Questões de Inglês

[1] Orientalism means several interdependent

things. The most readily accepted designation

for Orientalism is an academic one. Anyone

who teaches, writes about, or researches the

[5] Orient, either in its specific or its general

aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she

does is Orientalism.

Related to this academic tradition is a

more general meaning for Orientalism as a

[10] style of thought based ........ a distinction

made between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident.’

Thus a very large mass of writers and thinkers

have accepted the basic distinction between

East and West as the starting point for

[15] elaborate theories, epics, novels, social

descriptions, and political accounts concerning

the Orient, its people, customs, ‘mind,’

destiny, and so on.

The interchange between the academic

[20] and the more or less imaginative meanings of

Orientalism is a constant one, and since the

late 18th century there has been a

considerable traffic between the two. Here I

come to the third meaning of Orientalism,

[25] which is something more historically and

materially defined than either of the other

two. Orientalism can be discussed and

analyzed as the corporate institution for

dealing with the Orient—dealing with it by

[30] making statements about it, authorizing views

of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it: in

short, Orientalism as a Western discourse for

dominating, restructuring, and having

authority ........ the Orient.

[35] The Orient is not an inert fact of nature. It

is not merely there, just as the Occident itself

is not just there either. As both geographical

and cultural entities such regions as ‘Orient’

and ‘Occident’ are man-made. Therefore as

[40] much as the West itself, the Orient is an idea

that has a history and a tradition of thought,

imagery, and vocabulary that have given it

reality and presence in and for the West. The

two geographical entities thus support and to

[45] an extent reflect each other. It would be

wrong to conclude that the Orient is

essentially an idea, or a creation with no

corresponding reality. There are cultures and

nations whose location is in the East, and

[50] their lives, histories, and customs have a

brute reality obviously greater than anything

that could be said about them in the West.

But the phenomenon of Orientalism as

studied here deals principally, not with a

[55] correspondence between Orientalism and

Orient, but with the internal consistency of

Orientalism and its ideas about the Orient

........ or beyond any correspondence, or lack

thereof, with a ‘real’ Orient.

Adaptado de: SAID, Edward. Orientalism. In: Ashcroft, Bill et al. (ed.) The Postcolonial Studies Reader . London/ New York: Routledge, 1995. p. 87-91.

[1] Orientalism means several interdependent

things. The most readily accepted designation

for Orientalism is an academic one. Anyone

who teaches, writes about, or researches the

[5] Orient, either in its specific or its general

aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she

does is Orientalism.

Related to this academic tradition is a

more general meaning for Orientalism as a

[10] style of thought based ........ a distinction

made between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident.’

Thus a very large mass of writers and thinkers

have accepted the basic distinction between

East and West as the starting point for

[15] elaborate theories, epics, novels, social

descriptions, and political accounts concerning

the Orient, its people, customs, ‘mind,’

destiny, and so on.

The interchange between the academic

[20] and the more or less imaginative meanings of

Orientalism is a constant one, and since the

late 18th century there has been a

considerable traffic between the two. Here I

come to the third meaning of Orientalism,

[25] which is something more historically and

materially defined than either of the other

two. Orientalism can be discussed and

analyzed as the corporate institution for

dealing with the Orient—dealing with it by

[30] making statements about it, authorizing views

of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it: in

short, Orientalism as a Western discourse for

dominating, restructuring, and having

authority ........ the Orient.

[35] The Orient is not an inert fact of nature. It

is not merely there, just as the Occident itself

is not just there either. As both geographical

and cultural entities such regions as ‘Orient’

and ‘Occident’ are man-made. Therefore as

[40] much as the West itself, the Orient is an idea

that has a history and a tradition of thought,

imagery, and vocabulary that have given it

reality and presence in and for the West. The

two geographical entities thus support and to

[45] an extent reflect each other. It would be

wrong to conclude that the Orient is

essentially an idea, or a creation with no

corresponding reality. There are cultures and

nations whose location is in the East, and

[50] their lives, histories, and customs have a

brute reality obviously greater than anything

that could be said about them in the West.

But the phenomenon of Orientalism as

studied here deals principally, not with a

[55] correspondence between Orientalism and

Orient, but with the internal consistency of

Orientalism and its ideas about the Orient

........ or beyond any correspondence, or lack

thereof, with a ‘real’ Orient.

Adaptado de: SAID, Edward. Orientalism. In: Ashcroft, Bill et al. (ed.) The Postcolonial Studies Reader . London/ New York: Routledge, 1995. p. 87-91.

[1] Orientalism means several interdependent

things. The most readily accepted designation

for Orientalism is an academic one. Anyone

who teaches, writes about, or researches the

[5] Orient, either in its specific or its general

aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she

does is Orientalism.

Related to this academic tradition is a

more general meaning for Orientalism as a

[10] style of thought based ........ a distinction

made between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident.’

Thus a very large mass of writers and thinkers

have accepted the basic distinction between

East and West as the starting point for

[15] elaborate theories, epics, novels, social

descriptions, and political accounts concerning

the Orient, its people, customs, ‘mind,’

destiny, and so on.

The interchange between the academic

[20] and the more or less imaginative meanings of

Orientalism is a constant one, and since the

late 18th century there has been a

considerable traffic between the two. Here I

come to the third meaning of Orientalism,

[25] which is something more historically and

materially defined than either of the other

two. Orientalism can be discussed and

analyzed as the corporate institution for

dealing with the Orient—dealing with it by

[30] making statements about it, authorizing views

of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it: in

short, Orientalism as a Western discourse for

dominating, restructuring, and having

authority ........ the Orient.

[35] The Orient is not an inert fact of nature. It

is not merely there, just as the Occident itself

is not just there either. As both geographical

and cultural entities such regions as ‘Orient’

and ‘Occident’ are man-made. Therefore as

[40] much as the West itself, the Orient is an idea

that has a history and a tradition of thought,

imagery, and vocabulary that have given it

reality and presence in and for the West. The

two geographical entities thus support and to

[45] an extent reflect each other. It would be

wrong to conclude that the Orient is

essentially an idea, or a creation with no

corresponding reality. There are cultures and

nations whose location is in the East, and

[50] their lives, histories, and customs have a

brute reality obviously greater than anything

that could be said about them in the West.

But the phenomenon of Orientalism as

studied here deals principally, not with a

[55] correspondence between Orientalism and

Orient, but with the internal consistency of

Orientalism and its ideas about the Orient

........ or beyond any correspondence, or lack

thereof, with a ‘real’ Orient.

Adaptado de: SAID, Edward. Orientalism. In: Ashcroft, Bill et al. (ed.) The Postcolonial Studies Reader . London/ New York: Routledge, 1995. p. 87-91.

[1] Orientalism means several interdependent

things. The most readily accepted designation

for Orientalism is an academic one. Anyone

who teaches, writes about, or researches the

[5] Orient, either in its specific or its general

aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she

does is Orientalism.

Related to this academic tradition is a

more general meaning for Orientalism as a

[10] style of thought based ........ a distinction

made between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident.’

Thus a very large mass of writers and thinkers

have accepted the basic distinction between

East and West as the starting point for

[15] elaborate theories, epics, novels, social

descriptions, and political accounts concerning

the Orient, its people, customs, ‘mind,’

destiny, and so on.

The interchange between the academic

[20] and the more or less imaginative meanings of

Orientalism is a constant one, and since the

late 18th century there has been a

considerable traffic between the two. Here I

come to the third meaning of Orientalism,

[25] which is something more historically and

materially defined than either of the other

two. Orientalism can be discussed and

analyzed as the corporate institution for

dealing with the Orient—dealing with it by

[30] making statements about it, authorizing views

of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it: in

short, Orientalism as a Western discourse for

dominating, restructuring, and having

authority ........ the Orient.

[35] The Orient is not an inert fact of nature. It

is not merely there, just as the Occident itself

is not just there either. As both geographical

and cultural entities such regions as ‘Orient’

and ‘Occident’ are man-made. Therefore as

[40] much as the West itself, the Orient is an idea

that has a history and a tradition of thought,

imagery, and vocabulary that have given it

reality and presence in and for the West. The

two geographical entities thus support and to

[45] an extent reflect each other. It would be

wrong to conclude that the Orient is

essentially an idea, or a creation with no

corresponding reality. There are cultures and

nations whose location is in the East, and

[50] their lives, histories, and customs have a

brute reality obviously greater than anything

that could be said about them in the West.

But the phenomenon of Orientalism as

studied here deals principally, not with a

[55] correspondence between Orientalism and

Orient, but with the internal consistency of

Orientalism and its ideas about the Orient

........ or beyond any correspondence, or lack

thereof, with a ‘real’ Orient.

Adaptado de: SAID, Edward. Orientalism. In: Ashcroft, Bill et al. (ed.) The Postcolonial Studies Reader . London/ New York: Routledge, 1995. p. 87-91.

The Road Not Taken

[1] Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,

And sorry I could not travel both

And be one traveler, long I stood

And looked down one as far as I could

[5] To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,

And having perhaps the better claim,

Because it was grassy and wanted wear;

Though as for that the passing there

[10] Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay

In leaves no step had trodden black.

Oh, I kept the first for another day!

Yet knowing how way leads on to way,

[15] I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I –

I took the one less traveled by,

[20] And that has made all the difference.

Adaptado de: FROST, Robert. The Road not Taken .  Disponível em: <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/ poem/173536>. Acesso em: 08 set. 2014.

The Road Not Taken

[1] Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,

And sorry I could not travel both

And be one traveler, long I stood

And looked down one as far as I could

[5] To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,

And having perhaps the better claim,

Because it was grassy and wanted wear;

Though as for that the passing there

[10] Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay

In leaves no step had trodden black.

Oh, I kept the first for another day!

Yet knowing how way leads on to way,

[15] I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I –

I took the one less traveled by,

[20] And that has made all the difference.

Adaptado de: FROST, Robert. The Road not Taken .  Disponível em: <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/ poem/173536>. Acesso em: 08 set. 2014.