Português
Interpretação de TextosUECE · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
Sobre o uso do verbo dicendi na introdução da
fala das personagens no conto de Dalton Trevisan, é
correto afirmar que
Questões do ENEM: Linguagens e nível médio
Use os filtros para chegar às questões que interessam. Cada resultado abre em uma página própria com enunciado, alternativas e gabarito.
Resultados
8.516 questões encontradas. Mostrando a página 153 de 426.
16504C4A-CB 164D0467-CB Português
Interpretação de TextosUECE · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosHá várias passagens do conto em que o narrador procura mostrar o descaso das pessoas diante do ataque e da morte de Dario. Assinale a opção que corresponde ao trecho do conto que NÃO revela este descaso.164988AB-CB Português
Coesão e coerênciaUECE · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosNo conto, o pronome lhe recupera, muitas vezes, o referente “Dario” para evitar repetições do nome da personagem principal. Atente às seguintes afirmações sobre o uso deste pronome no texto:
I. A ocorrência do lhe no enunciado “Abriu-lhe o paletó, o colarinho, a gravata e a cinta” (linhas 15-16), tem a mesma função sintática e textual do uso do lhe em “Quando lhe retiraram os sapatos”. (linha 17)
II. Em “Dario roncou feio e bolhas de espuma surgiram no canto da boca” (linhas 17-19), pode-se acrescentar o lhe ao segundo período (“surgiram-lhe no canto da boca”) que terá função sintática e textual semelhante à do emprego deste pronome utilizado em “Abriu-lhe o paletó, o colarinho, a gravata e a cinta”. (linhas 15-16)
III. No enunciado “Enxame de moscas lhe cobriu o rosto, sem que fizesse um gesto para espantá-las” (linhas 42-44), o pronome lhe não está relacionado sintaticamente ao verbo “cobrir”, mas ao substantivo “rosto”, indicando a ideia de posse.
IV. O pronome lhe utilizado nos enunciados “Um terceiro sugeriu que lhe examinassem os papéis” (linhas 50-51) e “Um senhor piedoso despiu o paletó de Dario para lhe sustentar a cabeça” (linhas 73-74) só pôde ser usado, nestes casos, porque se retoma um referente do gênero masculino no singular.
Está correto o que se afirma em
1641C9EE-CB Português
Interpretação de TextosUECE · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosCom relação ao estilo da linguagem presente no conto de Dalton Trevisan, NÃO é lícito dizer queD5E52A2E-BB Inglês
Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehensionUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
You missed the starting gun (ℓ. 12)
The fragment above ends the metaphor created in the second stanza.
This metaphor establishes a connection between “life” and the following element:
D5DD575E-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
A QUESTÃO REFERE-SE À OBRA “O ALIENISTA”, DE MACHADO DE ASSIS.
Em 1879, Machado de Assis escreve o artigo “A nova geração”, no qual sustenta a tese de que o Realismo “não presta para nada”.
“O alienista” expõe essa mesma tese sob a forma ficcional, já que o personagem Dr. Bacamarte pode ser compreendido, em relação ao Realismo, como:
D5D98F7C-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosA QUESTÃO REFERE-SE À OBRA “O ALIENISTA”, DE MACHADO DE ASSIS.
Além de se opor ao cientificismo dogmático do século XIX, “O alienista” também põe em xeque práticas de outros grupos da sociedade da época.
A narração da revolta dos Canjicas e da postura de seu líder, o barbeiro Porfírio, tem como alvo o grupo dos:
D5CB3A48-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosA QUESTÃO REFERE-SE À OBRA “O ALIENISTA”, DE MACHADO DE ASSIS.
No início do capítulo I, o médico Simão Bacamarte explica que se casou com D. Evarista porque ela “estava assim apta para dar-lhe filhos robustos, sãos e inteligentes”, mas logo em seguida observa que ela “não lhe deu filhos robustos nem mofinos”.
As duas informações do personagem anunciam para o leitor o seguinte tom predominante da narrativa:
D5C70CF4-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosA QUESTÃO REFERE-SE À OBRA “O ALIENISTA”, DE MACHADO DE ASSIS.
Ao final do texto “Violência e psiquiatria” (ℓ. 19-21), David Cooper introduz um comentário a respeito da fronteira entre sanidade e loucura.
Esse comentário dialoga com questão fundamental de “O alienista”, apresentada no seguinte trecho:
D5BE1F32-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosDavid Cooper dirige uma crítica à psiquiatria quando esta define saúde como ausência de doença e, desse modo, acaba por não definir adequadamente a própria doença mental.
Essa forma de definição incorre em um sofisma conhecido como:
D5B64845-BB Português
Coesão e coerênciaUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
Está 100% estabelecido que esses genes não têm nenhuma influência sobre qualquer traço comportamental ou intelectual. (ℓ. 37-38)
Para introduzir a frase acima, mantendo a coerência com a que a precede, pode ser utilizada a seguinte expressão:
D5B210F4-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosNo último parágrafo, o autor expressa uma crítica à teoria de Linnaeus, por reconhecer na classificação que este propôs o seguinte problema:D58E4E7D-BB Português
Flexão verbal de tempo (presente, pretérito, futuro)UERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
Por exemplo, “A busca pela compreensão cósmica” é uma das aulas, na qual apresento a evolução dos modelos que temos do universo. (ℓ. 23-24)
No trecho, a forma verbal sublinhada expressa uma ação que se caracteriza como:
D58A07A3-BB Português
Interpretação de TextosUERJ · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosPara atingir seus propósitos, o curso oferecido pelo autor explora uma estratégia baseada no seguinte aspecto da linguagem:F810BF7C-A6 Inglês
Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehensionUEMG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosTaking into account the following image and the comment made by the husband, what will probably be Loretta’s gift this Christmas?
Disponível em <http://comicskingdom.com/blog/2014/12/02/tuesday-s-top-ten-comics-holiday-shopping-gift-giving>Acesso em: 15 nov. 2017.F80D839C-A6 Inglês
Adjetivos | AdjectivesUEMG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosBrazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
In the excerpt “Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist”, the expression “stray bullet” isF80A1DA4-A6 Inglês
Adjetivos | AdjectivesUEMG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosBrazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Consider the following excerpt: “Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments.” Mark the option which best describes the use of some words in the excerpt.F806E2C5-A6 Inglês
Pronomes | PronounsUEMG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosBrazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Considering the excerpt “[...] it has disrupted the daily life of the community […]”, and the context it was taken from, mark the correct option regarding the pronoun “it”.F8039041-A6 Inglês
Verbos | VerbsUEMG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosBrazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Taking into account the excerpt: “Brazil must legalise drugs”, mark the option which best describes the word “must” in the aforementioned context.F7FFF2B5-A6 Inglês
Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehensionUEMG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritosBrazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
The text expresses the opinion of a top Brazilian judge about drugs. Mark the correct answer concerning the subject matter discussed throughout the essay.