Resolver o Simulado Professor - FGV - Nível Superior

0 / 30

Português

1


A frase abaixo que mostra uma forma inadequada do termo sublinhado é:

  • A Trabalho duro nunca matou ninguém, mas por que arriscar?;
  • B Se disserem que o crime não compensa, você tem que lembrar que é porque, quando compensa, não é crime;
  • C É de justiça, e não de caridade, que o mundo precisa, mas por quê?;
  • D Tem gente que se acha honesta só porque não sabia da mamata;
  • E Não sei porque dizem que a justiça é cega.
2
No mercado encontramos vários tipos de auditor. Entre as empresas, o interno e o externo são os mais comuns.
Auditor interno? É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para analisar e garantir o cumprimento dos regulamentos internos. Eles devem identificar falhas ou atestar se os procedimentos internos são cumpridos à risca, buscando sempre um altíssimo padrão de qualidade.
Auditor externo? Trabalha em um escritório especializado em auditoria e é chamado para atestar os dados patrimoniais e financeiros da empresa contratante.
Por lei, empresas de grande porte (faturamento acima de R$ 300 milhões anuais) e empresas de capital aberto precisam se submeter a um processo anual de auditoria externa.
Bancos, seguradoras, fundos de investimento e demais instituições financeiras devem obrigatoriamente passar por uma auditoria a cada seis meses.

Na frase “É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para analisar e garantir o cumprimento dos regulamentos internos”, há dois infinitivos sublinhados.
Se essa frase for reescrita, substituindo esses infinitivos por formas nominais, a forma adequada será:

  • A É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para a análise e garantia do cumprimento dos regulamentos internos
  • B É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para que analise e garanta o cumprimento dos regulamentos internos 
  • C É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para a análise e para garantir o cumprimento dos regulamentos internos 
  • D É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para analisar e para a garantia do cumprimento dos regulamentos internos 
  • E É o profissional contratado pela própria empresa para que se analise e se garanta o cumprimento dos regulamentos internos
3
“As casas foram construídas para serem habitadas, e não para serem contempladas.”
Francis Bacon
Assinale a opção que apresenta corretamente o pensamento contido nessa frase.
  • A A adequada habitabilidade deve ser o valor predominante no planejamento de casas pelos arquitetos.
  • B A arquitetura deve dar prioridade ao aspecto decorativo das residências para dar prazer aos moradores.
  • C As casas construídas devem ser imediatamente habitadas a fim de minorar-se o problema habitacional.
  • D A construção de casas deve obedecer a parâmetros econômicos e políticos, e não estéticos.
  • E A necessidade de imediata ocupação de casas recém-construídas pode provocar a desconsideração por seus aspectos decorativos.
4
“Um erro de cálculo pode explicar o desabamento de um edifício. Mas por que não pensar também na rebelião das paredes contra o que se passa entre elas?”
Aníbal Machado
Sobre o que é expresso nesse pensamento, assinale a afirmativa correta.
  • A O desabamento de um edifício envolve obrigatoriamente um erro de cálculo.
  • B As paredes de um edifício se rebelam contra a falta de punições daqueles que causam desabamento dos prédios.
  • C Os erros frequentes de cálculos na construção de edifícios podem explicar a rebelião das paredes.
  • D As variadas circunstâncias de relações pessoais dentro de um prédio podem causar a rebelião das paredes.
  • E A rebelião das paredes de um edifício se dirige certamente a problemas ocasionados pela má construção do prédio.
5
“A vida na cidade é um inferno, mas ninguém quer mudar-se para o paraíso”.
Júlio Camargo.
Assinale a opção que mostra a forma de reescritura dessa frase que modificou o seu sentido original.
  • A Apesar de a vida na cidade ser um inferno, ninguém quer mudar-se para o paraíso.
  • B Ninguém quer mudar-se para o paraíso, mesmo que a vida na cidade seja um inferno.
  • C A vida na cidade é um inferno; ninguém, porém, quer mudar-se para o paraíso.
  • D Mesmo que ninguém queira mudar-se para o paraíso, a vida na cidade, no entanto, é um inferno.
  • E Embora a vida na cidade seja um inferno, ninguém quer mudar-se para o paraíso.
6
“Quando todo mundo é corcunda, o belo porte torna-se uma monstruosidade.”
H. de Balzac
Segundo esse pensamento, o conceito de beleza
  • A decorre da busca de originalidade.
  • B resulta do conceito de uma maioria.
  • C varia segundo o momento em que se vive.
  • D se modifica por meio dos grandes artistas.
  • E se opõe continuamente ao mau-gosto.
7
“A Arquitetura refere-se a toda construção e modelagem artificial do ambiente físico, incluindo seu processo de projeto e o produto deste, sendo a palavra também usada para definir os estilos e métodos de projeto das construções de uma época. Em outras áreas, como, por exemplo, na ciência da computação, o termo arquitetura se refere à estrutura geral de um sistema, sendo como um sinônimo de algo projetado ou a forma como funciona.” 

Já que a arquitetura se refere à modelagem artificial do ambiente físico, entre as obras desse tipo não está incluído(a)

  • A um caminho de paralelepípedos em uma mata.
  • B um túmulo construído com pedras sobrepostas.
  • C um monumento elaborado com troncos de árvores.
  • D uma parede de tijolos de cimento.
  • E uma cachoeira fluvial que forma uma piscina.
8
“A Arquitetura refere-se a toda construção e modelagem artificial do ambiente físico, incluindo seu processo de projeto e o produto deste, sendo a palavra também usada para definir os estilos e métodos de projeto das construções de uma época. Em outras áreas, como, por exemplo, na ciência da computação, o termo arquitetura se refere à estrutura geral de um sistema, sendo como um sinônimo de algo projetado ou a forma como funciona.” 

A respeito dos termos sublinhados, assinale a opção que indica aquele que não se refere a nenhum termo anterior.

  • A seu.
  • B deste.
  • C a palavra.
  • D de uma época.
  • E ciência da computação.
9
“Foi o rei Arthur e seus cavaleiros que resolveram uma das piores aflições dos encarregados de qualquer cerimonial: em reuniões, com pessoas ilustres, todas sentadas a uma mesa, quem deve ocupar o lugar de maior destaque, a cabeceira? Alguém descobriu o óbvio, e descobrir o óbvio não percebido é sinal de genialidade. O geniozinho da corte do rei Arthur simplesmente criou a mesa redonda. Nela todos, democraticamente, se colocam em posição de igualdade, adeus problemas de etiqueta!”

Márcio Cotrim. O Pulo-do-Gato 2. Geração Editorial. São Paulo. 2007

Assinale a opção que apresenta o segmento que mostra por inteiro uma opinião do autor do texto.

  • A “Foi o rei Arthur e seus cavaleiros que resolveram uma das piores aflições dos encarregados de qualquer cerimonial.”
  • B “em reuniões, com pessoas ilustres, todas sentadas a uma mesa, quem deve ocupar o lugar de maior destaque, a cabeceira?”
  • C “Alguém descobriu o óbvio, e descobrir o óbvio não percebido é sinal de genialidade.”
  • D “O geniozinho da corte do rei Arthur simplesmente criou a mesa redonda.”
  • E “Nela todos, democraticamente, se colocam em posição de igualdade, adeus problemas de etiqueta!”
10
“Foi o rei Arthur e seus cavaleiros que resolveram uma das piores aflições dos encarregados de qualquer cerimonial: em reuniões, com pessoas ilustres, todas sentadas a uma mesa, quem deve ocupar o lugar de maior destaque, a cabeceira? Alguém descobriu o óbvio, e descobrir o óbvio não percebido é sinal de genialidade. O geniozinho da corte do rei Arthur simplesmente criou a mesa redonda. Nela todos, democraticamente, se colocam em posição de igualdade, adeus problemas de etiqueta!”

Márcio Cotrim. O Pulo-do-Gato 2. Geração Editorial. São Paulo. 2007

As opções a seguir mostram modificações que foram feitas na escritura do texto acima. Em termos estruturais, assinale a opção que indica a modificação inadequada.

  • A Foi o rei Arthur e seus cavaleiros / Foram o rei Arthur e seus cavaleiros.
  • B Foi o rei Arthur e seus cavaleiros / Foram os cavaleiros e seu rei, o rei Arthur.
  • C que resolveram uma das piores aflições dos encarregados de qualquer cerimonial / que resolveram, em qualquer cerimonial, uma das piores aflições dos encarregados.
  • D em reuniões com pessoas ilustres, todas sentadas a uma mesa / em reuniões com pessoas sentadas a uma mesa, todas igualmente ilustres.
  • E quem deve ocupar o lugar de maior destaque, a cabeceira? / quem deve ocupar a cabeceira, o lugar de maior destaque? 

Inglês

11
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

The main objective of Text I is to:

  • A solve a problem.
  • B convey a request.
  • C demystify a view.
  • D explain a concept.
  • E break a stereotype.
12
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

Based on Text I, mark the statements below as TRUE (T) or FALSE (F)
( ) English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and as a Foreign Language (EFL) present different perspectives. ( ) In an ELF context, learners look up to native language speakers as models. ( ) Research in the area of ELF has involved areas other than pedagogical settings.
The statements are, respectively:

  • A T – F – T.
  • B T – T – F.
  • C T – F – F.
  • D F – T – T.
  • E F – T – F.
13
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

The 3rd paragraph of Text I focuses on

  • A views on English-speaking countries.
  • B pedagogical applications for EFL.
  • C investigations in the field of ELF.
  • D tools to enhance learning.
  • E norms of language use.
14
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

In the opening sentence, the verb phrase in “‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen” is in the

  • A past perfect, active voice.
  • B past perfect, passive voice.
  • C simple present, passive voice.
  • D present perfect, passive voice.
  • E present perfect continuous, active voice.
15
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

In the 1st paragraph, “in order to address” indicates

  • A comparison.
  • B contrast.
  • C purpose.
  • D addition.
  • E cause.
16
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

“Instead” in “In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users” (2nd paragraph) can be replaced without change of meaning by

  • A so.
  • B yet.
  • C besides.
  • D although.
  • E alternatively.
17
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

“Emulate” in “emulate native speakers” (2nd paragraph) is a synonym of

  • A imitate.
  • B engage.
  • C criticize.
  • D compete.
  • E disregard.
18
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

The modal verb in “they may have another common language at their disposal” (2nd paragraph) indicates

  • A permission.
  • B possibility.
  • C obligation.
  • D certainty.
  • E advice.
19
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

The possessive determiner in “changing in its international uses” (3rd paragraph) refers to

  • A EFL.
  • B world.
  • C English.
  • D research.
  • E compilation.
20
Text I

What is English as a Lingua Franca?

      ‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives.
      ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication, especially in transnational contexts.
        So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora, ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

Adapted from https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/ back-issues/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

The underlined word in “Since the empirical corpus work started” (3rd paragraph) is a

  • A verb.
  • B noun.
  • C adverb.
  • D adjective.
  • E preposition.

Legislação Estadual

21
Após regular processo administrativo disciplinar, Ivo, servidor ocupante de cargo de provimento efetivo no âmbito de uma estrutura de poder do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul, foi demitido. Poucos anos depois, o Poder Judiciário julgou procedente o pedido de anulação da decisão administrativa de demissão. À luz dessa narrativa e considerando que o cargo ocupado por Ivo, por ocasião de sua demissão, se encontra provido, é correto afirmar que ele deve ser:
  • A revertido;
  • B reintegrado;
  • C readaptado;
  • D reconduzido;
  • E posto em disponibilidade.
22
Clara e Myrtes são muito amigas desde a infância e, como tinham planejado desde criança, acabaram de descobrir que ambas estão grávidas, no mesmo período de gestação, mas estão preocupadas com a sua situação funcional junto ao Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. Clara ocupa cargo estadual exclusivamente em comissão, de livre nomeação e exoneração. Já Myrtes é servidora concursada em cargo efetivo, que alcançou a estabilidade, mas está receosa de perder a função de confiança gratificada na qual está em exercício, na medida em que esta também é de livre nomeação e exoneração.
Diante dessa situação hipotética, considerando o disposto na Lei Complementar estadual nº 10.098/1994, é correto afirmar que:
  • A tanto Clara quanto Myrtes gozam de estabilidade provisória em decorrência da gestação, com relação ao cargo em comissão e à função gratificada, que ocupam respectivamente, desde a confirmação da gravidez até cinco meses depois do parto, bem como ao prazo de cento e oitenta dias de licença-maternidade a serem pagos pelo Estado por todo o período;
  • B Clara poderá ser exonerada do cargo em comissão a qualquer tempo, enquanto Myrtes tem estabilidade no cargo efetivo, mas não na funçao gratificada, que poderá perder em razão da gravidez, sendo que, em ambos os casos, não há previsão de indenização, por se tratar de situações de livre exoneração;
  • C Myrtes tem estabilidade no cargo efetivo, mas não em relação à função gratificada, que poderá perder em razão da gravidez, enquanto Clara goza de estabilidade provisória e terá direito à indenização, caso venha a ser exonerada no período da confirmação da gravidez até cento e oitenta dias após o parto;
  • D tanto Clara quanto Myrtes podem ser exoneradas, respectivamente, do cargo em comissão e do cargo efetivo juntamente com a função gratificada em questão, na medida em que não há previsão de estabilidade provisória para nenhum dos casos, considerando que as servidoras só podem ser renumeradas pelo efetivo exercício, sob pena de enriquecimento sem causa;
  • E é assegurada a estabilidade provisória em razão da gestação tanto para Clara no cargo em comissão que ocupa quanto para Myrtes com relação ao exercício da função gratificada, no período entre a confirmação da gravidez até o cento e oitenta dias após o parto, independentemente de serem situações de livre nomeação e exoneração.
23

Ana, estudante de direito, questionou o seu professor sobre quais seriam os legitimados à apresentação de proposta de Emenda à Constituição do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte.
O professor respondeu, corretamente, que têm legitimidade:

  • A 1/3, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; e o governador do Estado;
  • B 1/3, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; o governador do Estado; e 3%, no mínimo, do eleitorado estadual, distribuídos, pelo menos, em 3/5 dos Municípios do Estado;
  • C metade, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; o governador do Estado; e 5%, no mínimo, do eleitorado estadual, distribuídos, pelo menos, em metade dos Municípios do Estado;
  • D metade, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; e mais da metade das Câmaras Municipais existentes no Estado, manifestando-se, cada uma delas, pela maioria absoluta de seus membros;
  • E 1/3, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; o governador do Estado; e mais da metade das Câmaras Municipais existentes no Estado, manifestando-se, cada uma delas, pela maioria relativa de seus membros.
24

O Tribunal de Justiça do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte apresentou projeto de lei à Assembleia Legislativa visando à criação do cargo de provimento efetivo XX, definindo o valor da respectiva remuneração e fixando suas atribuições. No âmbito da Assembleia Legislativa, três deputados estaduais apresentaram emendas ao projeto, visando a:
(1) criar um segundo cargo, o YY, definindo as atribuições e fixando a respectiva remuneração; (2) aumentar o valor da remuneração proposta para o cargo XX; e (3) reduzir as atribuições do cargo XX.
À luz da sistemática estabelecida na Constituição do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte, é correto afirmar, em relação às três emendas, que:

  • A somente (2) e (3) são constitucionais;
  • B somente (1) e (2) são constitucionais;
  • C somente (2) é constitucional;
  • D somente (3) é constitucional;
  • E (1), (2) e (3) são inconstitucionais.
25

Maria, servidora ocupante de cargo de provimento efetivo no Poder Judiciário do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte, foi designada para substituir Joana, ocupante de cargo de provimento em comissão, que se encontrava afastada das suas funções.
Nesse caso, consoante a sistemática estabelecida pela Lei Complementar Estadual nº 715/2022, é correto afirmar que Maria:

  • A pode cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, fazendo jus a um acréscimo de 50% em sua remuneração regular, pago de modo proporcional, caso a substituição se dê por prazo superior a trinta dias;
  • B pode cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, também fazendo jus à retribuição deste último, paga de modo proporcional, caso a substituição se dê por prazo superior a dez dias;
  • C deverá ser afastada do seu cargo efetivo, considerando a expressa vedação de cumulação de cargos no âmbito do Poder Judiciário, o que não impediria Maria de cumular uma função de confiança;
  • D poderia cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, no caso de vacância deste último, também fazendo jus à retribuição correlata, paga de modo proporcional;
  • E pode cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, mas deve optar pela remuneração de um deles, com os benefícios correlatos.
26

Determinada Comarca do Rio Grande do Norte contava com mais de uma unidade dos Juizados Especiais Criminais. Maria, servidora recém-empossada em cargo de provimento efetivo do Poder Judiciário, foi lotada em uma dessas unidades. Ato contínuo, realizou pesquisa a respeito do órgão competente para promover a execução nos processos em que fosse aplicada pena alternativa, tendo concluído corretamente que essa atividade, à luz da Lei Complementar Estadual nº 643/2018, seria desenvolvida:

  • A por cada unidade, nos processos a ela vinculados;
  • B pela unidade definida pelo Pleno do Tribunal de Justiça;
  • C pela unidade titularizada pelo juiz de Direito mais antigo na classe;
  • D pela unidade designada pelo presidente do Tribunal de Justiça;
  • E pela unidade titularizada pelo juiz de Direito mais antigo na carreira.
27

O Tribunal de Justiça do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte, por seu órgão competente, recebeu solicitação para que fosse criada uma nova unidade judiciária em Comarca de entrância intermediária.
De acordo com a sistemática estabelecida na Lei Complementar Estadual nº 643/2018, devem ser considerados critérios de natureza:

  • A exclusivamente forense, sendo que a criação está condicionada a que a estimativa de casos novos no último triênio seja igual ou superior ao dobro da média de casos novos por magistrado em todas as unidades judiciárias de igual competência no Estado;
  • B exclusivamente forense, sendo que a criação está condicionada a que o acervo existente na unidade a ser desmembrada seja igual ou superior ao dobro do acervo existente em todas as unidades judiciárias de igual competência da macrorregião;
  • C demográfica e forense, sendo que, em relação a este último, a criação está condicionada a que a estimativa de casos novos no último quinquênio seja igual ou superior ao dobro da média de casos novos por magistrado em todas as unidades judiciárias de igual competência no Estado;
  • D demográfica e forense, sendo que, em relação a este último, a criação está condicionada a que a estimativa de casos novos no último triênio seja igual ou superior ao dobro da média de casos novos por magistrado em algumas das unidades judiciárias de igual competência na mesma base territorial;
  • E demográfica, temporal e forense, sendo que, em relação a este último, a criação está condicionada a que a estimativa de casos novos no último biênio seja igual ou superior ao dobro da mediana de casos novos por magistrado em algumas das unidades judiciárias de igual competência na mesma base territorial.
28

Ana, estudante de direito, questionou o seu professor sobre quais seriam os legitimados à apresentação de proposta de Emenda à Constituição do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte.
O professor respondeu, corretamente, que têm legitimidade:

  • A 1/3, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; e o governador do Estado;
  • B 1/3, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; o governador do Estado; e 3%, no mínimo, do eleitorado estadual, distribuídos, pelo menos, em 3/5 dos Municípios do Estado;
  • C metade, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; o governador do Estado; e 5%, no mínimo, do eleitorado estadual, distribuídos, pelo menos, em metade dos Municípios do Estado;
  • D metade, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; e mais da metade das Câmaras Municipais existentes no Estado, manifestando-se, cada uma delas, pela maioria absoluta de seus membros;
  • E 1/3, no mínimo, dos membros da Assembleia Legislativa; o governador do Estado; e mais da metade das Câmaras Municipais existentes no Estado, manifestando-se, cada uma delas, pela maioria relativa de seus membros.
29

Maria, servidora ocupante de cargo de provimento efetivo no Poder Judiciário do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte, foi designada para substituir Joana, ocupante de cargo de provimento em comissão, que se encontrava afastada das suas funções.
Nesse caso, consoante a sistemática estabelecida pela Lei Complementar Estadual nº 715/2022, é correto afirmar que Maria:

  • A pode cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, fazendo jus a um acréscimo de 50% em sua remuneração regular, pago de modo proporcional, caso a substituição se dê por prazo superior a trinta dias;
  • B pode cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, também fazendo jus à retribuição deste último, paga de modo proporcional, caso a substituição se dê por prazo superior a dez dias;
  • C deverá ser afastada do seu cargo efetivo, considerando a expressa vedação de cumulação de cargos no âmbito do Poder Judiciário, o que não impediria Maria de cumular uma função de confiança;
  • D poderia cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, no caso de vacância deste último, também fazendo jus à retribuição correlata, paga de modo proporcional;
  • E pode cumular o cargo efetivo com o cargo em comissão, mas deve optar pela remuneração de um deles, com os benefícios correlatos.
30
João, fiscal de Tributos Estaduais do Mato Grosso, no exercício da função, prejudicou deliberadamente a reputação de outros servidores públicos lotados no mesmo setor onde trabalha.

De acordo com o Código de Ética Funcional do Servidor Público Civil do Estado de Mato Grosso, seguindo o procedimento previsto na Lei Complementar Estadual nº 112/2002, pela violação de norma estipulada no citado Código, João está sujeito à cominação de
  • A censura, reservadamente, aplicada pelo Governador do Estado, após parecer exarado pela Procuradoria-Geral do Estado.
  • B suspensão por até 30 (trinta) dias, aplicada pelo Secretário de Estado de Administração, após parecer exarado pela Comissão de Ética.
  • C advertência, que é aplicável aos servidores públicos no exercício do cargo efetivo ou em comissão, emprego público ou função de confiança.
  • D suspensão por até 90 (noventa) dias, que é aplicável aos servidores públicos no exercício do cargo efetivo, e não aos ocupantes de cargo em comissão, que podem ser exonerados ad nutum.
  • E advertência, que é aplicável aos servidores públicos no exercício do cargo efetivo, e não aos ocupantes de cargo em comissão, que podem ser exonerados ad nutum.