Questões do ENEM: Verbos | Verbs

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

Resultados

256 questões encontradas. Mostrando a página 2 de 13.

  • 3458AAF6-0F

    Inglês

    Verbos | Verbs
    UFGD · 2023MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Why does Nature Loss Matter?


    Nature is our life-support system. From the fresh air we (1) breathe to the clean water we (2) drink, nature (3) provides the essentials we all rely on for our survival and well-being. And it also holds the key to our (4) prosperity, with millions of livelihoods and much of our economic activity also depending on the natural world. These immense (5) benefits to humanity, estimated to be worth around US$ 125 trillion a year, are only possible if we maintain a rich (6) diversity of wildlife.


    Available in: https://explore.panda.org/newdeal?gclid=Cj0KCQjwgO2XBhCaARIsANrW2X0IIHXhC2iCZHBBoQAx6UyJdDDUy2p-hWYPGlbDTblY7kfNin2Y2GoaAvVGEALw_wcB#why. Access in: 16 Aug. 2022.

    De acordo com o texto, assinale a alternativa que indica a classificação correta das palavras destacadas.

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 3458aaf6-0f
  • B09B7533-04

    Inglês

    Adjetivos | Adjectives
    UFGD · 2023MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    What is mindful eating?

    Mindfulness is the practice of being present in the moment, and observing the inputs flooding your senses. At meal time: "Think about how the food looks, how it tastes and smells. What's the texture? What memories does it bring up? How does it make you feel?" Burton Murray asks. By being mindful at meals, you'll slow the eating process, pay more attention to your body's hunger and fullness cues, and perhaps avoid overeating. "It makes you take a step back and make decisions about what you're eating, rather than just going through the automatic process of see food, take food, eat food," Burton Murray says.

    Set yourself up for success in being mindful when you eat by: Removing distractions. Turn off phones, TVs, and computers. Eat in a peaceful, uncluttered space.

    Pacing yourself for a 20-minute meal. Chew your food slowly and put your fork down between bites.


    Captura_de tela 2025-03-18 113239.png (491×250)


    Disponible in: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/overeating-mindfulness-exercises-may-help-202203282714. Access in: May, 15 2023 (adapted).


    Choose the correct alternative.
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão b09b7533-04
  • D6CFE743-C0

    Inglês

    Verbos | Verbs
    PUC - RS · 2023DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    INSTRUÇÃO: Responder à questão com base no texto 2. 

    TEXTO 2

    STATELESSNESS
    NEWSLETTER
    #IBELONG CAMPAIGN
    Celebrating its 6th anniversary

    2_-10.png (374×265)

    UNHCR 2020 Youth With Refugees Art Contest.
    ©UNHCR/Faida
    The alternative that presents three verbs that can relate to the message of Text 2 is
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão d6cfe743-c0
  • FA8AC7CE-73

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    Faculdade Evangélica Mackenzie do Paraná · 2022Entre para guardar nos favoritos
    Read the following text and answer the question.

    The “Modern Physician” needs to embrace technology

    February 12, 2021
    Veronica Diaz, MD

    texto_1.jpg (236×139)

            Even before the COVID-19 pandemic forced health systems and private practices to implement technology solutions such as telehealth, the evolution toward a more tech-savvy healthcare experience was firmly underway. The days of carting paper charts and hard film x-rays has been broadly supplanted with cloudbased electronic health records and digital Picture Archiving Communications Systems (PACS). The pandemic has made those previously reticent to adopt technology wake up to its necessity.

            Practicing medicine today requires a higher degree of technical literacy than ever before, and the challenges of the pandemic have only reinforced and accelerated that trend. We have reached an inflection point in the industry where clinical expertise is not the only prerequisite for a successful career. Physicians who familiarize, vet, and incorporate new technology into their practices will likely be in the best position to deliver optimal care. 

    From: https://www.physicianspractice.com/view/ the-modern-physician-needs-to-embrace-technology
    In the first sentence, the author makes clear that technology in healthcare had been evolving
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa8ac7ce-73
  • 45663986-DF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    CEDERJ · 2022Muito fácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    WHAT IS SOCIAL MEDIA ADDICTION?


    Whether you use social media to connect with friends and loved ones, watch videos, or simply “kill time,” the popularity of this pastime has increased significantly over the last decade. This is especially the case in children and teenagers, as well as young to middle-aged adults.

    So, how does a seemingly harmless hobby turn into an “addiction”?

    Like other types of behavioral addictions, using social media can influence your brain in harmful ways. Moreover, you may use social media compulsively and excessively. You can also become so accustomed to scrolling through posts, images, and videos that it interferes with other areas of your life.

    Not everyone who uses social media will develop an addiction. Since this activity is becoming more accessible to more people, though, more people may develop an addiction to social media at some point in their lives.


    How do you know if you have social media addiction?


    A mental health professional can help you determine whether you truly have social media addiction or just really enjoy using it a lot. But there are a few key differences between social media addiction and a habit that you enjoy. These include:


     negative effects to your job or schoolwork due to the overuse of social media.

     increased use during other activities, such as hanging out with friends and family, or while eating.

     increased reliance on social media as a way to cope with problems.

     restlessness and irritability whenever you’re not using social media.

    • anger whenever social media usage is reduced.


    How can you decrease social media use and prevent its addiction?

    Consider the following tips to help you achieve a healthier balance with social media:


     Turn off your personal phone during work, as well as during school, meals, and recreational activities. You can also adjust the setting on each social media app so you can turn off certain notifications.

     Set aside a certain amount of time dedicated to social media per day. Turn on a timer to help keep you accountable.

     Take up a new hobby that’s not technologyrelated. Examples include sports, art, cooking classes, and more. Let yourself be in control of your life — not your social media account.


    Available at: https://www.healthline.com/health/socialmedia-addiction#decreasing-use. Access: 30 April 2022.
    The use of the verbs in the imperative form (set aside, turn off, take up), in the third section of the article, indicates that the items in the list are:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 45663986-df
  • 13B34E72-A2

    Inglês

    Verbos | Verbs
    UECE · 2022MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    A Neurologist’s Tips to Protect Your Memory

    1_- 6.png (340×105)   
    7_- 32.png (355×466)
    33_- 67.png (353×627)
    68_- 99.png (356×574)
    100_- 128.png (360×518)
    129_- 138.png (359×178) 

    Adapted from: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/06/
    In "... if you've forgotten the name of someone you met at a cocktail party..." (lines 34-36), the tenses of the two verbs are, respectively
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 13b34e72-a2
  • 22121D06-8B

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    UNESP · 2021Entre para guardar nos favoritos

    Leia a tira para responder à questão.



    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021



    (https://thebrickinthesky.wordpress.com)

    No trecho do primeiro quadrinho “I guess we should start it over again”, o termo sublinhado pode ser substituído, sem alteração de sentido, por 
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 22121d06-8b
  • 96C471DF-74

    Inglês

    Verbos | Verbs
    UECE · 2021FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ 2021/sep/27/

    In “The analysis found that only those aged under 40 years today will live to see the consequences of the choices made on emission cuts.” (lines 111-114), the underlined verbs are respectively
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 96c471df-74
  • 96C1CFFB-74

    Inglês

    Adjetivos | Adjectives
    UECE · 2021FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ 2021/sep/27/

    The underlined words in “extreme heatwaves” (line 13), “current pledges” (lines 14- 15), “polluting countries” (line 32) function respectively as
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 96c1cffb-74
  • 96BCAC0D-74

    Inglês

    Futuro perfeito | Future perfect
    UECE · 2021MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ 2021/sep/27/

    In “Those who are older will have died before the impact of those choices” (lines 114-116), the verb tenses are 
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 96bcac0d-74
  • 96BA24C0-74

    Inglês

    Futuro simples | Simple future
    UECE · 2021FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ 2021/sep/27/

    The verbs in “The analysis showed that a child born in 2020 will endure an average of 30 extreme heatwaves in their lifetime” (lines 11-13) are respectively
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 96ba24c0-74
  • 778BD857-0B

    Inglês

    Análise sintática | Syntax Parsing
    UECE · 2021FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    The World Might Be Running Low on Americans


        The world has been stricken by scarcity. Our post-pandemic pantry has run bare of gasoline, lumber, microchips, chicken wings, ketchup packets, cat food, used cars and Chickfil-A sauce. Like the Great Toilet Paper Scare of 2020, though, many of these shortages are the consequence of near-term, Covid-related disruptions. Soon enough there will again be a chicken wing in every pot and more than enough condiments to go with it.


        But there is one recently announced potential shortage that should give Americans great reason for concern. It is a shortfall that the nation has rarely had to face, and nobody quite knows how things will work when we begin to run out.


        I speak, of course, of all of us: The world may be running low on Americans — most crucially, tomorrow’s working-age, childbearing, idea-generating, community-building young Americans. Late last month, the Census Bureau released the first results from its 2020 count, and the numbers confirmed what demographers have been warning of for years: The United States is undergoing “demographic stagnation,” transitioning from a relatively fast-growing country of young people to a slow-growing, older nation.


        Many Americans might consider slow growth a blessing. Your city could already be packed to the gills, the roads clogged with traffic and housing prices shooting through the roof. Why do we need more folks? And, anyway, aren’t we supposed to be conserving resources on a planet whose climate is changing? Yet demographic stagnation could bring its own high costs, among them a steady reduction in dynamism, productivity and a slowdown in national and individual prosperity, even a diminishment of global power.


        And there is no real reason we have to endure such a transition, not even an environmental one. Even if your own city is packed like tinned fish, the U.S. overall can accommodate millions more people. Most of the counties in the U.S. are losing working-age adults; if these declines persist, local economies will falter, tax bases will dry up, and local governments will struggle to maintain services. Growth is not just an option but a necessity — it’s not just that we can afford to have more people, it may be that we can’t afford not to.


        But how does a country get more people? There are two ways: Make them, and invite them in. Increasing the first is relatively difficult — birthrates are declining across the world, and while family-friendly policies may be beneficial for many reasons, they seem to do little to get people to have more babies. On the second method, though, the United States enjoys a significant advantage — people around the globe have long been clamoring to live here, notwithstanding our government’s recent hostility to foreigners. This fact presents a relatively simple policy solution to a vexing long-term issue: America needs more people, and the world has people to send us. All we have to do is let more of them in.


        For decades, the United States has enjoyed a significant economic advantage over other industrialized nations — our population was growing faster, which suggested a more youthful and more prosperous future. But in the last decade, American fertility has gone down. At the same time, there has been a slowdown in immigration.


        The Census Bureau’s latest numbers show that these trends are catching up with us. As of April 1, it reports that there were 331,449,281 residents in the United States, an increase of just 7.4 percent since 2010 — the second-smallest decade-long growth rate ever recorded, only slightly ahead of the 7.3 percent growth during the Depression-struck 1930s.


        The bureau projects that sometime next decade — that is, in the 2030s — Americans over 65 will outnumber Americans younger than 18 for the first time in our history. The nation will cross the 400-million population mark sometime in the late 2050s, but by then we’ll be quite long in the tooth — about half of Americans will be over 45, and one fifth will be older than 85.


        The idea that more people will lead to greater prosperity may sound counterintuitive — wouldn’t more people just consume more of our scarce resources? Human history generally refutes this simple intuition. Because more people usually make for more workers, more companies, and most fundamentally, more new ideas for pushing humanity forward, economic studies suggest that population growth is often an important catalyst of economic growth.


        A declining global population might be beneficial in some ways; fewer people would most likely mean less carbon emission, for example — though less than you might think, since leading climate models already assume slowing population growth over the coming century. And a declining population could be catastrophic in other ways. In a recent paper, Chad Jones, an economist at Stanford, argues that a global population decline could reduce the fundamental innovativeness of humankind. The theory is simple: Without enough people, the font of new ideas dries up, Jones argues; without new ideas, progress could be imperiled.


        There are more direct ways that slow growth can hurt us. As a country’s population grows heavy with retiring older people and light with working younger people, you get a problem of too many eaters and too few cooks. Programs for seniors like Social Security and Medicare may suffer as they become dependent on ever-fewer working taxpayers for funding. Another problem is the lack of people to do all the work. For instance, experts predict a major shortage of health care workers, especially home care workers, who will be needed to help the aging nation.


        In a recent report, Ali Noorani, the chief executive of the National Immigration Forum, an immigration-advocacy group, and a co-author, Danilo Zak, say that increasing legal immigration by slightly more than a third each year would keep America’s ratio of working young people to retired old people stable over the next four decades. 


        As an immigrant myself, I have to confess I find much of the demographic argument in favor of greater immigration quite a bit too anodyne. Immigrants bring a lot more to the United States than simply working-age bodies for toiling in pursuit of greater economic growth. I also believe that the United States’ founding idea of universal equality will never be fully realized until we recognize that people outside our borders are as worthy of our ideals as those here through an accident of birth.

    In “Another problem is the lack of people to do all the work” there is an example of
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 778bd857-0b
  • 7787FA1D-0B

    Inglês

    Passado perfeito | Past perfect
    UECE · 2021FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    The World Might Be Running Low on Americans


        The world has been stricken by scarcity. Our post-pandemic pantry has run bare of gasoline, lumber, microchips, chicken wings, ketchup packets, cat food, used cars and Chickfil-A sauce. Like the Great Toilet Paper Scare of 2020, though, many of these shortages are the consequence of near-term, Covid-related disruptions. Soon enough there will again be a chicken wing in every pot and more than enough condiments to go with it.


        But there is one recently announced potential shortage that should give Americans great reason for concern. It is a shortfall that the nation has rarely had to face, and nobody quite knows how things will work when we begin to run out.


        I speak, of course, of all of us: The world may be running low on Americans — most crucially, tomorrow’s working-age, childbearing, idea-generating, community-building young Americans. Late last month, the Census Bureau released the first results from its 2020 count, and the numbers confirmed what demographers have been warning of for years: The United States is undergoing “demographic stagnation,” transitioning from a relatively fast-growing country of young people to a slow-growing, older nation.


        Many Americans might consider slow growth a blessing. Your city could already be packed to the gills, the roads clogged with traffic and housing prices shooting through the roof. Why do we need more folks? And, anyway, aren’t we supposed to be conserving resources on a planet whose climate is changing? Yet demographic stagnation could bring its own high costs, among them a steady reduction in dynamism, productivity and a slowdown in national and individual prosperity, even a diminishment of global power.


        And there is no real reason we have to endure such a transition, not even an environmental one. Even if your own city is packed like tinned fish, the U.S. overall can accommodate millions more people. Most of the counties in the U.S. are losing working-age adults; if these declines persist, local economies will falter, tax bases will dry up, and local governments will struggle to maintain services. Growth is not just an option but a necessity — it’s not just that we can afford to have more people, it may be that we can’t afford not to.


        But how does a country get more people? There are two ways: Make them, and invite them in. Increasing the first is relatively difficult — birthrates are declining across the world, and while family-friendly policies may be beneficial for many reasons, they seem to do little to get people to have more babies. On the second method, though, the United States enjoys a significant advantage — people around the globe have long been clamoring to live here, notwithstanding our government’s recent hostility to foreigners. This fact presents a relatively simple policy solution to a vexing long-term issue: America needs more people, and the world has people to send us. All we have to do is let more of them in.


        For decades, the United States has enjoyed a significant economic advantage over other industrialized nations — our population was growing faster, which suggested a more youthful and more prosperous future. But in the last decade, American fertility has gone down. At the same time, there has been a slowdown in immigration.


        The Census Bureau’s latest numbers show that these trends are catching up with us. As of April 1, it reports that there were 331,449,281 residents in the United States, an increase of just 7.4 percent since 2010 — the second-smallest decade-long growth rate ever recorded, only slightly ahead of the 7.3 percent growth during the Depression-struck 1930s.


        The bureau projects that sometime next decade — that is, in the 2030s — Americans over 65 will outnumber Americans younger than 18 for the first time in our history. The nation will cross the 400-million population mark sometime in the late 2050s, but by then we’ll be quite long in the tooth — about half of Americans will be over 45, and one fifth will be older than 85.


        The idea that more people will lead to greater prosperity may sound counterintuitive — wouldn’t more people just consume more of our scarce resources? Human history generally refutes this simple intuition. Because more people usually make for more workers, more companies, and most fundamentally, more new ideas for pushing humanity forward, economic studies suggest that population growth is often an important catalyst of economic growth.


        A declining global population might be beneficial in some ways; fewer people would most likely mean less carbon emission, for example — though less than you might think, since leading climate models already assume slowing population growth over the coming century. And a declining population could be catastrophic in other ways. In a recent paper, Chad Jones, an economist at Stanford, argues that a global population decline could reduce the fundamental innovativeness of humankind. The theory is simple: Without enough people, the font of new ideas dries up, Jones argues; without new ideas, progress could be imperiled.


        There are more direct ways that slow growth can hurt us. As a country’s population grows heavy with retiring older people and light with working younger people, you get a problem of too many eaters and too few cooks. Programs for seniors like Social Security and Medicare may suffer as they become dependent on ever-fewer working taxpayers for funding. Another problem is the lack of people to do all the work. For instance, experts predict a major shortage of health care workers, especially home care workers, who will be needed to help the aging nation.


        In a recent report, Ali Noorani, the chief executive of the National Immigration Forum, an immigration-advocacy group, and a co-author, Danilo Zak, say that increasing legal immigration by slightly more than a third each year would keep America’s ratio of working young people to retired old people stable over the next four decades. 


        As an immigrant myself, I have to confess I find much of the demographic argument in favor of greater immigration quite a bit too anodyne. Immigrants bring a lot more to the United States than simply working-age bodies for toiling in pursuit of greater economic growth. I also believe that the United States’ founding idea of universal equality will never be fully realized until we recognize that people outside our borders are as worthy of our ideals as those here through an accident of birth.

    The verb tenses in "...our population was growing faster, which suggested a more youthful and prosperous future..." are, respectively,
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 7787fa1d-0b
  • 778456A0-0B

    Inglês

    Futuro perfeito | Future perfect
    UECE · 2021FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    The World Might Be Running Low on Americans


        The world has been stricken by scarcity. Our post-pandemic pantry has run bare of gasoline, lumber, microchips, chicken wings, ketchup packets, cat food, used cars and Chickfil-A sauce. Like the Great Toilet Paper Scare of 2020, though, many of these shortages are the consequence of near-term, Covid-related disruptions. Soon enough there will again be a chicken wing in every pot and more than enough condiments to go with it.


        But there is one recently announced potential shortage that should give Americans great reason for concern. It is a shortfall that the nation has rarely had to face, and nobody quite knows how things will work when we begin to run out.


        I speak, of course, of all of us: The world may be running low on Americans — most crucially, tomorrow’s working-age, childbearing, idea-generating, community-building young Americans. Late last month, the Census Bureau released the first results from its 2020 count, and the numbers confirmed what demographers have been warning of for years: The United States is undergoing “demographic stagnation,” transitioning from a relatively fast-growing country of young people to a slow-growing, older nation.


        Many Americans might consider slow growth a blessing. Your city could already be packed to the gills, the roads clogged with traffic and housing prices shooting through the roof. Why do we need more folks? And, anyway, aren’t we supposed to be conserving resources on a planet whose climate is changing? Yet demographic stagnation could bring its own high costs, among them a steady reduction in dynamism, productivity and a slowdown in national and individual prosperity, even a diminishment of global power.


        And there is no real reason we have to endure such a transition, not even an environmental one. Even if your own city is packed like tinned fish, the U.S. overall can accommodate millions more people. Most of the counties in the U.S. are losing working-age adults; if these declines persist, local economies will falter, tax bases will dry up, and local governments will struggle to maintain services. Growth is not just an option but a necessity — it’s not just that we can afford to have more people, it may be that we can’t afford not to.


        But how does a country get more people? There are two ways: Make them, and invite them in. Increasing the first is relatively difficult — birthrates are declining across the world, and while family-friendly policies may be beneficial for many reasons, they seem to do little to get people to have more babies. On the second method, though, the United States enjoys a significant advantage — people around the globe have long been clamoring to live here, notwithstanding our government’s recent hostility to foreigners. This fact presents a relatively simple policy solution to a vexing long-term issue: America needs more people, and the world has people to send us. All we have to do is let more of them in.


        For decades, the United States has enjoyed a significant economic advantage over other industrialized nations — our population was growing faster, which suggested a more youthful and more prosperous future. But in the last decade, American fertility has gone down. At the same time, there has been a slowdown in immigration.


        The Census Bureau’s latest numbers show that these trends are catching up with us. As of April 1, it reports that there were 331,449,281 residents in the United States, an increase of just 7.4 percent since 2010 — the second-smallest decade-long growth rate ever recorded, only slightly ahead of the 7.3 percent growth during the Depression-struck 1930s.


        The bureau projects that sometime next decade — that is, in the 2030s — Americans over 65 will outnumber Americans younger than 18 for the first time in our history. The nation will cross the 400-million population mark sometime in the late 2050s, but by then we’ll be quite long in the tooth — about half of Americans will be over 45, and one fifth will be older than 85.


        The idea that more people will lead to greater prosperity may sound counterintuitive — wouldn’t more people just consume more of our scarce resources? Human history generally refutes this simple intuition. Because more people usually make for more workers, more companies, and most fundamentally, more new ideas for pushing humanity forward, economic studies suggest that population growth is often an important catalyst of economic growth.


        A declining global population might be beneficial in some ways; fewer people would most likely mean less carbon emission, for example — though less than you might think, since leading climate models already assume slowing population growth over the coming century. And a declining population could be catastrophic in other ways. In a recent paper, Chad Jones, an economist at Stanford, argues that a global population decline could reduce the fundamental innovativeness of humankind. The theory is simple: Without enough people, the font of new ideas dries up, Jones argues; without new ideas, progress could be imperiled.


        There are more direct ways that slow growth can hurt us. As a country’s population grows heavy with retiring older people and light with working younger people, you get a problem of too many eaters and too few cooks. Programs for seniors like Social Security and Medicare may suffer as they become dependent on ever-fewer working taxpayers for funding. Another problem is the lack of people to do all the work. For instance, experts predict a major shortage of health care workers, especially home care workers, who will be needed to help the aging nation.


        In a recent report, Ali Noorani, the chief executive of the National Immigration Forum, an immigration-advocacy group, and a co-author, Danilo Zak, say that increasing legal immigration by slightly more than a third each year would keep America’s ratio of working young people to retired old people stable over the next four decades. 


        As an immigrant myself, I have to confess I find much of the demographic argument in favor of greater immigration quite a bit too anodyne. Immigrants bring a lot more to the United States than simply working-age bodies for toiling in pursuit of greater economic growth. I also believe that the United States’ founding idea of universal equality will never be fully realized until we recognize that people outside our borders are as worthy of our ideals as those here through an accident of birth.

    In the sentence “The bureau projects that sometime next decade — that is, in the 2030s — Americans over 65 will outnumber Americans younger than 18 for the first time in our history.” the verb tenses are, respectively,
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 778456a0-0b
  • A7FB324B-70

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
    Universidade de Pernambuco · 2021MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Text

    Volunteering is fun! 

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021


    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021


    Disponível em: https://learnenglishteens.britishcouncil.org/magazine/life-around-world/volunteering-fun. Texto adaptado. Acesso em: ago. 2020.

    Nesta análise linguística do texto, apenas uma afirmativa está INCORRETA. Assinale-a!
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão a7fb324b-70
  • DC5E8D6F-6E

    Inglês

    Falso Cognatos | False Cognates
    Universidade de Pernambuco · 2021MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021
    Imagem da questão de Inglês, da prova de 2021
    Considere a análise linguística elaborada para o texto e assinale a alternativa INCORRETA.
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão dc5e8d6f-6e
  • 7E764026-92

    Inglês

    Infinitivo e gerúndio | Infinitive and gerund
    UECE · 2020DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

    The United States is using more
    plastic than ever, and waste exported for
    recycling is often mishandled, according
    to a new study.
    The United States contribution
    to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
    significantly larger than previously
    thought, possibly by as much as five
    times, according to a study published
    Friday. The research, published in Science
    Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
    by the same authors. Two factors
    contributed to the sharp increase:
    Americans are using more plastic than
    ever and the current study included
    pollution generated by United States
    exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
    one did not.
    The United States, which does
    not have sufficient infrastructure to
    handle its recycling demands at home,
    exports about half of its recyclable waste.
    Of the total exported, about 88 percent
    ends up in countries considered to have
    inadequate waste management.
    “When you consider how much
    of our plastic waste isn’t actually
    recyclable because it is low-value,
    contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
    not surprising that a lot of it ends up
    polluting the environment,” said the
    study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
    research professor of oceanography at
    Sea Education Association, in a
    statement.
    The study estimates that in
    2016, the United States contributed
    between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
    plastic waste to the oceans through a
    combination of littering, dumping and 
    mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
    that’s almost double the total estimated
    waste in the team’s previous study. At the
    high end, it would be a fivefold increase
    over the earlier estimate.
    Nicholas Mallos, a senior
    director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
    author of the study, said the upper
    estimate would be equal to a pile of
    plastic covering the area of the White
    House Lawn and reaching as high as the
    Empire State Building.
    The ranges are wide partly
    because “there’s no real standard for
    being able to provide good quality data on
    collection and disposal of waste in
    general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
    economist at DSM Environmental
    Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
    author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
    researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
    practices in countries around the world
    and used their “best professional
    judgment” to determine the lowest and
    highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
    escape into the environment. They settled
    on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
    Tony Walker, an associate
    professor at the Dalhousie University
    School for Resource and Environmental
    Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
    analyzing waste data can amount to a
    “data minefield” because there are no
    data standards across municipalities.
    Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
    overseas, he said, data is often not
    recorded at all.
    Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
    was not involved in the study, said it
    could offer a more accurate accounting of
    plastic pollution than the previous study,
    which likely underestimated the United
    States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
    best estimate, as accurate as they can be
    with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
    which underscores that the figures are
    estimates.
    Of the plastics that go into the
    United States recycling system, about 9
    percent of the country’s total plastic
    waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
    be remade into new consumer goods. New
    plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
    that only certain expensive, high-grade
    plastics are profitable to recycle within the
    United States, which is why roughly half
    of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
    abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
    which data is available.
    Since 2016, however, the
    recycling landscape has changed. China
    and many countries in Southeast Asia
    have stopped accepting plastic waste
    imports. And lower oil prices have further
    reduced the market for recycled plastic.
    “What the new study really underscores is
    we have to get a handle on source
    reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
    starts with eliminating unnecessary and
    problematic single-use plastics.”

    From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
    In the phrases “Of the total exported” (line 23) and “in countries considered” (line 24), the two verbs are in the
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 7e764026-92
  • 7E6CB093-92

    Inglês

    Verbos | Verbs
    UECE · 2020MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

    The United States is using more
    plastic than ever, and waste exported for
    recycling is often mishandled, according
    to a new study.
    The United States contribution
    to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
    significantly larger than previously
    thought, possibly by as much as five
    times, according to a study published
    Friday. The research, published in Science
    Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
    by the same authors. Two factors
    contributed to the sharp increase:
    Americans are using more plastic than
    ever and the current study included
    pollution generated by United States
    exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
    one did not.
    The United States, which does
    not have sufficient infrastructure to
    handle its recycling demands at home,
    exports about half of its recyclable waste.
    Of the total exported, about 88 percent
    ends up in countries considered to have
    inadequate waste management.
    “When you consider how much
    of our plastic waste isn’t actually
    recyclable because it is low-value,
    contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
    not surprising that a lot of it ends up
    polluting the environment,” said the
    study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
    research professor of oceanography at
    Sea Education Association, in a
    statement.
    The study estimates that in
    2016, the United States contributed
    between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
    plastic waste to the oceans through a
    combination of littering, dumping and 
    mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
    that’s almost double the total estimated
    waste in the team’s previous study. At the
    high end, it would be a fivefold increase
    over the earlier estimate.
    Nicholas Mallos, a senior
    director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
    author of the study, said the upper
    estimate would be equal to a pile of
    plastic covering the area of the White
    House Lawn and reaching as high as the
    Empire State Building.
    The ranges are wide partly
    because “there’s no real standard for
    being able to provide good quality data on
    collection and disposal of waste in
    general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
    economist at DSM Environmental
    Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
    author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
    researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
    practices in countries around the world
    and used their “best professional
    judgment” to determine the lowest and
    highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
    escape into the environment. They settled
    on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
    Tony Walker, an associate
    professor at the Dalhousie University
    School for Resource and Environmental
    Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
    analyzing waste data can amount to a
    “data minefield” because there are no
    data standards across municipalities.
    Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
    overseas, he said, data is often not
    recorded at all.
    Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
    was not involved in the study, said it
    could offer a more accurate accounting of
    plastic pollution than the previous study,
    which likely underestimated the United
    States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
    best estimate, as accurate as they can be
    with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
    which underscores that the figures are
    estimates.
    Of the plastics that go into the
    United States recycling system, about 9
    percent of the country’s total plastic
    waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
    be remade into new consumer goods. New
    plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
    that only certain expensive, high-grade
    plastics are profitable to recycle within the
    United States, which is why roughly half
    of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
    abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
    which data is available.
    Since 2016, however, the
    recycling landscape has changed. China
    and many countries in Southeast Asia
    have stopped accepting plastic waste
    imports. And lower oil prices have further
    reduced the market for recycled plastic.
    “What the new study really underscores is
    we have to get a handle on source
    reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
    starts with eliminating unnecessary and
    problematic single-use plastics.”

    From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
    The verbs in “...ends up in countries considered to have inadequate waste management” (lines 24-25) are, respectively,
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 7e6cb093-92