CESPE/UnB-2007 – DIPLOMATA – CACD – WRITING EXAMINATION – LÍNGUA INGLESA – CONCURSO DE ADMISSÃO À CARREIRA DE DIPLOMATA.

❑ PROVA DE LÍNGUA INGLESA: CESPE/UnB-2007-DIPLOMATA-CACD-WRITING EXAMINATION.

www.cespe.unb.br

❑ ESTRUTURA-PROVA:

➭ TRANSLATION (English/Portuguese) – 25 points.

- Text (1 parágrafo) – The United States in Literature.

➭ VERSION (Portuguese/English) – 25 points.

- Text (2 parágrafos) – Brasil 2002.

➭ COMPOSITION – [Length: 350 to 450 words] – 50 points.

- Assunto (geral) – Nationalism – Internationalism.

- Tema (específico) – Discuta a declaração acima, adaptada de um discurso do então secretário-geral das Nações Unidas, Dag Hammarskjöld, na Universidade de Stanford em 1955, à luz dos atuais eventos políticos internacionais.

➧ PROVA:

Translate into Portuguese the following text adapted from John Cornwell’s, Seminary Boy (New York: Doubleday, 2006):

By late 1944, and after four wartime home removals, I was attending a Catholic primary school run by Irish nuns and spinsters, surrounded by a hostile world of unbelief. One Sunday a V-2 rocket destroyed a nearby Anglican church, killing most of the congregation. The next day Miss Doonan, who taught us so piously to make the sign of the
cross, informed us that these people had been struck down by God because they were Protestants.

            
The day before we celebrated the end of the war in Europe, I was humming to myself, skipping ahead of the girl who took me to school, when two bull terriers hurtled round the corner and sank their teeth into my plump legs. I spent the morning in a doctor’s surgery being stitched up and painted with iodine. According to the policeman who visited our house on Victory Day, the dogs’ owner claimed that I had made the animals bite me by my singing and dancing.

     Resposta (Inglês→português)     :           

No fim de 1944, após quatro mudanças de residência por causa da guerra, eu frequentava uma escola primária administrada por solteironas e freiras irlandesas, cercada por um mundo hostil de descrença. Num domingo, um foguete V-2 destruiu uma igreja Anglicana que ficava próximo, matando a maior parte da congregação. No dia seguinte, a senhorita Doonan, que nos ensinou tão fervorosamente a fazer o sinal da cruz, informou-nos que aquelas pessoas haviam sido golpeadas por Deus porque eram protestantes.
            
Um dia antes de celebrarmos o fim da Guerra na Europa, eu estava cantando bem baixinho, pulando à frente da garota que me levava para a escola, quando dois cachorros da raça bull terrier pularam de trás da esquina e cravaram os dentes na minha perna roliça. Eu passei a manhã em um consultório médico levando pontos e pinceladas de iodo. De acordo com o policial que visitou nossa casa no Dia da Vitória, o dono dos cães afirmou que eu havia provocado a mordida dos animais com a minha dança e a minha música.

Translate into English the following text adapted from Wilson Martins’ A Palavra Escrita (São Paulo: Editora Ática, 1996):

Não havia razão para que os gregos amassem e, por conseqüência, guardassem os seus próprios livros: Sócrates, como tantos outros, nada escreveu. Desprezando profundamente os “bárbaros”, não havia igualmente razão para que amassem e, por conseqüência, procurassem guardar os livros estrangeiros. Assim, o povo letrado por excelência da Antiguidade, a pátria das letras e das artes, não possuía bibliotecas.
            
Para completar o paradoxo, é um povo militar e guerreiro, comerciante e prático, imediatista e político, que só admitia a palavra — escrita ou oral — como instrumento da ação, que vai, no mundo ocidental, possuir as melhores bibliotecas e, em particular, as primeiras bibliotecas públicas. Nisto, aliás, neste último traço, está gravado o caráter de um povo, voltado para a conquista do mundo e capaz de imediatamente perceber a utilidade de todas as armas: com os romanos, o livro passa da categoria sagrada para a categoria profana, deixa de ser intocável para ser condutor, e, posto ao alcance de todos, é o veículo por excelência das idéias, dos projetos e dos empreendimentos.

    Resposta (Português→Inglês)     :           

]There was no reason for the Greeks to love and therefore keep their own books. Socrates, like so many others, wrote nothing. Deeply despising “barbarians”, there was neither reason for them to love and therefore preserve foreign books. Thus, the most remarkably literate people of the Ancient World had no libraries. 

            
In order to render the paradox complete, the best libraries and particularly the first public libraries, in the Western World, will belong to a military and bellicose, trading and practical, immediatistic and political people, who only allowed for words – written or spoken – as instruments for action. Indeed, this last trait summarizes the character of a people driven
for world conquest and capable of instantly perceiving the utility of all weapons: with the Romans, book leave the sacred sphere to enter the profane one, shed their aura of aloofness to become means, and, available to everyone, turn into the privileged vehicle of ideas, projects and entreprises.

03. (CESPE-2007-MRE-DIPLOMATA-DISCURSIVA)

Read the following text adapted from Empires with Expiration Dates by Niall Ferguson in FOREIGN POLICY, nr. 156 (Sept./Oct. 2006), and complete the exercises at the end.

Empires, more than nation-states, are the principal actors on the stage of world history. Much of history consists of the deeds of the few score empires that once ruled alien peoples across large tracts of the globe. Yet the lifespan of empires has tended to decline. Compared with their predecessors, the empires of the last century were singularly shortlived. Reduced imperial life expectancy has profound implications for our own time.
            
Officially, there are no empires now, only 190-plus nation-states. Yet the ghosts of empires past continue to stalk the Earth. Regional conflicts are easily — nay, often glibly — explained in terms of imperial sins of yore: an arbitrary border here, a strategy of divide-and-rule there.
            
Moreover, many of today's most important states are still recognizably the progeny of empires. Imperial inheritance is apparent from the Russian Federation to Great Britain, Italy and Germany. India is the heir of the Mughal Empire and the British Raj, China the direct descendant of the Middle Kingdom. In the Americas, the imperial legacy is patent from Canada to Argentina.
           
Today's world, in short, is as much one of ex-empires and former colonies as it is of nation-states. Even institutions designed to reorder the world after 1945 have a distinctly imperial bent. For what ______ are the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council if not a cozy ______ of empires past? And what, pray, is "humanitarian intervention" if not a more politically correct-sounding version of the western empires' old "civilizing mission"?
            
Empires’ life cycles and geographic reach are remarkably irregular. Whereas the average Roman empire lasted over 800 years, equivalents elsewhere before the modern age survived no more than half that time. The empires forged in the 20th century, by contrast, were comparatively short. Why did they prove so ephemeral? The answer lies partly in the unprecedented degrees of centralized power, economic control, and social homogeneity to which the Communists in Russia and China, the Fascists in Germany and Italy and the expansionist Japanese aspired. They were not content with the haphazard administrative arrangements that had characterized the old empires. Though they inherited from the 19th century nation-builders an insatiable appetite for uniformity, these new "empire states" repudiated religious and legal constraints on the use of force. They relished sweeping away old political institutions and existing social structures. Above all, they made a virtue of ruthlessness.
            
The empire states of the mid-20th century were to a considerable extent the architects of their own demise. In particular, the Germans and Japaneses imposed their authority on other peoples with such unbridled ferocity that they undermined local collaboration thus laying the foundations for indigenous resistance. At the same time, their territorial ambitions were so boundless that they swiftly conjured into being an unassailable coalition of imperial rivals in the form of the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and the United States.
           
Empires do not survive for long if they cannot establish and sustain local consent and if they allow more powerful coalitions of rival empires to unite against them. The crucial question is whether or not today's global powers behave differently from their imperial forebears.
            
Publicly, the leaders of the American and Chinese republics deny entertaining imperial designs. Both states are the product of revolutions and have entrenched anti-imperialist traditions. Yet the mask does slip on occasions. In 2004 a senior presidential advisor confided to a journalist: "We're an empire now and when we act, we create our own reality." Similar thoughts may cross the minds of China's leaders. In any case, it is perfectly possible for a republic to behave like an empire in practice, while remaining in denial about its loss of republican virtue.
             
A historical pattern of U.S. imperial intervention underpins the widespread assumption that the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq will not long outlast President Bush's term in office. Empire — especially unstated empire — is ephemeral in a way that sets our own age quite apart. In the American case, however, the real snag is not the alienation of conquered peoples or threats posed by rival empires (the prime solvents of other 20th-century empires) but domestic constraints. These take three distinct forms.
            
The first can be classified as a troop deficit. The United States prefers to maintain a relatively small proportion of its population in the armed forces, at 0.5 percent. Moreover, only a small and highly trained part of this military is available for combat duties overseas. Members of this elite are not to be readily sacrificed. Nor are they easy to replace.
            
The second constraint on America's tacit empire is the burgeoning budget deficit. The costs of the war in Iraq have substantially exceeded the administration’s forecast: $290 billion since the invasion in 2003.
            
Finally, there is the attention deficit. Past empires were not sorely taxed to sustain public support for protracted conflicts. The American public, by contrast, tires quickly. It has taken less than 18 months for a majority of American voters to start viewing the invasion of Iraq as a mistake.
            
An empire will thrive and endure so long as the benefits of exerting power over foreign peoples outstrip the costs of doing so in the eyes of the
imperialists; and so long as the benefits of knuckling under a foreign yoke exceed the costs of resistance in the eyes of the subjects. Such calculations implicitly take stock of the potential costs of relinquishing power to a rival empire.
            
For the time being, the costs of empire building look too high to most Americans while the benefits seem at best nebulous. Moreover, a rival equipped or willing to do the job is clearly wanting. With its republican institutions battered but still intact, the United States hardly passes muster as a latter-day Rome.
            
All that may change, however. In a world where natural resources are destined to become scarcer, the old mainsprings of imperial rivalry resist. Empire today is both unstated and unsung. History suggests, though, that the calculus of power could well swing back in its favor tomorrow.

04. (CESPE-2007-MRE-DIPLOMATA-DISCURSIVA)

Summarize the text, in your own words, in up to 200 words:

    Resposta - RESUMO     

Modelo 1 (Resumo):           

Despite the historical importance of empires, modern history has seen a marked decline in their lifespan. Today, nearly 200 nation-states exist and, officially, there are no empires.

             
Notwithstanding, the impact of empires on the modern world is pervasive. Many countries are the result of imperial actions of the past, as are many of today’s conflicts. Even international organizations appear to be influenced by the offspring of empires.
             
The short-lived empires of the 20th Century were greatly responsible for their own downfall: their ruthlessness bred resistance and their expansionism contributed to the creation of opposing coalitions. Empires cannot overcome lack of local consent and powerful opponents.
             
The leaders of today’s powers, such as China and America, deny having imperial intentions, thus the question of whether they behave differently when compared to their predecessors gains importance. In the American case, among several factors, one appears to make a significant difference: the lack of popular support for long wars.
             
Empires exist only while imperialists and their subjects believe there is a benefit. The American people’s lack of support for long conflicts seems to prevent imperial designs. Notwithstanding, the increasing scarcity of resources could change that picture, and empires could stage a comeback.

05. (CESPE-2007-MRE-DIPLOMATA-DISCURSIVA)

Fill in each of the two gaps in paragraph four of the text above with an appropriate word or phrase:

"For what ____ are the five permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council if not a cozy ____ of empires past?"

     Resposta      

"For what truly are the five permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council if not a cozy gathering of empires past?"

06. (CESPE-2007-MRE-DIPLOMATA-DISCURSIVA)

Choose the most appropriate substitute in context for the words underlined in paragraph twelve:

(I) taxed:

"Past empires were not sorely taxed to sustain public support for protracted conflicts."

1) drained
2) compelled
3) levied
4) hurt
5) pressed

     Resposta    I    (5) pressed 

"Past empires were not sorely taxed to sustain public support for protracted conflicts."

(Os impérios passados não foram gravemente tributados para sustentar o apoio público a conflitos prolongados.)

(II) protracted:

"Past empires were not sorely taxed to sustain public support for protracted conflicts."

1) dreadful
2) damaging
3) drawn out
4) costly
5) withering

👉    Resposta   II   (3) drawn out  

"Past empires were not sorely taxed to sustain public support for protracted conflicts."
(Os impérios passados não foram gravemente tributados para sustentar o apoio público a conflitos prolongados.)

07. (CESPE-2007-MRE-DIPLOMATA-DISCURSIVA)

Re-write the following sentence from the antepenultimate paragraph of the text starting as indicated below:

"An empire will thrive and endure so long as the benefits of exerting power over foreign peoples outstrip the costs of doing so in the eyes of the imperialists."

Only when the benefits ________________________.

    Resposta     

Only when the benefits of the exercise of power over alien civilizations outweigh their price in the eyes of the conquerors, will an empire grow or survive.

Write a composition on the following quotation from Albert Einstein:

“The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.”

(Length: 350-450 words)

    Redação em Inglês     :

Modelo 01 (com 05 prágrafos- Média de 80 palavras / parágrafo):

            

When Marx stated that revolutions were the locomotives of history, he probably envisaged the technical and scientific revolutions that would alter the course of human actions and thought. What he could not foresee, however, was the boundless destructive capacity of the atom bomb. While developments in nuclear technology have permitted many countries to expand an otherwise deficient energy base, the world continues to fear the prospect of a nuclear war. The end of the Cold War may have somewhat dissipated that fear, but the bellicose tendencies of political leaders are a constant source of preoccupation.
            
Many argue today that scientific experiments with nuclear fission have produced more good than evil. Principal in what pertains to the former is the enlarged capacity which some countries now have to produce energy. With nuclear power, it is possible to provide electricity to more people at a lower cost, especially given the rising prices of fossil fuels used in thermal plants. The environmental effects, though ultimately ambiguous, are visually pleasing: less smoke and a reduction of coal mining in what have once again become pleasant rural landscapes.
            
Some of these arguments, however, are difficult to sustain. On the one hand, while the European countryside seems to be regaining its idyllic wilderness, much of the nuclear waste produced is being exported to poorer countries, which have found a new, though immensely risky, source of income. On the other hand, it has not been clearly shown by world leaders that the benefits of nuclear energy outweigh the dangers of stockpiling and testing nuclear warheads. One is led to question whether nuclear experiments should be banned altogether.
            
The problem lies in the repeated demonstrations of irresponsible behavior by Western and non-Western leaders alike. Some countries, such as North Korea and Iran, have been deemed “rogue states” for their disregard of international norms regulating nuclear experiments. Western leaders, however, also defy societal beliefs and needs, as they undermine world peace by maintaining arsenals and, at least until the 1990s, conducting explosions. This attitude seems to reflect an unchanging militaristic mindset within most governments and, possibly, a significant portion of voters.