(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª FASE)
Leia o trecho inicial de um poema de Álvaro de Campos, heterônimo do escritor Fernando Pessoa (1888-1935), para responder a questão.
Esta velha angústia,
Esta angústia que trago há séculos em mim,
Transbordou da vasilha,
Em lágrimas, em grandes imaginações,
Em sonhos em estilo de pesadelo sem terror,
Em grandes emoções súbitas sem sentido nenhum.
Transbordou.
Mal sei como conduzir-me na vida
Com este mal-estar a fazer-me pregas na alma!
Se ao menos endoidecesse deveras!
Mas não: é este estar entre,
Este quase,
Este poder ser que...,
Isto.
Um internado num manicômio é, ao menos, alguém,
Eu sou um internado num manicômio sem manicômio.
Estou doido a frio,
Estou lúcido e louco,
Estou alheio a tudo e igual a todos:
Estou dormindo desperto com sonhos que são loucura
Porque não são sonhos.
Estou assim...
Pobre velha casa da minha infância perdida!
Quem te diria que eu me desacolhesse tanto!
Que é do teu menino? Está maluco.
Que é de quem dormia sossegado sob o teu teto provinciano?
Está maluco.
Quem de quem fui? Está maluco. Hoje é quem eu sou.
(Obra poética, 1965.)
No verso “Pobre velha casa da minha infância perdida!” (4ª estrofe), a anteposição dos adjetivos “pobre” e “velha” ao substantivo “casa”, em lugar da posposição,
Ver questão
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª FASE)
Essa nova sensibilidade artística, apesar de heterogênea, pode ser resumida através da atenção à forma e ao tema, assim como ao processo. A forma inclui cores saturadas, formas simples, contornos relativamente nítidos e supressão do espaço profundo. O tema deriva de fontes preexistentes e manufaturadas para consumo de massa.
(David McCarthy. Movimentos da arte moderna, 2002. Adaptado.)
O comentário do historiador David McCarthy aplica-se à obra reproduzida em:
Ver questão
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª fase)
Em “Since you are a lawyer”, o termo em destaque pode ser substituído, sem alteração de sentido, por
Ver questão
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª fase)
Disparity in life spans of the rich and the poor is growing
Sabrina Tavernise
February 12, 2016
Experts have long known that rich people generally live longer than poor people. But a growing body of data shows a more disturbing pattern: Despite big advances in medicine, technology and education, the longevity gap between high-income and low-income Americans has been widening sharply.
The poor are losing ground not only in income, but also in years of life, the most basic measure of well-being. In the early 1970s, a 60-year-old man in the top half of the earnings ladder could expect to live 1.2 years longer than a man of the same age in the bottom half, according to an analysis by the Social Security Administration. Fast-forward to 2001, and he could expect to live 5.8 years longer than his poorer counterpart.
New research released this month contains even more jarring numbers. Looking at the extreme ends of the income spectrum, economists at the Brookings Institution found that for men born in 1920, there was a six-year difference in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of earners and the bottom 10 percent. For men born in 1950, that difference had more than doubled, to 14 years. For women, the gap grew to 13 years, from 4.7 years. “There has been this huge spreading out,” said Gary Burtless, one of the authors of the study.
The growing chasm is alarming policy makers, and has surfaced in the presidential campaign. During a Democratic debate, Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton expressed concern over shortening life spans for some Americans. “This may be the next frontier of the inequality discussion,” said Peter Orszag, a former Obama administration official now at Citigroup, who was among the first to highlight the pattern. The causes are still being investigated, but public health researchers say that deep declines in smoking among the affluent and educated may partly explain the difference.
Overall, according to the Brookings study, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of wage earners improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 compared with those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, though, it jumped by about 28 percent.
(The researchers used a common measure – life expectancy at age 50 – and included data from 1984 to 2012.)
(www.nytimes.com. Adaptado.)
No título do texto, o termo “disparity” tem sentido semelhante ao termo do texto
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª fase)
Disparity in life spans of the rich and the poor is growing
Sabrina Tavernise
February 12, 2016
Experts have long known that rich people generally live longer than poor people. But a growing body of data shows a more disturbing pattern: Despite big advances in medicine, technology and education, the longevity gap between high-income and low-income Americans has been widening sharply.
The poor are losing ground not only in income, but also in years of life, the most basic measure of well-being. In the early 1970s, a 60-year-old man in the top half of the earnings ladder could expect to live 1.2 years longer than a man of the same age in the bottom half, according to an analysis by the Social Security Administration. Fast-forward to 2001, and he could expect to live 5.8 years longer than his poorer counterpart.
New research released this month contains even more jarring numbers. Looking at the extreme ends of the income spectrum, economists at the Brookings Institution found that for men born in 1920, there was a six-year difference in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of earners and the bottom 10 percent. For men born in 1950, that difference had more than doubled, to 14 years. For women, the gap grew to 13 years, from 4.7 years. “There has been this huge spreading out,” said Gary Burtless, one of the authors of the study.
The growing chasm is alarming policy makers, and has surfaced in the presidential campaign. During a Democratic debate, Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton expressed concern over shortening life spans for some Americans. “This may be the next frontier of the inequality discussion,” said Peter Orszag, a former Obama administration official now at Citigroup, who was among the first to highlight the pattern. The causes are still being investigated, but public health researchers say that deep declines in smoking among the affluent and educated may partly explain the difference.
Overall, according to the Brookings study, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of wage earners improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 compared with those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, though, it jumped by about 28 percent.
(The researchers used a common measure – life expectancy at age 50 – and included data from 1984 to 2012.)
(www.nytimes.com. Adaptado.)
According to the first paragraph,
Ver questão
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª fase)
Disparity in life spans of the rich and the poor is growing
Sabrina Tavernise
February 12, 2016
Experts have long known that rich people generally live longer than poor people. But a growing body of data shows a more disturbing pattern: Despite big advances in medicine, technology and education, the longevity gap between high-income and low-income Americans has been widening sharply.
The poor are losing ground not only in income, but also in years of life, the most basic measure of well-being. In the early 1970s, a 60-year-old man in the top half of the earnings ladder could expect to live 1.2 years longer than a man of the same age in the bottom half, according to an analysis by the Social Security Administration. Fast-forward to 2001, and he could expect to live 5.8 years longer than his poorer counterpart.
New research released this month contains even more jarring numbers. Looking at the extreme ends of the income spectrum, economists at the Brookings Institution found that for men born in 1920, there was a six-year difference in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of earners and the bottom 10 percent. For men born in 1950, that difference had more than doubled, to 14 years. For women, the gap grew to 13 years, from 4.7 years. “There has been this huge spreading out,” said Gary Burtless, one of the authors of the study.
The growing chasm is alarming policy makers, and has surfaced in the presidential campaign. During a Democratic debate, Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton expressed concern over shortening life spans for some Americans. “This may be the next frontier of the inequality discussion,” said Peter Orszag, a former Obama administration official now at Citigroup, who was among the first to highlight the pattern. The causes are still being investigated, but public health researchers say that deep declines in smoking among the affluent and educated may partly explain the difference.
Overall, according to the Brookings study, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of wage earners improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 compared with those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, though, it jumped by about 28 percent.
(The researchers used a common measure – life expectancy at age 50 – and included data from 1984 to 2012.)
(www.nytimes.com. Adaptado.)
No trecho do segundo parágrafo “not only in income, but also in years of life”, a expressão “not only … but also” indica
Ver questão
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª fase)
Disparity in life spans of the rich and the poor is growing
Sabrina Tavernise
February 12, 2016
Experts have long known that rich people generally live longer than poor people. But a growing body of data shows a more disturbing pattern: Despite big advances in medicine, technology and education, the longevity gap between high-income and low-income Americans has been widening sharply.
The poor are losing ground not only in income, but also in years of life, the most basic measure of well-being. In the early 1970s, a 60-year-old man in the top half of the earnings ladder could expect to live 1.2 years longer than a man of the same age in the bottom half, according to an analysis by the Social Security Administration. Fast-forward to 2001, and he could expect to live 5.8 years longer than his poorer counterpart.
New research released this month contains even more jarring numbers. Looking at the extreme ends of the income spectrum, economists at the Brookings Institution found that for men born in 1920, there was a six-year difference in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of earners and the bottom 10 percent. For men born in 1950, that difference had more than doubled, to 14 years. For women, the gap grew to 13 years, from 4.7 years. “There has been this huge spreading out,” said Gary Burtless, one of the authors of the study.
The growing chasm is alarming policy makers, and has surfaced in the presidential campaign. During a Democratic debate, Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton expressed concern over shortening life spans for some Americans. “This may be the next frontier of the inequality discussion,” said Peter Orszag, a former Obama administration official now at Citigroup, who was among the first to highlight the pattern. The causes are still being investigated, but public health researchers say that deep declines in smoking among the affluent and educated may partly explain the difference.
Overall, according to the Brookings study, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of wage earners improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 compared with those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, though, it jumped by about 28 percent.
(The researchers used a common measure – life expectancy at age 50 – and included data from 1984 to 2012.)
(www.nytimes.com. Adaptado.)
Conforme as informações apresentadas no segundo parágrafo,
Ver questão
(UNESP - 2016/2 - 1ª fase)
Disparity in life spans of the rich and the poor is growing
Sabrina Tavernise
February 12, 2016
Experts have long known that rich people generally live longer than poor people. But a growing body of data shows a more disturbing pattern: Despite big advances in medicine, technology and education, the longevity gap between high-income and low-income Americans has been widening sharply.
The poor are losing ground not only in income, but also in years of life, the most basic measure of well-being. In the early 1970s, a 60-year-old man in the top half of the earnings ladder could expect to live 1.2 years longer than a man of the same age in the bottom half, according to an analysis by the Social Security Administration. Fast-forward to 2001, and he could expect to live 5.8 years longer than his poorer counterpart.
New research released this month contains even more jarring numbers. Looking at the extreme ends of the income spectrum, economists at the Brookings Institution found that for men born in 1920, there was a six-year difference in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of earners and the bottom 10 percent. For men born in 1950, that difference had more than doubled, to 14 years. For women, the gap grew to 13 years, from 4.7 years. “There has been this huge spreading out,” said Gary Burtless, one of the authors of the study.
The growing chasm is alarming policy makers, and has surfaced in the presidential campaign. During a Democratic debate, Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton expressed concern over shortening life spans for some Americans. “This may be the next frontier of the inequality discussion,” said Peter Orszag, a former Obama administration official now at Citigroup, who was among the first to highlight the pattern. The causes are still being investigated, but public health researchers say that deep declines in smoking among the affluent and educated may partly explain the difference.
Overall, according to the Brookings study, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of wage earners improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 compared with those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, though, it jumped by about 28 percent.
(The researchers used a common measure – life expectancy at age 50 – and included data from 1984 to 2012.)
(www.nytimes.com. Adaptado.)
A nova pesquisa da Brookings Institution que foi divulgada
Ver questão