Questõesde UNICENTRO 2017 sobre Inglês

InícioTodas as questões
1
1
1
Foram encontradas 24 questões
14725bfe-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Yesterday we had a wonderful time. We ________ to a great party.

In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
(Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
A
Gone
B
Was going
C
Went
D
Had went
14634a15-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the text, answer true (T) or false (F):


( ) The referendum was held only in some parts of Turkey

( ) The referendum has reduced Recip Erdogan’s presidential powers.

( ) With the new constitution, the Turkish president will not be able to appoint his own ministers.

( ) The European Union that the referendum is not going to help Turkey become a member of the

The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:

In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
(Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
A
F-F-T-F
B
F-F-T-T
C
F-F-F-T
D
T-F-F-T
14685383-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

In the third paragraph, the word they refers to:

In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
(Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
A
The Turkish people
B
Recip Erdogan and his allies
C
The parliament
D
Recip Erdogan’s opponents
146d7a98-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Pronomes | Pronouns

We asked _______ to help ______ with our task.

In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
(Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
A
She – us
B
She – we
C
Her – us
D
Her – we
1477f25e-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Tempos Verbais | Verb Tenses, Futuro simples | Simple future, Preposições | Prepositions, Pronomes | Pronouns, Pronomes interrogativos | Question words

__________ is your birthday?

It is ________ November.

Great! We ________ celebrate together.

In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
(Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
A
What – on - will
B
Where – in – going to
C
When – in - will
D
Who – on - are going to
be07a7ce-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Considering the text, fill the parenthesis with T (true) or F (false):

( ) One of the problems of current research on the hazards of mobile phones is that they have been popular for too long, which creates a lot of data do be analyzed.
( ) Regarding the risks mobile phones can pose to our health, health professionals worldwide believe it is better to be cautious until more conclusive research is conducted.
( ) The frequency used by mobile phones is significantly higher than the frequency of microwaves, hence the health problems.
( ) Health professionals use the example of the tobacco industry to illustrate that mobile phones can be dangerous, even though research is still not conclusive on that.

The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:

Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

(Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

A
F-T-F-T
B
F-F-T-T
C
F-T-T-T
D
T-T-T-T
be0a8eac-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

From the sentence “mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s", it is possible to understand that:

Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

(Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

A
Mobile phones were only popular in the 1990s
B
Mobile phones are more popular nowadays than in the 1990s.
C
Mobile phones were popular in the 1990s and are still popular these days.
D
Mobile phones were popular in the 1990s but their popularity has faded since then.
be04bdd3-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Tempos Verbais | Verb Tenses, Verbos modais | Modal verbs, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

In the fourth paragraph, the modal verb may expresses:

Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

(Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

A
Certainty, as researchers are convinced that wireless technology is dangerous to human health.
B
Uncertainty, as researchers are still not 100% sure of the dangers of wireless technology.
C
Uncertainty, as recent studies have proved that smartphones are not hazardous.
D
Certainty, as there is compelling evidence of the dangers of wireless technology.
be00f8cc-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

In the first paragraph, the word however tells the reader that the following sentence will:

Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

(Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

A
Add a similar idea to the previous sentence.
B
Reinforce the meaning of the previous sentence.
C
Express a different idea from the previous sentence.
D
Exemplify the points presented previously.
bdfe2c1f-ff
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

The main objective of the article is to:

Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

(Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

A
Show that smartphones are the main cause of cancer nowadays.
B
Warn us of the risks of using mobile phones.
C
To provide compelling evidence that it is completely safe to use mobile technology.
D
To show that there is still no consensus on whether mobile phones are hazardous to health, even though research suggests they may be.
212a9096-00
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Análise sintática | Syntax Parsing

Mark the sentence that contains a relative clause.

How World Leaders Reacted to Trump at the U.N.

By SOMINI SENGUPTA and MEGAN SPECIA SEPT. 23, 2017 


He was called a “giant gold Goliath” and a “rogue newcomer.” But in a few corners the remarks made by President Trump at the United Nations were described as “courageous” and “gratifying.”

Throughout the week, Mr. Trump’s first address to the General Assembly drew many direct and indirect swipes, from allies and rivals alike, and sparse support.

While the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, attacked Mr. Trump from afar — calling him a “dotard” in a statement on North Korean national television — others used their platforms at the United Nations to respond.

Some leaders were more subtle than others.

Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s 93-year-old president, took aim at Mr. Trump during his own speech on Thursday. Mr. Mugabe mocked Mr. Trump as a “giant gold Goliath” and said other nations were “embarrassed if not frightened” by his statements about North Korea. 

“Are we having a return of Goliath to our midst, who threatens the extinction of other countries?” Mr. Mugabe asked. Some responded with applause to his reference to the biblical character who threatened the Israelites before being slain by the young shepherd David, who would become king.

Mr. Mugabe then went on to address Mr. Trump directly, telling him to “blow your trumpet in a musical way towards the values of unity, peace, cooperation, togetherness and dialogue which we have always stood for.”

During his speech, Mr. Trump notably omitted any talk of climate change, seen as one of the most pressing issues for many world leaders.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada received the longest applause during his General Assembly speech on Thursday after an implicit dig at Mr. Trump.

“There is no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change,” Mr. Trudeau said, referring to Mr. Trump’s plans to pull out of the Paris climate accord.


(Adapted from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/23/world/americas/world-leaders-trump-un.html?mcubz=0)

A
Some responded with applause to his reference to the biblical character who threatened the Israelites before being slain by the young shepherd David, who would become king.
B
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada received the longest applause during his General Assembly speech on Thursday after an implicit dig at Mr. Trump.
C
Some leaders were more subtle than others.
D
During his speech, Mr. Trump notably omitted any talk of climate change, seen as one of the most pressing issues for many world leaders.
21244097-00
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the text:

How World Leaders Reacted to Trump at the U.N.

By SOMINI SENGUPTA and MEGAN SPECIA SEPT. 23, 2017 


He was called a “giant gold Goliath” and a “rogue newcomer.” But in a few corners the remarks made by President Trump at the United Nations were described as “courageous” and “gratifying.”

Throughout the week, Mr. Trump’s first address to the General Assembly drew many direct and indirect swipes, from allies and rivals alike, and sparse support.

While the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, attacked Mr. Trump from afar — calling him a “dotard” in a statement on North Korean national television — others used their platforms at the United Nations to respond.

Some leaders were more subtle than others.

Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s 93-year-old president, took aim at Mr. Trump during his own speech on Thursday. Mr. Mugabe mocked Mr. Trump as a “giant gold Goliath” and said other nations were “embarrassed if not frightened” by his statements about North Korea. 

“Are we having a return of Goliath to our midst, who threatens the extinction of other countries?” Mr. Mugabe asked. Some responded with applause to his reference to the biblical character who threatened the Israelites before being slain by the young shepherd David, who would become king.

Mr. Mugabe then went on to address Mr. Trump directly, telling him to “blow your trumpet in a musical way towards the values of unity, peace, cooperation, togetherness and dialogue which we have always stood for.”

During his speech, Mr. Trump notably omitted any talk of climate change, seen as one of the most pressing issues for many world leaders.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada received the longest applause during his General Assembly speech on Thursday after an implicit dig at Mr. Trump.

“There is no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change,” Mr. Trudeau said, referring to Mr. Trump’s plans to pull out of the Paris climate accord.


(Adapted from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/23/world/americas/world-leaders-trump-un.html?mcubz=0)

A
The world leaders are mad because President Trump and Kim Jong-un are contributing to climate problems.
B
The world leaders are uncomfortable because President Trump used some biblical characters in a disrespectful way.
C
President Trump talked about climate changes during his speech and annoyed Kim Jong-un and Robert Mugabe.
D
The speech by President Trump generated different opinions and called attention of world leaders.
212786d1-00
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Voz Ativa e Passiva | Passive and Active Voice

Turn the active voice into passive voice:

Mr. Trump notably omitted any talk of climate change

How World Leaders Reacted to Trump at the U.N.

By SOMINI SENGUPTA and MEGAN SPECIA SEPT. 23, 2017 


He was called a “giant gold Goliath” and a “rogue newcomer.” But in a few corners the remarks made by President Trump at the United Nations were described as “courageous” and “gratifying.”

Throughout the week, Mr. Trump’s first address to the General Assembly drew many direct and indirect swipes, from allies and rivals alike, and sparse support.

While the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, attacked Mr. Trump from afar — calling him a “dotard” in a statement on North Korean national television — others used their platforms at the United Nations to respond.

Some leaders were more subtle than others.

Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s 93-year-old president, took aim at Mr. Trump during his own speech on Thursday. Mr. Mugabe mocked Mr. Trump as a “giant gold Goliath” and said other nations were “embarrassed if not frightened” by his statements about North Korea. 

“Are we having a return of Goliath to our midst, who threatens the extinction of other countries?” Mr. Mugabe asked. Some responded with applause to his reference to the biblical character who threatened the Israelites before being slain by the young shepherd David, who would become king.

Mr. Mugabe then went on to address Mr. Trump directly, telling him to “blow your trumpet in a musical way towards the values of unity, peace, cooperation, togetherness and dialogue which we have always stood for.”

During his speech, Mr. Trump notably omitted any talk of climate change, seen as one of the most pressing issues for many world leaders.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada received the longest applause during his General Assembly speech on Thursday after an implicit dig at Mr. Trump.

“There is no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change,” Mr. Trudeau said, referring to Mr. Trump’s plans to pull out of the Paris climate accord.


(Adapted from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/23/world/americas/world-leaders-trump-un.html?mcubz=0)

A
Any talk of climate change was notably omitted by Mr. Trump.
B
Any talk of climate change were notably not omitted.
C
Any talk of climate change is notably omitted.
D
Any talk of climate change are notably omitted by Mr. Trump.
21213e04-00
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Discurso direto e indireto | Reported speech

Choose the correct option considering the use of the reported speech:
“There is no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change,” Mr. Trudeau said, referring to Mr. Trump’s plans to pull out of the Paris climate accord.

How World Leaders Reacted to Trump at the U.N.

By SOMINI SENGUPTA and MEGAN SPECIA SEPT. 23, 2017 


He was called a “giant gold Goliath” and a “rogue newcomer.” But in a few corners the remarks made by President Trump at the United Nations were described as “courageous” and “gratifying.”

Throughout the week, Mr. Trump’s first address to the General Assembly drew many direct and indirect swipes, from allies and rivals alike, and sparse support.

While the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, attacked Mr. Trump from afar — calling him a “dotard” in a statement on North Korean national television — others used their platforms at the United Nations to respond.

Some leaders were more subtle than others.

Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s 93-year-old president, took aim at Mr. Trump during his own speech on Thursday. Mr. Mugabe mocked Mr. Trump as a “giant gold Goliath” and said other nations were “embarrassed if not frightened” by his statements about North Korea. 

“Are we having a return of Goliath to our midst, who threatens the extinction of other countries?” Mr. Mugabe asked. Some responded with applause to his reference to the biblical character who threatened the Israelites before being slain by the young shepherd David, who would become king.

Mr. Mugabe then went on to address Mr. Trump directly, telling him to “blow your trumpet in a musical way towards the values of unity, peace, cooperation, togetherness and dialogue which we have always stood for.”

During his speech, Mr. Trump notably omitted any talk of climate change, seen as one of the most pressing issues for many world leaders.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada received the longest applause during his General Assembly speech on Thursday after an implicit dig at Mr. Trump.

“There is no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change,” Mr. Trudeau said, referring to Mr. Trump’s plans to pull out of the Paris climate accord.


(Adapted from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/23/world/americas/world-leaders-trump-un.html?mcubz=0)

A
Mr. Trudeau said (that) there isn’t no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change.
B
Mr. Trudeau said (that) there was no country on the planet that could walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change.
C
Mr. Trudeau said (that) there wasn’t no country on the planet that can walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change.
D
Mr. Trudeau said (that) there were no country on the planet that could not walk away from the challenge and reality of climate change.
1584e336-fd
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Tempos Verbais | Verb Tenses, Verbos modais | Modal verbs, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Choose the best answer, according to the text. Refer to the words in bold when necessary:

Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


(Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

A
The words may and could are used to indicate uncertainty.
B
Lauren Fletcher is still working at NASA
C
The word widespread is used as an adjective to the noun battle.
D
The pronoun which is used to refer the aforementioned widespread clear-cutting.
E
Burning of forests accounts for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions nowadays
15803e20-fd
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Vocabulário | Vocabulary

The word widespread is closest in meaning to

Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


(Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

A
Recent.
B
Complete.
C
Long-term.
D
Extensive.
E
Systematic .
157ba27f-fd
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

The words buzz and hum both represent:

Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


(Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

A
Dangerous activities.
B
Sounds that animals can produce.
C
Excitement.
D
The types of flight of some bees.
E
Types of insects.
1578ad9e-fd
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Considering the text, fill the parenthesis with T (true) or F (false):

( ) The drones can drop seeds in places which are hard to access.
( ) The drones will make a lot of noise, which can pose a risk to nature.
( ) Fletcher and his team expect that the drones will have a positive impact in the long run
( ) The drones can only help spread tree species.
( ) Despite being simple, BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is efficient.

The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:

Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


(Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

A
T-F-T-T-F
B
T-F-T-T-T
C
F-F-F-T-T
D
T-F-T-F-T
E
F-T-F-T-T
157586c9-fd
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the text, the drones can:

Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


(Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

A
Plant more than 40.000 seeds a day
B
Assess the health of sprouts and saplings.
C
Prevent deforestation in South Africa and Amazonian jungles.
D
Plant seeds that farmers cannot.
E
Improve the quality of seeds.
15711d80-fd
UNICENTRO 2017 - Inglês - Vocabulário | Vocabulary, Sinônimos | Synonyms

The word input is closest in meaning to:

View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'

A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of gunfire.

On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet; on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.

For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much shared affection, culture, art and memory.

Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find protection. It has been 218 days of fear.

All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work. We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.

Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised by the government.

We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of those who live with the consequences of failed policies. 

As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.

But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied. The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.

(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-
promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
A
Entrance
B
Put in
C
Source
D
Judgement
E
Opinion