Questões do ENEM: Linguagens e Universidade Estadual de Goiás (UEG)

Use os filtros para chegar às questões que interessam. Cada resultado abre em uma página própria com enunciado, alternativas e gabarito.

Resultados

392 questões encontradas. Mostrando a página 7 de 20.

  • 6673D62C-C3

    Inglês

    Aspectos linguísticos | Linguistic aspects
    UEG · 2019DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.

    Forest fires: the good and the bad

    Every year it seems like there’s another disastrous wildfire in the American West. In 2018, nearly 9 million acres were burned in the US alone. Uncontrolled fires often started accidentally by people, rampage and decimate forests. F

    or most people, a forest fire is synonymous with disaster. But there are some kinds of forest fires that actually benefit the environment.

    A controlled burn is a wildfire that people set intentionally for a specific purpose. Well-thought-out and wellmanaged controlled burns can be incredibly beneficial for forest management—in part because they can help stop an out-of-control wildfire. The technique is called backburning, and it involves setting a controlled fire in the path of the approaching wildfire. All the flammable material is burnt up and extinguished. When the wildfire approaches, there’s no more fuel left for it to keep going, and it dies out.

    Controlled burns are also used to prevent forest fires. Even before human involvement, natural, low-intensity wildfires occurred every few years to burn up fuel, plant debris, and dead trees, making way for young, healthy trees and vegetation to thrive. That new growth in turn supports forest wildlife. Forest managers are now replicating this natural strategy when appropriate, starting manageable, slow-burning fires to make room for new life that will help keep the forest healthy in the long term.

    The same method is one of WWF’s strategies for maintaining grassland habitats in the Northern Great Plains. Working with partners such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, WWF has intentionally burned hundreds of acres of prairie land to revitalize these key habitats. The fire burns off tall, aggressive vegetation that isn’t as hospitable to wildlife, and makes room for new growth that attracts bison, birds, and prairie dogs.

    This doesn’t mean all intentional wildfires are good – far from it. Many of the fires intentionally set for agriculture and land clearing are at best ill-advised, and at worst devastating. Slash and burn fires are set every day to destroy large sections of forests. Of course, these forests don’t just remove trees; they kill and displace wildlife, alter water cycles and soil fertility, and endanger the lives and livelihoods of local communities. They also can rage out of control. In 1997, fires set intentionally to clear forests in Indonesia escalated into one of the largest wildfires in recorded history. Hundreds of people died; millions of acres burned; already at-risk species like orangutans perished by the hundreds; and a smoke and ash haze hung over southeast Asia for months, reducing visibility and causing acute health conditions.

    That’s exactly why WWF helps governments around the world crack down on slash and burn deforestation. WWF also works with farmers and companies to stop unnecessary agricultural burns. And when our scientists think fire could be the best solution for revitalizing wild areas, we bring the right experts to the table to study the situation and come up with a plan.

    All fire is risky. To minimize that risk as much as possible, controlled burns must be well-considered, wellplanned, and ignited and maintained by trained professionals. The bottom line? Fire can be a tool for conservation, but only when used the right way.

    Disponível em: https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/forest-fires-the-good-and-the-bad. Acesso em: 08 out. 2019

    Analisando os aspectos linguísticos da língua inglesa presentes no texto, constata-se que
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 6673d62c-c3
  • 6670EB84-C3

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    UEG · 2019DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.

    Forest fires: the good and the bad

    Every year it seems like there’s another disastrous wildfire in the American West. In 2018, nearly 9 million acres were burned in the US alone. Uncontrolled fires often started accidentally by people, rampage and decimate forests. F

    or most people, a forest fire is synonymous with disaster. But there are some kinds of forest fires that actually benefit the environment.

    A controlled burn is a wildfire that people set intentionally for a specific purpose. Well-thought-out and wellmanaged controlled burns can be incredibly beneficial for forest management—in part because they can help stop an out-of-control wildfire. The technique is called backburning, and it involves setting a controlled fire in the path of the approaching wildfire. All the flammable material is burnt up and extinguished. When the wildfire approaches, there’s no more fuel left for it to keep going, and it dies out.

    Controlled burns are also used to prevent forest fires. Even before human involvement, natural, low-intensity wildfires occurred every few years to burn up fuel, plant debris, and dead trees, making way for young, healthy trees and vegetation to thrive. That new growth in turn supports forest wildlife. Forest managers are now replicating this natural strategy when appropriate, starting manageable, slow-burning fires to make room for new life that will help keep the forest healthy in the long term.

    The same method is one of WWF’s strategies for maintaining grassland habitats in the Northern Great Plains. Working with partners such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, WWF has intentionally burned hundreds of acres of prairie land to revitalize these key habitats. The fire burns off tall, aggressive vegetation that isn’t as hospitable to wildlife, and makes room for new growth that attracts bison, birds, and prairie dogs.

    This doesn’t mean all intentional wildfires are good – far from it. Many of the fires intentionally set for agriculture and land clearing are at best ill-advised, and at worst devastating. Slash and burn fires are set every day to destroy large sections of forests. Of course, these forests don’t just remove trees; they kill and displace wildlife, alter water cycles and soil fertility, and endanger the lives and livelihoods of local communities. They also can rage out of control. In 1997, fires set intentionally to clear forests in Indonesia escalated into one of the largest wildfires in recorded history. Hundreds of people died; millions of acres burned; already at-risk species like orangutans perished by the hundreds; and a smoke and ash haze hung over southeast Asia for months, reducing visibility and causing acute health conditions.

    That’s exactly why WWF helps governments around the world crack down on slash and burn deforestation. WWF also works with farmers and companies to stop unnecessary agricultural burns. And when our scientists think fire could be the best solution for revitalizing wild areas, we bring the right experts to the table to study the situation and come up with a plan.

    All fire is risky. To minimize that risk as much as possible, controlled burns must be well-considered, wellplanned, and ignited and maintained by trained professionals. The bottom line? Fire can be a tool for conservation, but only when used the right way.

    Disponível em: https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/forest-fires-the-good-and-the-bad. Acesso em: 08 out. 2019

    De acordo com o texto, em termos de sentido, verifica se que
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 6670eb84-c3
  • 666D1B9E-C3

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    UEG · 2019DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.

    Forest fires: the good and the bad

    Every year it seems like there’s another disastrous wildfire in the American West. In 2018, nearly 9 million acres were burned in the US alone. Uncontrolled fires often started accidentally by people, rampage and decimate forests. F

    or most people, a forest fire is synonymous with disaster. But there are some kinds of forest fires that actually benefit the environment.

    A controlled burn is a wildfire that people set intentionally for a specific purpose. Well-thought-out and wellmanaged controlled burns can be incredibly beneficial for forest management—in part because they can help stop an out-of-control wildfire. The technique is called backburning, and it involves setting a controlled fire in the path of the approaching wildfire. All the flammable material is burnt up and extinguished. When the wildfire approaches, there’s no more fuel left for it to keep going, and it dies out.

    Controlled burns are also used to prevent forest fires. Even before human involvement, natural, low-intensity wildfires occurred every few years to burn up fuel, plant debris, and dead trees, making way for young, healthy trees and vegetation to thrive. That new growth in turn supports forest wildlife. Forest managers are now replicating this natural strategy when appropriate, starting manageable, slow-burning fires to make room for new life that will help keep the forest healthy in the long term.

    The same method is one of WWF’s strategies for maintaining grassland habitats in the Northern Great Plains. Working with partners such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, WWF has intentionally burned hundreds of acres of prairie land to revitalize these key habitats. The fire burns off tall, aggressive vegetation that isn’t as hospitable to wildlife, and makes room for new growth that attracts bison, birds, and prairie dogs.

    This doesn’t mean all intentional wildfires are good – far from it. Many of the fires intentionally set for agriculture and land clearing are at best ill-advised, and at worst devastating. Slash and burn fires are set every day to destroy large sections of forests. Of course, these forests don’t just remove trees; they kill and displace wildlife, alter water cycles and soil fertility, and endanger the lives and livelihoods of local communities. They also can rage out of control. In 1997, fires set intentionally to clear forests in Indonesia escalated into one of the largest wildfires in recorded history. Hundreds of people died; millions of acres burned; already at-risk species like orangutans perished by the hundreds; and a smoke and ash haze hung over southeast Asia for months, reducing visibility and causing acute health conditions.

    That’s exactly why WWF helps governments around the world crack down on slash and burn deforestation. WWF also works with farmers and companies to stop unnecessary agricultural burns. And when our scientists think fire could be the best solution for revitalizing wild areas, we bring the right experts to the table to study the situation and come up with a plan.

    All fire is risky. To minimize that risk as much as possible, controlled burns must be well-considered, wellplanned, and ignited and maintained by trained professionals. The bottom line? Fire can be a tool for conservation, but only when used the right way.

    Disponível em: https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/forest-fires-the-good-and-the-bad. Acesso em: 08 out. 2019

    According to the ideas expressed in the text, we verify that
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 666d1b9e-c3
  • 9C737F55-C5

    Português

    Interpretação de Textos
    UEG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir.


    A base de toda teoria médica medieval sobre paixões ou acidentes da alma encontra-se na autoridade das obras de Cláudio Galeno (130 – 200?), médico que viveu e escreveu sua extensa obra no II século, na Roma Imperial [...]. Essa teoria médica defendia a relação estreita entre corpo e alma. Assim, as paixões da alma ou ainda os acidentes (outra expressão encontrada em obras médicas) eram considerados movimentos psicossomáticos efetivos relacionados diretamente ao corpo e indiretamente à alma.

    SANTOS, D. O. A. dos. Paixões da alma, melancolia e medicina (século XIII – XV). In: MACEDO, J. R. A Idade Média no Brasil. Porto Alegre: Vidráguas, 2011. p. 108 - 109.


    De acordo com a medicina medieval, o órgão central dessa relação entre corpo e alma era o

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c737f55-c5
  • 9C3A92A2-C5

    Literatura

    Barroco
    UEG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Observe a imagem a seguir para responder às questão.


    Imagem da questão de Literatura, da prova de 2018

    A pintura apresentada filia-se ao Barroco, o que esteticamente se evidencia pelo
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c3a92a2-c5
  • 9C33FE59-C5

    Português

    Gêneros Textuais
    UEG · 2018FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.


    Imagem da questão de Português, da prova de 2018

    O texto “Percepção e cognição”, de Mário Perini, apresenta elementos que o caracterizam como
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c33fe59-c5
  • 9C2F8C15-C5

    Português

    Interpretação de Textos
    UEG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.


    Imagem da questão de Português, da prova de 2018

    De acordo com o autor, quando as pessoas aprendem a língua materna, aprendem a não prestar atenção às diferenças de som que não são importantes para a comunicação (linhas 26-29). No entanto, há casos em que essas diferenças não só são percebidas, mas também podem chamar bastante atenção. Isso é um dos objetos de estudo da Sociolinguística e acontece, por exemplo, quando
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c2f8c15-c5
  • 9C2B644D-C5

    Português

    Interpretação de Textos
    UEG · 2018FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.


    Imagem da questão de Português, da prova de 2018

    No trecho que vai da linha 5 à linha 13, o autor defende suas ideias com base em argumentos
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c2b644d-c5
  • 9C27D00F-C5

    Português

    Gêneros Textuais
    UEG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o soneto a seguir para responder à questão


    Tome, Dr., esta tesoura, e... corte 
    Minha singularíssima pessoa. 
    Que importa a mim que a bicharia roa 
    Todo o meu coração, depois da morte?!

    Ah! Um urubu pousou na minha sorte! 
    Também, das diatomáceas da lagoa 
    A criptógama cápsula se esbroa 
    Ao contacto de bronca destra forte!

    Dissolva-se, portanto, minha vida 
    Igualmente a uma célula caída 
    Na aberração de um óvulo infecundo;

    Mas o agregado abstrato das saudades 
    Fique batendo nas perpétuas grades 
    Do último verso que eu fizer no mundo! 


                            ANJOS, Augusto dos. Budismo moderno. In: Eu e outros poemas. 30. ed. Rio de janeiro: Livraria São José, 1965. p. 84. 

    Quanto à distribuição ao longo do poema, nota-se, nas duas primeiras estrofes, respectivamente, a presença de rimas
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c27d00f-c5
  • 9C243E47-C5

    Português

    Interpretação de Textos
    UEG · 2018DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o soneto a seguir para responder à questão


    Tome, Dr., esta tesoura, e... corte 
    Minha singularíssima pessoa. 
    Que importa a mim que a bicharia roa 
    Todo o meu coração, depois da morte?!

    Ah! Um urubu pousou na minha sorte! 
    Também, das diatomáceas da lagoa 
    A criptógama cápsula se esbroa 
    Ao contacto de bronca destra forte!

    Dissolva-se, portanto, minha vida 
    Igualmente a uma célula caída 
    Na aberração de um óvulo infecundo;

    Mas o agregado abstrato das saudades 
    Fique batendo nas perpétuas grades 
    Do último verso que eu fizer no mundo! 


                            ANJOS, Augusto dos. Budismo moderno. In: Eu e outros poemas. 30. ed. Rio de janeiro: Livraria São José, 1965. p. 84. 

    Tem-se, no soneto apresentado, uma sugestão de que
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c243e47-c5
  • 9C171E17-C5

    Português

    Interpretação de Textos
    UEG · 2018FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia o fragmento a seguir para responder à questão.


    Imagem da questão de Português, da prova de 2018

    Tem-se, no excerto apresentado, o retrato de uma mulher que
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c171e17-c5
  • 9C0E0F18-C5

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    UEG · 2018DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons

        The United States remains committed to the goal of nuclear disarmament, and to seeking to create conditions toward that end. And history makes clear that important progress can be made when security conditions allow. The easing of Cold War rivalries allowed the United States and Russia to make significant steps toward the shared dream of eventual nuclear disarmament after decades in which such movement was impossible. Disarmament success is predicated on patience, attention to detail, effective verification, and patient attention to the challenges of effecting the changes in the security environment that are necessary for progress. This last element is critical, considering the crucial role that nuclear deterrence plays in preserving and protecting international peace and security, and the potentially catastrophic consequences were deterrence’s restraining effect to be removed while it still remains necessary.

        The “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” violates all these tenets. Its obligations are longstanding worded, imprecise, vaguely worded and sometimes internally contradictory, while offering only an empty shell for verification. Worse, it is fundamentally at odds with today’s security challenges. It is not simply an unproductive instrument; it is likely to be a counterproductive one, with the potential to cause lasting harm to the nonproliferation regime and to the cause of disarmament alike.

        The ban treaty is based on the premise that addressing crucial international security issues is not necessary for disarmament. Ban treaty proponents would have us believe that we can do away with nuclear deterrence despite - to cite just one example - the danger posed by North Korea’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems, which stand in flagrant violation of international law.

         Furthermore, the Treaty does not contain a credible verification mechanism, demurring on the issue almost entirely. It does run counter to decades of progress in nonproliferation verification by endorsing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement as its standard for safeguarding nuclear material.

        Finally, the ban treaty has the potential to do real damage to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in other ways. It exacerbates political tensions on disarmament, dividing states into overly-simplified camps of “nuclear weapons supporters” and “nuclear weapons banners,” rather than recognizing shared interests – especially on the challenges involved in creating the conditions that would make possible further disarmament progress. Reinforcing this false dichotomy and worsening the world’s polarization on disarmament will make further progress within the institutions that have been vehicles for success, such as the NPT review process, significantly more difficult.

        Inspired by the NPT Preamble’s acknowledgement of the need to ease international tension and strengthen trust between States in order to facilitate disarmament, the United States stands ready to work with others on effective measures to create improved conditions for nuclear disarmament. This work is focused on overcoming technical challenges to make substantive progress when the security conditions improve. We also continue our longstanding work to support and strengthen the global nonproliferation regime against the many challenges it faces today, for who could deny that there can be no way to envision today’s nuclear weapons possessors ever putting down such tools without rock-solid assurances that no one else will take them up?

        There are no shortcuts to nuclear disarmament. Unrealistic attempts to skip to the finish line have the potential to undermine the institutions and standards we have worked so hard to build. Our collective experience demonstrates that inclusiveness and the search for consensus can lead to progress, while polarization is a recipe for failure. We urge all states to work with us in searching for common solutions to collective problems, pursuing a more secure world.

    Considerando-se os elementos de estrutura e forma da língua inglesa, constata-se que
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c0e0f18-c5
  • 9C096EA3-C5

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    UEG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons

        The United States remains committed to the goal of nuclear disarmament, and to seeking to create conditions toward that end. And history makes clear that important progress can be made when security conditions allow. The easing of Cold War rivalries allowed the United States and Russia to make significant steps toward the shared dream of eventual nuclear disarmament after decades in which such movement was impossible. Disarmament success is predicated on patience, attention to detail, effective verification, and patient attention to the challenges of effecting the changes in the security environment that are necessary for progress. This last element is critical, considering the crucial role that nuclear deterrence plays in preserving and protecting international peace and security, and the potentially catastrophic consequences were deterrence’s restraining effect to be removed while it still remains necessary.

        The “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” violates all these tenets. Its obligations are longstanding worded, imprecise, vaguely worded and sometimes internally contradictory, while offering only an empty shell for verification. Worse, it is fundamentally at odds with today’s security challenges. It is not simply an unproductive instrument; it is likely to be a counterproductive one, with the potential to cause lasting harm to the nonproliferation regime and to the cause of disarmament alike.

        The ban treaty is based on the premise that addressing crucial international security issues is not necessary for disarmament. Ban treaty proponents would have us believe that we can do away with nuclear deterrence despite - to cite just one example - the danger posed by North Korea’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems, which stand in flagrant violation of international law.

         Furthermore, the Treaty does not contain a credible verification mechanism, demurring on the issue almost entirely. It does run counter to decades of progress in nonproliferation verification by endorsing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement as its standard for safeguarding nuclear material.

        Finally, the ban treaty has the potential to do real damage to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in other ways. It exacerbates political tensions on disarmament, dividing states into overly-simplified camps of “nuclear weapons supporters” and “nuclear weapons banners,” rather than recognizing shared interests – especially on the challenges involved in creating the conditions that would make possible further disarmament progress. Reinforcing this false dichotomy and worsening the world’s polarization on disarmament will make further progress within the institutions that have been vehicles for success, such as the NPT review process, significantly more difficult.

        Inspired by the NPT Preamble’s acknowledgement of the need to ease international tension and strengthen trust between States in order to facilitate disarmament, the United States stands ready to work with others on effective measures to create improved conditions for nuclear disarmament. This work is focused on overcoming technical challenges to make substantive progress when the security conditions improve. We also continue our longstanding work to support and strengthen the global nonproliferation regime against the many challenges it faces today, for who could deny that there can be no way to envision today’s nuclear weapons possessors ever putting down such tools without rock-solid assurances that no one else will take them up?

        There are no shortcuts to nuclear disarmament. Unrealistic attempts to skip to the finish line have the potential to undermine the institutions and standards we have worked so hard to build. Our collective experience demonstrates that inclusiveness and the search for consensus can lead to progress, while polarization is a recipe for failure. We urge all states to work with us in searching for common solutions to collective problems, pursuing a more secure world.

    De acordo com o texto, em termos de sentido, verifica-se que
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c096ea3-c5
  • 9C052E64-C5

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    UEG · 2018MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons

        The United States remains committed to the goal of nuclear disarmament, and to seeking to create conditions toward that end. And history makes clear that important progress can be made when security conditions allow. The easing of Cold War rivalries allowed the United States and Russia to make significant steps toward the shared dream of eventual nuclear disarmament after decades in which such movement was impossible. Disarmament success is predicated on patience, attention to detail, effective verification, and patient attention to the challenges of effecting the changes in the security environment that are necessary for progress. This last element is critical, considering the crucial role that nuclear deterrence plays in preserving and protecting international peace and security, and the potentially catastrophic consequences were deterrence’s restraining effect to be removed while it still remains necessary.

        The “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” violates all these tenets. Its obligations are longstanding worded, imprecise, vaguely worded and sometimes internally contradictory, while offering only an empty shell for verification. Worse, it is fundamentally at odds with today’s security challenges. It is not simply an unproductive instrument; it is likely to be a counterproductive one, with the potential to cause lasting harm to the nonproliferation regime and to the cause of disarmament alike.

        The ban treaty is based on the premise that addressing crucial international security issues is not necessary for disarmament. Ban treaty proponents would have us believe that we can do away with nuclear deterrence despite - to cite just one example - the danger posed by North Korea’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems, which stand in flagrant violation of international law.

         Furthermore, the Treaty does not contain a credible verification mechanism, demurring on the issue almost entirely. It does run counter to decades of progress in nonproliferation verification by endorsing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement as its standard for safeguarding nuclear material.

        Finally, the ban treaty has the potential to do real damage to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in other ways. It exacerbates political tensions on disarmament, dividing states into overly-simplified camps of “nuclear weapons supporters” and “nuclear weapons banners,” rather than recognizing shared interests – especially on the challenges involved in creating the conditions that would make possible further disarmament progress. Reinforcing this false dichotomy and worsening the world’s polarization on disarmament will make further progress within the institutions that have been vehicles for success, such as the NPT review process, significantly more difficult.

        Inspired by the NPT Preamble’s acknowledgement of the need to ease international tension and strengthen trust between States in order to facilitate disarmament, the United States stands ready to work with others on effective measures to create improved conditions for nuclear disarmament. This work is focused on overcoming technical challenges to make substantive progress when the security conditions improve. We also continue our longstanding work to support and strengthen the global nonproliferation regime against the many challenges it faces today, for who could deny that there can be no way to envision today’s nuclear weapons possessors ever putting down such tools without rock-solid assurances that no one else will take them up?

        There are no shortcuts to nuclear disarmament. Unrealistic attempts to skip to the finish line have the potential to undermine the institutions and standards we have worked so hard to build. Our collective experience demonstrates that inclusiveness and the search for consensus can lead to progress, while polarization is a recipe for failure. We urge all states to work with us in searching for common solutions to collective problems, pursuing a more secure world.

    According to the information expressed in the text, we verify that
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 9c052e64-c5