento da aplicação.

Leia o texto para responder à questão. If styles are general characteristics that differentiate one individual from another, then strategies are those specific “attacks” that we make on a given problem, and that vary considerably within each individual. They are the momentby-moment techniques that we employ to solve “problems” posed by second language input and output. Chamot (2005, p. 112) defines strategies quite broadly as “procedures that facilitate a learning task. Strategies are most often conscious and goal driven.” As our knowledge of second language acquisition increased markedly during the 1970s, teachers and researchers came to realize that no single research finding and no single method of language teaching would usher in an era of universal success in teaching a second language. We saw that certain learners seemed to be successful regardless of methods or techniques of teaching. We began to see the importance of individual variation in language learning. Certain people appeared to be endowed with abilities to succeed; others lacked those abilities. This observation led Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) to describe “good” language learners in terms of personal traits, styles, and strategies. Rubin (Rubin & Thompson, 1982) later summarized fourteen such characteristics. Among other abilities, good language learners tend to: 1. Find their own way, taking charge of their learning 2. Be creative and develop a “feel” for the language by experimenting with its grammar and words 3. Make their own opportunities for practice in using the language inside and outside the classroom 4. Learn to live with uncertainty by continuing to talk or listen without understanding every word 5. Use linguistic knowledge, including knowledge of their first language, in learning a second language 6. Use contextual cues to help them in comprehension 7. Learn to make intelligent guesses 8. Learn chunks of language as wholes and formalized routines to help them perform “beyond their competence” 9. Learn different styles of speech and writing and learn to vary their language according to the formality of the situation. (, H.Douglas Brown. Principles of language learning and teaching . 5th ed. Longman, 2000. Adaptado) Confidencial até o momento da aplicação.

Read the following extract to answer question. A friend of mine who is an orchestral conductor was asking me (early in our acquaintance) about what I did for a living. When I told him that apart from other activities, I wrote books about how to teach English he said ‘Books in the plural? Surely once you’ve written one, there’s nothing more to say!’ I wanted to reply that he had just argued himself out of a job (I mean, how many performances of Beethoven symphonies have there been in the twenty-first century alone?), but someone else laughed at his question, another musician made a different comment, the conversation moved on, and so Martin-the-conductor’s flippant enquiry evaporated in the convivial atmosphere of a British pub. But his question was a good one. Surely we know how to teach languages? After all, people have been doing it successfully for two thousand years or more, and some aspects of teaching in the past have probably not changed that much. But other things have, and continue to change. Which is (I suppose) why every time I re-examine past assumptions about teaching, I find myself questioning and reinterpreting things I thought were fixed. And of course, I am not alone in this. We all do it all the time – or at least we do if we haven’t closed our minds off from the possibility of change and renewal. Language teaching, perhaps more than many other activities, reflects the times it takes place in. Language is about communication, after all, and perhaps that is why philosophies and techniques for learning languages seem to develop and change in tune with the societies which give rise to them. Teaching and learning are very human activities; they are social just as much as they are (in our case) linguistic. But it’s not just society that changes and evolves. The last decades have seen what feels like unprecedented technological change. The Internet has seen to that, and other educational technology has not lagged behind. And it’s exciting stuff. I’ve tried to reflect that excitement and newness in parts of this new edition. (Jeremy Harmer, How to teach English . Adaptado)

Read the following extract to answer question. A friend of mine who is an orchestral conductor was asking me (early in our acquaintance) about what I did for a living. When I told him that apart from other activities, I wrote books about how to teach English he said ‘Books in the plural? Surely once you’ve written one, there’s nothing more to say!’ I wanted to reply that he had just argued himself out of a job (I mean, how many performances of Beethoven symphonies have there been in the twenty-first century alone?), but someone else laughed at his question, another musician made a different comment, the conversation moved on, and so Martin-the-conductor’s flippant enquiry evaporated in the convivial atmosphere of a British pub. But his question was a good one. Surely we know how to teach languages? After all, people have been doing it successfully for two thousand years or more, and some aspects of teaching in the past have probably not changed that much. But other things have, and continue to change. Which is (I suppose) why every time I re-examine past assumptions about teaching, I find myself questioning and reinterpreting things I thought were fixed. And of course, I am not alone in this. We all do it all the time – or at least we do if we haven’t closed our minds off from the possibility of change and renewal. Language teaching, perhaps more than many other activities, reflects the times it takes place in. Language is about communication, after all, and perhaps that is why philosophies and techniques for learning languages seem to develop and change in tune with the societies which give rise to them. Teaching and learning are very human activities; they are social just as much as they are (in our case) linguistic. But it’s not just society that changes and evolves. The last decades have seen what feels like unprecedented technological change. The Internet has seen to that, and other educational technology has not lagged behind. And it’s exciting stuff. I’ve tried to reflect that excitement and newness in parts of this new edition. (Jeremy Harmer, How to teach English . Adaptado)

Read the following extract to answer question. A friend of mine who is an orchestral conductor was asking me (early in our acquaintance) about what I did for a living. When I told him that apart from other activities, I wrote books about how to teach English he said ‘Books in the plural? Surely once you’ve written one, there’s nothing more to say!’ I wanted to reply that he had just argued himself out of a job (I mean, how many performances of Beethoven symphonies have there been in the twenty-first century alone?), but someone else laughed at his question, another musician made a different comment, the conversation moved on, and so Martin-the-conductor’s flippant enquiry evaporated in the convivial atmosphere of a British pub. But his question was a good one. Surely we know how to teach languages? After all, people have been doing it successfully for two thousand years or more, and some aspects of teaching in the past have probably not changed that much. But other things have, and continue to change. Which is (I suppose) why every time I re-examine past assumptions about teaching, I find myself questioning and reinterpreting things I thought were fixed. And of course, I am not alone in this. We all do it all the time – or at least we do if we haven’t closed our minds off from the possibility of change and renewal. Language teaching, perhaps more than many other activities, reflects the times it takes place in. Language is about communication, after all, and perhaps that is why philosophies and techniques for learning languages seem to develop and change in tune with the societies which give rise to them. Teaching and learning are very human activities; they are social just as much as they are (in our case) linguistic. But it’s not just society that changes and evolves. The last decades have seen what feels like unprecedented technological change. The Internet has seen to that, and other educational technology has not lagged behind. And it’s exciting stuff. I’ve tried to reflect that excitement and newness in parts of this new edition. (Jeremy Harmer, How to teach English . Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão: The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) reports that once water is contaminated, it is difficult, costly, and often impossible to remove the pollutants. Currently, 80% of global wastewater goes untreated, and is contaminated by a wide range of substances, from human waste to highly toxic industrial discharges. The type and amount of pollutants in freshwater determines its suitability for human uses such as drinking, bathing, and agriculture. Pollution of freshwater ecosystems can also impact the habitat and quality of life of fish and other wildlife. This can include pathogens (largely from human and animal waste), organic matter (including nutrients from agricultural run-off such as nitrogen or phosphorus), chemical pollution (from irrigation, domestic wastewater and runoff of mines into rivers) and salinity. Plastics, and chemicals of emerging concern, such as certain pharmaceutical products, are issues for which their extent and impacts on freshwater are largely unknown. A preliminary assessment of water quality in rivers in Latin America, Africa and Asia, “A Snapshot of the World’s Water Quality” (Ringler, et al., 2016), estimated that severe pathogenic pollution affects around one third of all rivers, severe organic pollution around one seventh of all rivers, and severe and moderate salinity pollution around one-tenth of all rivers in these regions. (UNDRR, “Pollution”. Disponível em: www.undrr.org/ understanding-disaster-risk/terminology/hips/tl0028#:~:text=Pollution%20 is%20defined%20as%20the,UN%20data%2C%20n o%20date. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão: The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) reports that once water is contaminated, it is difficult, costly, and often impossible to remove the pollutants. Currently, 80% of global wastewater goes untreated, and is contaminated by a wide range of substances, from human waste to highly toxic industrial discharges. The type and amount of pollutants in freshwater determines its suitability for human uses such as drinking, bathing, and agriculture. Pollution of freshwater ecosystems can also impact the habitat and quality of life of fish and other wildlife. This can include pathogens (largely from human and animal waste), organic matter (including nutrients from agricultural run-off such as nitrogen or phosphorus), chemical pollution (from irrigation, domestic wastewater and runoff of mines into rivers) and salinity. Plastics, and chemicals of emerging concern, such as certain pharmaceutical products, are issues for which their extent and impacts on freshwater are largely unknown. A preliminary assessment of water quality in rivers in Latin America, Africa and Asia, “A Snapshot of the World’s Water Quality” (Ringler, et al., 2016), estimated that severe pathogenic pollution affects around one third of all rivers, severe organic pollution around one seventh of all rivers, and severe and moderate salinity pollution around one-tenth of all rivers in these regions. (UNDRR, “Pollution”. Disponível em: www.undrr.org/ understanding-disaster-risk/terminology/hips/tl0028#:~:text=Pollution%20 is%20defined%20as%20the,UN%20data%2C%20n o%20date. Adaptado)