Questões de Inglês

[1] Since the fall of 2009, the European Union has been struggling with a slow-moving but

unshakable crisis over the enormous debts faced by its weakest economies, such as

Greece and Portugal, or those most battered by the global recession, like Ireland.

A series of negotiations, bailouts and austerity packages have failed to stop the slide of

[5] investor confidence or to restore the growth needed to give struggling countries a way out

of¹ their debt traps. By August 2011 European leaders found themselves scrambling once

again to intervene in the markets, this time to protect Italy and Spain, two countries seen

as too big to bail out².

The crisis has produced the deepest tensions within the union in memory, as Germany in

[10] particular has resisted aid to countries it sees as profligate, and has raised questions about

whether the euro can survive as a multinational currency, since countries like Greece have

been unable to boost their exports by devaluing their own currency.

A reluctant, indirect intervention by the European Central Bank in late 2011 led the crisis

fever to cool considerably, as it lent vast sums to banks on easy terms to head off³ a

[15] liquidity crunch. But crisis has given way to a grinding reality for Europe of economic

stagnation and even a second recession for countries including Spain, Italy, Belgium, the

Czech Republic and the Netherlands as well as Greece. Nearby, Britain also fell into⁴ a

double dip recession after two years of Conservative-led austerity.

In April 2012 there was a growing sense of resistance to the German prescription of budget

[20] cuts as the prescription for all. From trading floors to polling stations to the streets of cities

across Europe, the message appeared increasingly to be that countries cannot cut their

way to⁵ fiscal health, but need growth, too.

In May, voters in France and Greece punished politicians associated with austerity; France

ousted conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy in favor of Francois Hollande, a socialist

[25] and Greek voters cut the share of votes for its two traditionally dominant parties in half,

while far right and far left parties gained.

 

 

Escolha a opção cujas expressões idiomáticas correspondem aos seus sinônimos:

 

a way out¹  to bail out²  to head off³  fell into⁴  cut their way to⁵

Overview

 

[1] Since the fall of 2009, the European Union has been struggling with a slow-moving but

unshakable crisis over the enormous debts faced by its weakest economies, such as

Greece and Portugal, or those most battered by the global recession, like Ireland.

A series of negotiations, bailouts and austerity packages have failed to stop the slide of

[5] investor confidence or to restore the growth needed to give struggling countries a way out

of¹ their debt traps. By August 2011 European leaders found themselves scrambling once

again to intervene in the markets, this time to protect Italy and Spain, two countries seen

as too big to bail out².

The crisis has produced the deepest tensions within the union in memory, as Germany in

[10] particular has resisted aid to countries it sees as profligate, and has raised questions about

whether the euro can survive as a multinational currency, since countries like Greece have

been unable to boost their exports by devaluing their own currency.

A reluctant, indirect intervention by the European Central Bank in late 2011 led the crisis

fever to cool considerably, as it lent vast sums to banks on easy terms to head off³ a

[15] liquidity crunch. But crisis has given way to a grinding reality for Europe of economic

stagnation and even a second recession for countries including Spain, Italy, Belgium, the

Czech Republic and the Netherlands as well as Greece. Nearby, Britain also fell into⁴ a

double dip recession after two years of Conservative-led austerity.

In April 2012 there was a growing sense of resistance to the German prescription of budget

[20] cuts as the prescription for all. From trading floors to polling stations to the streets of cities

across Europe, the message appeared increasingly to be that countries cannot cut their

way to⁵ fiscal health, but need growth, too.

In May, voters in France and Greece punished politicians associated with austerity; France

ousted conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy in favor of Francois Hollande, a socialist

[25] and Greek voters cut the share of votes for its two traditionally dominant parties in half,

while far right and far left parties gained.

 

Marque a opção que resuma corretamente a ideia central do texto:

Overview

 

[1] Since the fall of 2009, the European Union has been struggling with a slow-moving but

unshakable crisis over the enormous debts faced by its weakest economies, such as

Greece and Portugal, or those most battered by the global recession, like Ireland.

A series of negotiations, bailouts and austerity packages have failed to stop the slide of

[5] investor confidence or to restore the growth needed to give struggling countries a way out

of¹ their debt traps. By August 2011 European leaders found themselves scrambling once

again to intervene in the markets, this time to protect Italy and Spain, two countries seen

as too big to bail out².

The crisis has produced the deepest tensions within the union in memory, as Germany in

[10] particular has resisted aid to countries it sees as profligate, and has raised questions about

whether the euro can survive as a multinational currency, since countries like Greece have

been unable to boost their exports by devaluing their own currency.

A reluctant, indirect intervention by the European Central Bank in late 2011 led the crisis

fever to cool considerably, as it lent vast sums to banks on easy terms to head off³ a

[15] liquidity crunch. But crisis has given way to a grinding reality for Europe of economic

stagnation and even a second recession for countries including Spain, Italy, Belgium, the

Czech Republic and the Netherlands as well as Greece. Nearby, Britain also fell into⁴ a

double dip recession after two years of Conservative-led austerity.

In April 2012 there was a growing sense of resistance to the German prescription of budget

[20] cuts as the prescription for all. From trading floors to polling stations to the streets of cities

across Europe, the message appeared increasingly to be that countries cannot cut their

way to⁵ fiscal health, but need growth, too.

In May, voters in France and Greece punished politicians associated with austerity; France

ousted conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy in favor of Francois Hollande, a socialist

[25] and Greek voters cut the share of votes for its two traditionally dominant parties in half,

while far right and far left parties gained.

 

Escolha a opção cujas expressões idiomáticas correspondem aos seus sinônimos:

 

a way out¹  to bail out²  to head off³  fell into⁴  cut their way to⁵

Leia os pares de sentenças e marque a opção CORRETA:

 

1A. You mustn´t park here.

1B. You can’t park here.

 

2A. Can I come in?

2B. May I come in?

 

3A. I think it will rain tomorrow.

3B. I think it is going to rain tomorrow.

 

4A. You should cut your hair.

4B. You ought to cut your hair.

 

5A. You mustn’t go.

5B. You don’t have to go.

THE PEACEMAKERS

 

1 It has become standard for countries which discover large deposits of oil to declare that they will copy Norway. A president will announce the creation of a fund to park revenues from hydrocarbons. Grand plans are drawn up for spending the bounty on improving the lot of mankind. But being Norway is much harder than it sounds. Only one country seems to have the necessary mixture of wealth, generosity, internationalism, optimism and modesty required to pull it off.

2 Norway is the biggest contributor to conflict resolution, the optimistic name given to efforts to get warring parties to talk to each other. A high point here came in 1993, when Norwegian diplomats and researchers cajoled Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate face to face. The resulting Oslo accords were signed in Washington by politicians from America, Russia, Israel and Palestine. Norway was more than happy for them to take the credit for its initiative.

3 Since then Norway has sought to involve itself in many other conflicts – the less tractable the better. It has tried to repeat its Arab-Israeli success (as it seemed at the time) in Colombia, Haiti, Cyprus, the Philippines, Burma, Indonesia and, most recently, Sri Lanka. This last has been criticized as naive, leading as it did to a ceasefire that allowed the combatants to rearm before the killing resumed. Yet a consistent principle runs through these efforts: that it is better to sit down with all parties, even those considered pariahs, than to exclude anyone from peace talks.

4 Norway is a generous funder of a huge number of good causes. It has, for instance, given more to alleviate hunger in the Horn of Africa this year than France or Germany. It has set up a mechanism to pay Brazil not to chop down the Amazon. And it shovels money into the United Nations. 5 This makes Norway sound like a place that models its foreign policy on the banners held up at Woodstock, but that is not the case. It is a member of NATO and is playing an outsized role in the campaign in Libya. It has repeatedly shown a willingness to put its soldiers in harm’s way. The foreign ministry estimates that 120,000 Norwegians served as peacekeepers between 1947 and 2008, and Norwegians wearing the UN’s blue berets can today be found in Sudan, Congo and Afghanistan.

The Economist - July 30th 2011

According to the information in the article, which of the following happened between 1947 and 2008?

THE PEACEMAKERS

 

1 It has become standard for countries which discover large deposits of oil to declare that they will copy Norway. A president will announce the creation of a fund to park revenues from hydrocarbons. Grand plans are drawn up for spending the bounty on improving the lot of mankind. But being Norway is much harder than it sounds. Only one country seems to have the necessary mixture of wealth, generosity, internationalism, optimism and modesty required to pull it off.

2 Norway is the biggest contributor to conflict resolution, the optimistic name given to efforts to get warring parties to talk to each other. A high point here came in 1993, when Norwegian diplomats and researchers cajoled Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate face to face. The resulting Oslo accords were signed in Washington by politicians from America, Russia, Israel and Palestine. Norway was more than happy for them to take the credit for its initiative.

3 Since then Norway has sought to involve itself in many other conflicts – the less tractable the better. It has tried to repeat its Arab-Israeli success (as it seemed at the time) in Colombia, Haiti, Cyprus, the Philippines, Burma, Indonesia and, most recently, Sri Lanka. This last has been criticized as naive, leading as it did to a ceasefire that allowed the combatants to rearm before the killing resumed. Yet a consistent principle runs through these efforts: that it is better to sit down with all parties, even those considered pariahs, than to exclude anyone from peace talks.

4 Norway is a generous funder of a huge number of good causes. It has, for instance, given more to alleviate hunger in the Horn of Africa this year than France or Germany. It has set up a mechanism to pay Brazil not to chop down the Amazon. And it shovels money into the United Nations. 5 This makes Norway sound like a place that models its foreign policy on the banners held up at Woodstock, but that is not the case. It is a member of NATO and is playing an outsized role in the campaign in Libya. It has repeatedly shown a willingness to put its soldiers in harm’s way. The foreign ministry estimates that 120,000 Norwegians served as peacekeepers between 1947 and 2008, and Norwegians wearing the UN’s blue berets can today be found in Sudan, Congo and Afghanistan.

The Economist - July 30th 2011

In paragraph 5, the phrase “…but that is not the case” most likely refers to which of the following?