Questões de Inglês

MONEY

1 Money is perhaps the most basic building-block in economics. It helps states collect taxes to fund public goods. It allows producers to specialise and reap gains from trade. It is clear what it does, but its origins are a mystery. Some argue that money has its roots in the power of the state. Others claim the origin of money is a purely private matter: it would exist even if governments did not. This debate is long-running but it informs some of the most pressing monetary questions of today.

2 Money fulfils three main functions. First, it must be a medium of exchange, easily traded for goods and services. Second, it must be a store of value, so that it can be saved and used for consumption in the future. Third, it must be a unit of account, a useful measuring-stick. Lots of things can do these jobs. Tea, salt and cattle have all been used as money. In Britain’s prisons, inmates currently favour shower-gel capsules or rosary beads.

3 The use of money stretches back millennia. Electrum, an alloy of gold and silver, was used to make coins in Lydia (now western Turkey) in around 650BC. The first paper money circulated in China in around 1000AD. The Aztecs used cocoa beans as cash until the 12th century. The puzzle is how people agreed what to use.

4 Karl Menger, an Austrian economist, set out one school of thought as long ago as 1892. In his version of events, the monetisation of an economy starts when agricultural communities move away from subsistence farming and start to specialise. This brings efficiency gains but means that trade with others becomes necessary. The problem is that operating markets on the basis of barter * is a pain: you have to scout around looking for the rare person who wants what you have and has what you want.

5 Money evolves to reduce barter costs, with some things working better than others. The commodity used as money should not lose value when it is bought and sold. So clothing is a bad money, since no one places the same value on second-hand clothes as new ones. Instead, something that is portable, durable (fruit and vegetables are out) and divisible into smaller pieces is needed. Menger called this property “saleableness”. Spices and shells are highly saleable, explaining their use as money. Government plays no role here. The origin of money is a market-led response to barter costs, in which the best money is that which minimises the costs of trade. Menger’s is a good description of how informal monies, such as those used by prisoners, originate.

6 But the story just doesn’t match the facts in most monetary economies, according to a 1998 paper by Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics. Take the widespread use of precious metals as money. A Mengerian would say that this happens because metals are durable, divisible and portable: that makes them an ideal medium of exchange. But it is incredibly hard to value raw metals, Goodhart argued, so the cost of using them in trade is high. It is much easier to assess the value of a bag of salt or a cow than a lump of metal. Raw metals fail Menger’s own saleableness test.

* The exchange of goods and services for othr goods and services.

Adapted from The Economist, August 18, 2012

MONEY

1 Money is perhaps the most basic building-block in economics. It helps states collect taxes to fund public goods. It allows producers to specialise and reap gains from trade. It is clear what it does, but its origins are a mystery. Some argue that money has its roots in the power of the state. Others claim the origin of money is a purely private matter: it would exist even if governments did not. This debate is long-running but it informs some of the most pressing monetary questions of today.

2 Money fulfils three main functions. First, it must be a medium of exchange, easily traded for goods and services. Second, it must be a store of value, so that it can be saved and used for consumption in the future. Third, it must be a unit of account, a useful measuring-stick. Lots of things can do these jobs. Tea, salt and cattle have all been used as money. In Britain’s prisons, inmates currently favour shower-gel capsules or rosary beads.

3 The use of money stretches back millennia. Electrum, an alloy of gold and silver, was used to make coins in Lydia (now western Turkey) in around 650BC. The first paper money circulated in China in around 1000AD. The Aztecs used cocoa beans as cash until the 12th century. The puzzle is how people agreed what to use.

4 Karl Menger, an Austrian economist, set out one school of thought as long ago as 1892. In his version of events, the monetisation of an economy starts when agricultural communities move away from subsistence farming and start to specialise. This brings efficiency gains but means that trade with others becomes necessary. The problem is that operating markets on the basis of barter * is a pain: you have to scout around looking for the rare person who wants what you have and has what you want.

5 Money evolves to reduce barter costs, with some things working better than others. The commodity used as money should not lose value when it is bought and sold. So clothing is a bad money, since no one places the same value on second-hand clothes as new ones. Instead, something that is portable, durable (fruit and vegetables are out) and divisible into smaller pieces is needed. Menger called this property “saleableness”. Spices and shells are highly saleable, explaining their use as money. Government plays no role here. The origin of money is a market-led response to barter costs, in which the best money is that which minimises the costs of trade. Menger’s is a good description of how informal monies, such as those used by prisoners, originate.

6 But the story just doesn’t match the facts in most monetary economies, according to a 1998 paper by Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics. Take the widespread use of precious metals as money. A Mengerian would say that this happens because metals are durable, divisible and portable: that makes them an ideal medium of exchange. But it is incredibly hard to value raw metals, Goodhart argued, so the cost of using them in trade is high. It is much easier to assess the value of a bag of salt or a cow than a lump of metal. Raw metals fail Menger’s own saleableness test.

* The exchange of goods and services for othr goods and services.

Adapted from The Economist, August 18, 2012

[1] Txting: frNd or foe?

If I ........ a pound for every time I heard

someone predicting a language disaster

because of a new technological development,

[5] I would be a very rich man. If I were a time

traveller, my bank balance would have started

to grow with the arrival in the Middle Ages of

printing, thought by many to be the invention

of the devil. It would have increased with the

[10] telegraph, telephone and broadcasting. And I

would have been able to retire on the profits

from text messaging.

All the popular beliefs about texting are

wrong. It isn’t just used by the young

[15] generation: the vast majority of texts

circulating in cyberspace are among adults,

especially by and to institutions.

Only ........ very tiny part of text messaging

uses a distinctive orthography. The

[20] abbreviations are not a totally new

phenomenon. Young people don’t use them in

essays, nor in exam scripts. And research is

piling up that text messaging helps rather

than hinders literacy. Texting has, indeed,

[25] added a new dimension to language use, but

its long-term impact on existing varieties of

language is negligible. It is not a disaster.

The popular impression is quite the

opposite. People think that the written

[30] language seen on mobile phone screens is

new and alien. It has been labelled “textese”,

“slanguage”, and a “digital virus”. It has been

described as foreign and “outlandish”.

However, ........ most striking characteristic

[35] of text messages is the combination of

standard and non-standard features. Although

many texters like to be different and enjoy

breaking linguistic rules, they also know they

need to be understood. There is no point in

[40] paying for a message if it breaks so many

rules that it ceases to be intelligible. There is

always ........ unconscious pressure to use the

standard orthography.

Adapted from: CRYSTAL, David. Txting: frNd or foe? The Linguist, v. 47, n. 06, Dec. 2008/Jan 2009. Available at: <http://www.davidcrystal.com/DC_articles/ Internet16.pdf>. Access on: Sept 09, 2012.

[1] Txting: frNd or foe?

If I ........ a pound for every time I heard

someone predicting a language disaster

because of a new technological development,

[5] I would be a very rich man. If I were a time

traveller, my bank balance would have started

to grow with the arrival in the Middle Ages of

printing, thought by many to be the invention

of the devil. It would have increased with the

[10] telegraph, telephone and broadcasting. And I

would have been able to retire on the profits

from text messaging.

All the popular beliefs about texting are

wrong. It isn’t just used by the young

[15] generation: the vast majority of texts

circulating in cyberspace are among adults,

especially by and to institutions.

Only ........ very tiny part of text messaging

uses a distinctive orthography. The

[20] abbreviations are not a totally new

phenomenon. Young people don’t use them in

essays, nor in exam scripts. And research is

piling up that text messaging helps rather

than hinders literacy. Texting has, indeed,

[25] added a new dimension to language use, but

its long-term impact on existing varieties of

language is negligible. It is not a disaster.

The popular impression is quite the

opposite. People think that the written

[30] language seen on mobile phone screens is

new and alien. It has been labelled “textese”,

“slanguage”, and a “digital virus”. It has been

described as foreign and “outlandish”.

However, ........ most striking characteristic

[35] of text messages is the combination of

standard and non-standard features. Although

many texters like to be different and enjoy

breaking linguistic rules, they also know they

need to be understood. There is no point in

[40] paying for a message if it breaks so many

rules that it ceases to be intelligible. There is

always ........ unconscious pressure to use the

standard orthography.

Adapted from: CRYSTAL, David. Txting: frNd or foe? The Linguist, v. 47, n. 06, Dec. 2008/Jan 2009. Available at: <http://www.davidcrystal.com/DC_articles/ Internet16.pdf>. Access on: Sept 09, 2012.

[1] Advice Gratis to Certain Women – By a Woman

O, my strong-minded sisters, aspiring to vote,

And to row with your brothers, all in the same boat,

When you come out to speak to the public your mind,

[5] Leave your tricks, and your airs, and your graces behind!

For instance, when you by the world would be seen

As reporter, or editor (first-class, I mean),

I think – just to come to the point in one line –

What you write will be finer, if 'tis not too fine.

[10] Pray, don't let the thread of your subject be strung

With "golden," and "shimmer," "sweet," "filter," and "flung;"

Nor compel, by your style, all your readers to guess

You've ........ looking up words Webster marks obs.

And another thing: whatever else you may say,

[15] Do keep personalities out of the way;

Don't try every sentence to make people see

What a dear, charming creature the writer must be!

Don't mistake me; I mean that the public's not home,

You must do as the Romans do, when you're in Rome;

[20] I would have you be womanly, while you are wise;

'Tis the weak and the womanish tricks I despise.

'Tis a good thing to write, and to rule in the state,

But to be a true, womanly woman is great:

And if ever you come to be that, 'twill be when

[25] You can cease to be babies, nor try to be men!

Adaptado de: CAREY, Phoebe. Advice Gratis to Certain Women. In: RATTINER, Susan (ed.). Great Poems by American Women: An Anthology. Mineola: Dover Thrift, 1998. p. 72.

[1] Advice Gratis to Certain Women – By a Woman

O, my strong-minded sisters, aspiring to vote,

And to row with your brothers, all in the same boat,

When you come out to speak to the public your mind,

[5] Leave your tricks, and your airs, and your graces behind!

For instance, when you by the world would be seen

As reporter, or editor (first-class, I mean),

I think – just to come to the point in one line –

What you write will be finer, if 'tis not too fine.

[10] Pray, don't let the thread of your subject be strung

With "golden," and "shimmer," "sweet," "filter," and "flung;"

Nor compel, by your style, all your readers to guess

You've ........ looking up words Webster marks obs.

And another thing: whatever else you may say,

[15] Do keep personalities out of the way;

Don't try every sentence to make people see

What a dear, charming creature the writer must be!

Don't mistake me; I mean that the public's not home,

You must do as the Romans do, when you're in Rome;

[20] I would have you be womanly, while you are wise;

'Tis the weak and the womanish tricks I despise.

'Tis a good thing to write, and to rule in the state,

But to be a true, womanly woman is great:

And if ever you come to be that, 'twill be when

[25] You can cease to be babies, nor try to be men!

Adaptado de: CAREY, Phoebe. Advice Gratis to Certain Women. In: RATTINER, Susan (ed.). Great Poems by American Women: An Anthology. Mineola: Dover Thrift, 1998. p. 72.