@teacherandreabelo

Teacher Andrea Belo

Teacher Andrea Belo

 CODEMIG/2015
TURISMÓLOGO
FGV Teacher Andrea Belo

CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV

Sustainable mining – oxymoron or a way of the future?
Mining is an activity that has persisted since the start of humans using tools. However, one might argue that digging a big hole in the ground and selling the
finite resources that come out of that hole is not sustainable, especially when the digging involves the use of other finite resources (i.e. fuels) and produces
a lot of greenhouse gases.
The counter argument could go along the lines that minerals are not being lost or destroyed through mining and mineral processing – the elements are
being shifted around, and converted into new forms. Metals can even be extracted from waste, seawater or even sewage, and recycled. But a more simple
argument is possible: a mine can be sustainable if it is economically, socially and environmentally beneficial in the short and long term. To be sustainable,
the positive benefits of mining should outweigh any negative impacts. […]
Social positives are often associated with mines in regional areas, such as providing better amenities in a nearby town, or providing employment (an
economic and social positive). Social negatives can also occur, such as dust, noise, traffic and visual amenity. These are commonly debated and, whilst
sometimes controversial, can be managed with sufficient corporate commitment, stakeholder engagement, and enough time to work through the issues.
Time is the key parameter - it may take several years for a respectful process of community input, but as long as it is possible for social negatives to be
outweighed by social positives, then the project will be socially sustainable.
It is most likely that a mine development will have some environmental negatives, such as direct impacts on flora and fauna through clearing of vegetation
and habitat within the mine footprint. Some mines will have impacts which extend beyond the mine site, such as disruption to groundwater, production of
silt and disposal of waste. Certainly these impacts will need to be managed throughout the mine life, along with robust rehabilitation and closure planning.
[…]
The real turning point will come when mining companies go beyond environmental compliance to create ‘heritage projects’ that can enhance the
environmental or social benefits in a substantial way – by more than the environmental offsets needed just to make up for the negatives created by the
mine. In order to foster these innovative mining heritage projects we need to promote ‘sustainability assessments’ - not just ‘environmental assessments’.
This will lead to a more mature appreciation of the whole system whereby the economic and social factors, as well as environmental factors, are considered
in a holistic manner.
(adapted from https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/western-australia-division/sustainable-mining-oxymoron-or-way-future. Retrieved on August 10, 2015)
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV
As regards the content of Text 3, analyse the assertions below:
I – It is well-known that the resources extracted from mines are endless.
II – The social negative impacts of mining may be minimized as time goes by.
III – Sustainable assessment has a wider field of action than environmental assessment.
IV – There is agreement that negative impacts of mining are restricted to the site.
The correct sentences are only:
(A) I and II;
(B) I and IV;
(C) II and III;
(D) II and IV; GABARITO: C
(E) III and IV.
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV

Sustainable mining – oxymoron or a way of the future?
Mining is an activity that has persisted since the start of humans using tools. However, one might argue that digging a big hole in the ground and selling the
finite resources that come out of that hole is not sustainable, especially when the digging involves the use of other finite resources (i.e. fuels) and produces
a lot of greenhouse gases.
The counter argument could go along the lines that minerals are not being lost or destroyed through mining and mineral processing – the elements are
being shifted around, and converted into new forms. Metals can even be extracted from waste, seawater or even sewage, and recycled. But a more simple
argument is possible: a mine can be sustainable if it is economically, socially and environmentally beneficial in the short and long term. To be sustainable,
the positive benefits of mining should outweigh any negative impacts. […]
Social positives are often associated with mines in regional areas, such as providing better amenities in a nearby town, or providing employment (an
economic and social positive). Social negatives can also occur, such as dust, noise, traffic and visual amenity. These are commonly debated and, whilst
sometimes controversial, can be managed with sufficient corporate commitment, stakeholder engagement, and enough time to work through the issues.
Time is the key parameter - it may take several years for a respectful process of community input, but as long as it is possible for social negatives to be
outweighed by social positives, then the project will be socially sustainable.
It is most likely that a mine development will have some environmental negatives, such as direct impacts on flora and fauna through clearing of vegetation
and habitat within the mine footprint. Some mines will have impacts which extend beyond the mine site, such as disruption to groundwater, production of
silt and disposal of waste. Certainly these impacts will need to be managed throughout the mine life, along with robust rehabilitation and closure planning.
[…]
The real turning point will come when mining companies go beyond environmental compliance to create ‘heritage projects’ that can enhance the
environmental or social benefits in a substantial way – by more than the environmental offsets needed just to make up for the negatives created by the
mine. In order to foster these innovative mining heritage projects we need to promote ‘sustainability assessments’ - not just ‘environmental assessments’.
This will lead to a more mature appreciation of the whole system whereby the economic and social factors, as well as environmental factors, are considered
in a holistic manner.
(adapted from https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/western-australia-division/sustainable-mining-oxymoron-or-way-future. Retrieved on August 10, 2015)
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV
The title suggests that the expression “sustainable mining” may:
(A) imply anger;
(B) be contradictory;
(C) sound repetitive;
(D) reveal impatience;
(E) seem rather boring.

GABARITO: B
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV

Sustainable mining – oxymoron or a way of the future?
Mining is an activity that has persisted since the start of humans using tools. However, one might argue that digging a big hole in the ground and selling the
finite resources that come out of that hole is not sustainable, especially when the digging involves the use of other finite resources (i.e. fuels) and produces
a lot of greenhouse gases.
The counter argument could go along the lines that minerals are not being lost or destroyed through mining and mineral processing – the elements are
being shifted around, and converted into new forms. Metals can even be extracted from waste, seawater or even sewage, and recycled. But a more simple
argument is possible: a mine can be sustainable if it is economically, socially and environmentally beneficial in the short and long term. To be sustainable,
the positive benefits of mining should outweigh any negative impacts. […]
Social positives are often associated with mines in regional areas, such as providing better amenities in a nearby town, or providing employment (an
economic and social positive). Social negatives can also occur, such as dust, noise, traffic and visual amenity. These are commonly debated and, whilst
sometimes controversial, can be managed with sufficient corporate commitment, stakeholder engagement, and enough time to work through the issues.
Time is the key parameter - it may take several years for a respectful process of community input, but as long as it is possible for social negatives to be
outweighed by social positives, then the project will be socially sustainable.
It is most likely that a mine development will have some environmental negatives, such as direct impacts on flora and fauna through clearing of vegetation
and habitat within the mine footprint. Some mines will have impacts which extend beyond the mine site, such as disruption to groundwater, production of
silt and disposal of waste. Certainly these impacts will need to be managed throughout the mine life, along with robust rehabilitation and closure planning.
[…]
The real turning point will come when mining companies go beyond environmental compliance to create ‘heritage projects’ that can enhance the
environmental or social benefits in a substantial way – by more than the environmental offsets needed just to make up for the negatives created by the
mine. In order to foster these innovative mining heritage projects we need to promote ‘sustainability assessments’ - not just ‘environmental assessments’.
This will lead to a more mature appreciation of the whole system whereby the economic and social factors, as well as environmental factors, are considered
in a holistic manner.
(adapted from https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/western-australia-division/sustainable-mining-oxymoron-or-way-future. Retrieved on August 10, 2015)
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV
When Text 3 informs that elements can be “shifted around” (l. 9), it
means they can be:
(A) discarded from the mining pit;
(B) maintained in the same setting;
(C) unearthed from the digging site;
(D) stabilized into different elements;
(E) moved from one place to another.

GABARITO: E
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV

Sustainable mining – oxymoron or a way of the future?
Mining is an activity that has persisted since the start of humans using tools. However, one might argue that digging a big hole in the ground and selling the
finite resources that come out of that hole is not sustainable, especially when the digging involves the use of other finite resources (i.e. fuels) and produces
a lot of greenhouse gases.
The counter argument could go along the lines that minerals are not being lost or destroyed through mining and mineral processing – the elements are
being shifted around, and converted into new forms. Metals can even be extracted from waste, seawater or even sewage, and recycled. But a more simple
argument is possible: a mine can be sustainable if it is economically, socially and environmentally beneficial in the short and long term. To be sustainable,
the positive benefits of mining should outweigh any negative impacts. […]
Social positives are often associated with mines in regional areas, such as providing better amenities in a nearby town, or providing employment (an
economic and social positive). Social negatives can also occur, such as dust, noise, traffic and visual amenity. These are commonly debated and, whilst
sometimes controversial, can be managed with sufficient corporate commitment, stakeholder engagement, and enough time to work through the issues.
Time is the key parameter - it may take several years for a respectful process of community input, but as long as it is possible for social negatives to be
outweighed by social positives, then the project will be socially sustainable.
It is most likely that a mine development will have some environmental negatives, such as direct impacts on flora and fauna through clearing of vegetation
and habitat within the mine footprint. Some mines will have impacts which extend beyond the mine site, such as disruption to groundwater, production of
silt and disposal of waste. Certainly these impacts will need to be managed throughout the mine life, along with robust rehabilitation and closure planning.
[…]
The real turning point will come when mining companies go beyond environmental compliance to create ‘heritage projects’ that can enhance the
environmental or social benefits in a substantial way – by more than the environmental offsets needed just to make up for the negatives created by the
mine. In order to foster these innovative mining heritage projects we need to promote ‘sustainability assessments’ - not just ‘environmental assessments’.
This will lead to a more mature appreciation of the whole system whereby the economic and social factors, as well as environmental factors, are considered
in a holistic manner.
(adapted from https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/western-australia-division/sustainable-mining-oxymoron-or-way-future. Retrieved on August 10, 2015)
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODEMIG/2015 – TURISMÓLOGO – FGV
The excerpt “one might argue” (l. 2) expresses:
(A) denial;
(B) advice;
(C) ability;
(D) possibility;
(E) improbability.

GABARITO: D
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

THANK YOU!
@teacherandreabelo

Teacher Andrea Belo Teacher Andrea Belo

Teacher Andrea Belo

 CODESP/2010
GUARDA PORTUÁRIO
FGV Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
From lines 1 to 3 we deduce that in the nineteen-thirties
(A) there were just a few tugboats in New York Harbor.
(B) New York harbor had plenty of tugboat traffic.
(C) the traffic of tugboats in New York Harbor was little.
(D) New York Harbor was a calm place.
(E) New York was a sleepy fishing community.

GABARITO: B
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
In the passage, harbor (line 3) is
(A) a shelter for ships.
(B) a place where cars may be parked for a time.
(C) an area where vehicles are repaired.
(D) a stopping-place for railway trains.
(E) an area of open level ground for operation of aircraft.

GABARITO: A
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
According to lines 3 to 7, the so-called Irish Navy boats were
(A) uniform.
(B) varied.
(C) small.
(D) hired.
(E) old.

GABARITO: B
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
According to lines 3 to 7, the boats were propelled
(A) by diesel only.
(B) by oars and coal.
(C) by means of sails.
(D) by various types of fuel.
(E) by paddles.

GABARITO: D
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
According to lines 7 to 9, the people working on the boats were
(A) close friends.
(B) apprentices.
(C) skilled sailors.
(D) hard workers.
(E) relatives.

GABARITO: E
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
From lines 7 to 9 we apprehend that life around tugboats in New York in
the thirties was
(A) quite wealthy.
(B) very healthy.
(C) somewhat dangerous.
(D) very safe.
(E) rather weary.

GABARITO: C
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
In the passage, petty (line 9) means
(A) violent.
(B) ruthless.
(C) friendly.
(D) small.
(E) tough.

GABARITO: D
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
From lines 10 to 12 we deduce that tugboats
(A) could go in and get back out where other mariners wouldn´t dare to go.
(B) would just keep up with any other vessel.
(C) were worse than other ships.
(D) were not competitive at all.
(E) were just rusted vessels.

GABARITO: A
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
According to the passage as a whole we infer that
(A) New York Harbor was defended by the Irish Navy in the thirties.
(B) tugboats sink freighters.
(C) towing ships is a business that must be run by family members only.
(D) tugboats are scarcely equipped to go where other vessels can go.
(E) the jobs performed by tugs on the sea are various and highly necessary.

GABARITO: E
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV

New York was once the tugboat capital of the world, with more than eight
hundred boats crisscrossing its harbor in the nineteen-thirties. The McAllisters,
the Crowleys and the Danns, among others, were part of the so-called Irish Navy,
with its patchy fleets of steamboats, diesel tugs and coal barges. The boats were
manned by brothers, uncles, cousins, their blood ties a bond against the petty
thieves and extortionists of the waterfront. They docked ships, towed barges,
salvaged freighters, and generally went where other vessels couldn’t go.

About eight hundred million tons of cargo are still moved by tugboats in the
United States every year, but in recent decades the traffic has gradually shifted.
Houston now takes in more cargo than New York and New Jersey combined.

(from THE NEW YORKER, April 19, 2010)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo
CODESP/2010 – GUARDA PORTUÁRIO – FGV
From the passage as a whole, New York
(A) has always been the tugboat capital of the world.
(B) is the capital of the world.
(C) used to be the tugboat capital of the world.
(D) must be the tugboat capital of the world.
(E) will certainly be the tugboat capital of the world.

GABARITO: C
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

THANK YOU!
@teacherandreabelo

Teacher Andrea Belo Teacher Andrea Belo

Teacher Andrea Belo

 MRE/2016
OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA
FGV
Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV

Use of language in diplomacy
What language should one use when speaking to diplomats, or what language should diplomats use? Or, to be more precise, what language/languages should a (young) diplomat try to learn to be
more successful in his profession?
The term "language in diplomacy" obviously can be interpreted in several ways. First, as tongue ("mother" tongue or an acquired one), the speech "used by one nation, tribe, or other similar large
group of people"; in this sense we can say, for example, that French used to be the predominant diplomatic language in the first half of the 20th century. Second, as a special way of expressing the
subtle needs of the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the delegate of such-and-such a country spoke of the given subject in totally non-diplomatic language. Also,
the term can refer to the particular form, style, manner or tone of expression; such as the minister formulated his conditions in unusually strong language. It may mean as well the verbal or non-
verbal expression of thoughts or feelings: sending the gunships is a language that everybody understands.
All of these meanings - and probably several others - can be utilised in both oral and written practice. In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is of major importance, since language
is not a simple tool, vehicle for transmission of thoughts, or instrument of communication, but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation, and that has been so from the early
beginnings of our profession. That is why from early times the first envoys of the Egyptian pharaohs, Roman legates, mediaeval Dubrovnik consuls, etc., had to be educated and trained people,
well-spoken and polyglots.
Let us first look into different aspects of diplomatic language in its basic meaning - that of a tongue. Obviously, the first problem to solve is finding a common tongue. Diplomats only exceptionally
find themselves in the situation to be able to communicate in one language, common to all participants. This may be done between, for example, Germans and Austrians, or Portuguese and
Brazilians, or representatives of different Arab countries, or British and Americans, etc. Not only are such occasions rare, but very often there is a serious difference between the same language
used in one country and another.
There are several ways to overcome the problem of communication between people who speak different mother tongues. None of these ways is ideal. One solution, obviously, is that one of the
interlocutors speaks the language of the other. Problems may arise: the knowledge of the language may not be adequate, one side is making a concession and the other has an immediate and
significant advantage, there are possible political implications, it may be difficult to apply in multilateral diplomacy, etc. A second possibility is that both sides use a third, neutral, language. A
potential problem may be that neither side possesses full linguistic knowledge and control, leading to possible bad misunderstandings. Nevertheless, this method is frequently applied in
international practice because of its political advantages. A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used, particularly in multilateral diplomacy or for negotiations at a very high political
level - not only for reasons of equity, but because politicians and statesmen often do not speak foreign languages. This method also has disadvantages: it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes
inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect. […] Finally, there is the possibility of using one international synthetic, artificial language, such as Esperanto; this solution would have many advantages,
but unfortunately is not likely to be implemented soon, mostly because of the opposition of factors that dominate in the international political - and therefore also cultural and linguistic - scene.
So, which language is the diplomatic one? The answer is not simple at all […].
Words are bricks from which sentences are made. Each sentence should be a wound-up thought. If one wants to be clear, and particularly when using a language which he does not master
perfectly, it is better to use short, simple sentences. On the contrary, if one wishes to camouflage his thoughts or even not say anything specific, it can be well achieved by using a more complicated
style, complex sentences, digressions, interrupting one's own flow of thought and introducing new topics. One may leave the impression of being a little confused, but the basic purpose of
withholding the real answer can be accomplished.
(adapted from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.PDF)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV
In the second paragraph of Text III the author refers to different meanings the term
“language” can carry. When he argues that “sending the gunships is a language that
everybody understands”, he means that:
(A) threatening language should not be used in diplomatic exchanges;
(B) people understand the sentence because it is written in plain English;
(C) the language of diplomacy is rather complex so it is better to act first;
(D) one does not need to understand the language because this action speaks for itself;
(E) one must learn how to speak many languages to avoid misunderstandings and war.

GABARITO: D
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV

Use of language in diplomacy
What language should one use when speaking to diplomats, or what language should diplomats use? Or, to be more precise, what language/languages should a (young) diplomat try to learn to be
more successful in his profession?
The term "language in diplomacy" obviously can be interpreted in several ways. First, as tongue ("mother" tongue or an acquired one), the speech "used by one nation, tribe, or other similar large
group of people"; in this sense we can say, for example, that French used to be the predominant diplomatic language in the first half of the 20th century. Second, as a special way of expressing the
subtle needs of the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the delegate of such-and-such a country spoke of the given subject in totally non-diplomatic language. Also,
the term can refer to the particular form, style, manner or tone of expression; such as the minister formulated his conditions in unusually strong language. It may mean as well the verbal or non-
verbal expression of thoughts or feelings: sending the gunships is a language that everybody understands.
All of these meanings - and probably several others - can be utilised in both oral and written practice. In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is of major importance, since language
is not a simple tool, vehicle for transmission of thoughts, or instrument of communication, but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation, and that has been so from the early
beginnings of our profession. That is why from early times the first envoys of the Egyptian pharaohs, Roman legates, mediaeval Dubrovnik consuls, etc., had to be educated and trained people,
well-spoken and polyglots.
Let us first look into different aspects of diplomatic language in its basic meaning - that of a tongue. Obviously, the first problem to solve is finding a common tongue. Diplomats only exceptionally
find themselves in the situation to be able to communicate in one language, common to all participants. This may be done between, for example, Germans and Austrians, or Portuguese and
Brazilians, or representatives of different Arab countries, or British and Americans, etc. Not only are such occasions rare, but very often there is a serious difference between the same language
used in one country and another.
There are several ways to overcome the problem of communication between people who speak different mother tongues. None of these ways is ideal. One solution, obviously, is that one of the
interlocutors speaks the language of the other. Problems may arise: the knowledge of the language may not be adequate, one side is making a concession and the other has an immediate and
significant advantage, there are possible political implications, it may be difficult to apply in multilateral diplomacy, etc. A second possibility is that both sides use a third, neutral, language. A
potential problem may be that neither side possesses full linguistic knowledge and control, leading to possible bad misunderstandings. Nevertheless, this method is frequently applied in
international practice because of its political advantages. A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used, particularly in multilateral diplomacy or for negotiations at a very high political
level - not only for reasons of equity, but because politicians and statesmen often do not speak foreign languages. This method also has disadvantages: it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes
inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect. […] Finally, there is the possibility of using one international synthetic, artificial language, such as Esperanto; this solution would have many advantages,
but unfortunately is not likely to be implemented soon, mostly because of the opposition of factors that dominate in the international political - and therefore also cultural and linguistic - scene.
So, which language is the diplomatic one? The answer is not simple at all […].
Words are bricks from which sentences are made. Each sentence should be a wound-up thought. If one wants to be clear, and particularly when using a language which he does not master
perfectly, it is better to use short, simple sentences. On the contrary, if one wishes to camouflage his thoughts or even not say anything specific, it can be well achieved by using a more complicated
style, complex sentences, digressions, interrupting one's own flow of thought and introducing new topics. One may leave the impression of being a little confused, but the basic purpose of
withholding the real answer can be accomplished.
(adapted from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.PDF)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV
Mark the statements below as TRUE (T) or FALSE (F) according to points raised in Text III.
( ) Diplomats are often in situations where a common language is spoken.
( ) Using an interpreter as mediator is a flawless alternative for diplomatic meetings.
( ) Despite the efforts to do away with problems in communication, the ideal solution
has not been found yet.
The correct sequence is:
(A) F – T – T;
(B) T – F – F;
(C) T – T – F;
(D) F – T – F; GABARITO: E
(E) F – F – T.
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV

Use of language in diplomacy
What language should one use when speaking to diplomats, or what language should diplomats use? Or, to be more precise, what language/languages should a (young) diplomat try to learn to be
more successful in his profession?
The term "language in diplomacy" obviously can be interpreted in several ways. First, as tongue ("mother" tongue or an acquired one), the speech "used by one nation, tribe, or other similar large
group of people"; in this sense we can say, for example, that French used to be the predominant diplomatic language in the first half of the 20th century. Second, as a special way of expressing the
subtle needs of the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the delegate of such-and-such a country spoke of the given subject in totally non-diplomatic language. Also,
the term can refer to the particular form, style, manner or tone of expression; such as the minister formulated his conditions in unusually strong language. It may mean as well the verbal or non-
verbal expression of thoughts or feelings: sending the gunships is a language that everybody understands.
All of these meanings - and probably several others - can be utilised in both oral and written practice. In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is of major importance, since language
is not a simple tool, vehicle for transmission of thoughts, or instrument of communication, but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation, and that has been so from the early
beginnings of our profession. That is why from early times the first envoys of the Egyptian pharaohs, Roman legates, mediaeval Dubrovnik consuls, etc., had to be educated and trained people,
well-spoken and polyglots.
Let us first look into different aspects of diplomatic language in its basic meaning - that of a tongue. Obviously, the first problem to solve is finding a common tongue. Diplomats only exceptionally
find themselves in the situation to be able to communicate in one language, common to all participants. This may be done between, for example, Germans and Austrians, or Portuguese and
Brazilians, or representatives of different Arab countries, or British and Americans, etc. Not only are such occasions rare, but very often there is a serious difference between the same language
used in one country and another.
There are several ways to overcome the problem of communication between people who speak different mother tongues. None of these ways is ideal. One solution, obviously, is that one of the
interlocutors speaks the language of the other. Problems may arise: the knowledge of the language may not be adequate, one side is making a concession and the other has an immediate and
significant advantage, there are possible political implications, it may be difficult to apply in multilateral diplomacy, etc. A second possibility is that both sides use a third, neutral, language. A
potential problem may be that neither side possesses full linguistic knowledge and control, leading to possible bad misunderstandings. Nevertheless, this method is frequently applied in
international practice because of its political advantages. A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used, particularly in multilateral diplomacy or for negotiations at a very high political
level - not only for reasons of equity, but because politicians and statesmen often do not speak foreign languages. This method also has disadvantages: it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes
inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect. […] Finally, there is the possibility of using one international synthetic, artificial language, such as Esperanto; this solution would have many advantages,
but unfortunately is not likely to be implemented soon, mostly because of the opposition of factors that dominate in the international political - and therefore also cultural and linguistic - scene.
So, which language is the diplomatic one? The answer is not simple at all […].
Words are bricks from which sentences are made. Each sentence should be a wound-up thought. If one wants to be clear, and particularly when using a language which he does not master
perfectly, it is better to use short, simple sentences. On the contrary, if one wishes to camouflage his thoughts or even not say anything specific, it can be well achieved by using a more complicated
style, complex sentences, digressions, interrupting one's own flow of thought and introducing new topics. One may leave the impression of being a little confused, but the basic purpose of
withholding the real answer can be accomplished.
(adapted from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.PDF)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV
The sentence that offers a suggestion is:
(A) “Each sentence should be a wound-up thought”;
(B) “One may leave the impression of being a little confused”;
(C) “A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used”;
(D) “The term ‘language in diplomacy’ obviously can be interpreted in several ways”;
(E) “it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect”.

GABARITO: A
Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV

Use of language in diplomacy
What language should one use when speaking to diplomats, or what language should diplomats use? Or, to be more precise, what language/languages should a (young) diplomat try to learn to be
more successful in his profession?
The term "language in diplomacy" obviously can be interpreted in several ways. First, as tongue ("mother" tongue or an acquired one), the speech "used by one nation, tribe, or other similar large
group of people"; in this sense we can say, for example, that French used to be the predominant diplomatic language in the first half of the 20th century. Second, as a special way of expressing the
subtle needs of the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the delegate of such-and-such a country spoke of the given subject in totally non-diplomatic language. Also,
the term can refer to the particular form, style, manner or tone of expression; such as the minister formulated his conditions in unusually strong language. It may mean as well the verbal or non-
verbal expression of thoughts or feelings: sending the gunships is a language that everybody understands.
All of these meanings - and probably several others - can be utilised in both oral and written practice. In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is of major importance, since language
is not a simple tool, vehicle for transmission of thoughts, or instrument of communication, but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation, and that has been so from the early
beginnings of our profession. That is why from early times the first envoys of the Egyptian pharaohs, Roman legates, mediaeval Dubrovnik consuls, etc., had to be educated and trained people,
well-spoken and polyglots.
Let us first look into different aspects of diplomatic language in its basic meaning - that of a tongue. Obviously, the first problem to solve is finding a common tongue. Diplomats only exceptionally
find themselves in the situation to be able to communicate in one language, common to all participants. This may be done between, for example, Germans and Austrians, or Portuguese and
Brazilians, or representatives of different Arab countries, or British and Americans, etc. Not only are such occasions rare, but very often there is a serious difference between the same language
used in one country and another.
There are several ways to overcome the problem of communication between people who speak different mother tongues. None of these ways is ideal. One solution, obviously, is that one of the
interlocutors speaks the language of the other. Problems may arise: the knowledge of the language may not be adequate, one side is making a concession and the other has an immediate and
significant advantage, there are possible political implications, it may be difficult to apply in multilateral diplomacy, etc. A second possibility is that both sides use a third, neutral, language. A
potential problem may be that neither side possesses full linguistic knowledge and control, leading to possible bad misunderstandings. Nevertheless, this method is frequently applied in
international practice because of its political advantages. A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used, particularly in multilateral diplomacy or for negotiations at a very high political
level - not only for reasons of equity, but because politicians and statesmen often do not speak foreign languages. This method also has disadvantages: it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes
inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect. […] Finally, there is the possibility of using one international synthetic, artificial language, such as Esperanto; this solution would have many advantages,
but unfortunately is not likely to be implemented soon, mostly because of the opposition of factors that dominate in the international political - and therefore also cultural and linguistic - scene.
So, which language is the diplomatic one? The answer is not simple at all […].
Words are bricks from which sentences are made. Each sentence should be a wound-up thought. If one wants to be clear, and particularly when using a language which he does not master
perfectly, it is better to use short, simple sentences. On the contrary, if one wishes to camouflage his thoughts or even not say anything specific, it can be well achieved by using a more complicated
style, complex sentences, digressions, interrupting one's own flow of thought and introducing new topics. One may leave the impression of being a little confused, but the basic purpose of
withholding the real answer can be accomplished.
(adapted from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.PDF)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV
The word that forms the plural in the same way as “fora” in “The United
States and Brazil are also advancing human rights issues in bilateral and
multilateral fora” is:
(A) agenda;
(B) nucleus;
(C) formula; GABARITO: D
(D) criterion;
(E) paralysis.

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV

Use of language in diplomacy
What language should one use when speaking to diplomats, or what language should diplomats use? Or, to be more precise, what language/languages should a (young) diplomat try to learn to be
more successful in his profession?
The term "language in diplomacy" obviously can be interpreted in several ways. First, as tongue ("mother" tongue or an acquired one), the speech "used by one nation, tribe, or other similar large
group of people"; in this sense we can say, for example, that French used to be the predominant diplomatic language in the first half of the 20th century. Second, as a special way of expressing the
subtle needs of the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the delegate of such-and-such a country spoke of the given subject in totally non-diplomatic language. Also,
the term can refer to the particular form, style, manner or tone of expression; such as the minister formulated his conditions in unusually strong language. It may mean as well the verbal or non-
verbal expression of thoughts or feelings: sending the gunships is a language that everybody understands.
All of these meanings - and probably several others - can be utilised in both oral and written practice. In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is of major importance, since language
is not a simple tool, vehicle for transmission of thoughts, or instrument of communication, but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation, and that has been so from the early
beginnings of our profession. That is why from early times the first envoys of the Egyptian pharaohs, Roman legates, mediaeval Dubrovnik consuls, etc., had to be educated and trained people,
well-spoken and polyglots.
Let us first look into different aspects of diplomatic language in its basic meaning - that of a tongue. Obviously, the first problem to solve is finding a common tongue. Diplomats only exceptionally
find themselves in the situation to be able to communicate in one language, common to all participants. This may be done between, for example, Germans and Austrians, or Portuguese and
Brazilians, or representatives of different Arab countries, or British and Americans, etc. Not only are such occasions rare, but very often there is a serious difference between the same language
used in one country and another.
There are several ways to overcome the problem of communication between people who speak different mother tongues. None of these ways is ideal. One solution, obviously, is that one of the
interlocutors speaks the language of the other. Problems may arise: the knowledge of the language may not be adequate, one side is making a concession and the other has an immediate and
significant advantage, there are possible political implications, it may be difficult to apply in multilateral diplomacy, etc. A second possibility is that both sides use a third, neutral, language. A
potential problem may be that neither side possesses full linguistic knowledge and control, leading to possible bad misunderstandings. Nevertheless, this method is frequently applied in
international practice because of its political advantages. A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used, particularly in multilateral diplomacy or for negotiations at a very high political
level - not only for reasons of equity, but because politicians and statesmen often do not speak foreign languages. This method also has disadvantages: it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes
inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect. […] Finally, there is the possibility of using one international synthetic, artificial language, such as Esperanto; this solution would have many advantages,
but unfortunately is not likely to be implemented soon, mostly because of the opposition of factors that dominate in the international political - and therefore also cultural and linguistic - scene.
So, which language is the diplomatic one? The answer is not simple at all […].
Words are bricks from which sentences are made. Each sentence should be a wound-up thought. If one wants to be clear, and particularly when using a language which he does not master
perfectly, it is better to use short, simple sentences. On the contrary, if one wishes to camouflage his thoughts or even not say anything specific, it can be well achieved by using a more complicated
style, complex sentences, digressions, interrupting one's own flow of thought and introducing new topics. One may leave the impression of being a little confused, but the basic purpose of
withholding the real answer can be accomplished.
(adapted from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.PDF)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV
In the passage “Second, as a special way of expressing the subtle needs of
the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the
delegate of such-and-such a country spoke…” the expression “in this way”
can be replaced, without change in meaning by:
(A) hence;
(B) though;
(C) hereby; GABARITO: A
(D) hereafter;
(E) thereabouts.

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV

Use of language in diplomacy
What language should one use when speaking to diplomats, or what language should diplomats use? Or, to be more precise, what language/languages should a (young) diplomat try to learn to be
more successful in his profession?
The term "language in diplomacy" obviously can be interpreted in several ways. First, as tongue ("mother" tongue or an acquired one), the speech "used by one nation, tribe, or other similar large
group of people"; in this sense we can say, for example, that French used to be the predominant diplomatic language in the first half of the 20th century. Second, as a special way of expressing the
subtle needs of the diplomatic profession; in this way it can be said, for example, that the delegate of such-and-such a country spoke of the given subject in totally non-diplomatic language. Also,
the term can refer to the particular form, style, manner or tone of expression; such as the minister formulated his conditions in unusually strong language. It may mean as well the verbal or non-
verbal expression of thoughts or feelings: sending the gunships is a language that everybody understands.
All of these meanings - and probably several others - can be utilised in both oral and written practice. In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is of major importance, since language
is not a simple tool, vehicle for transmission of thoughts, or instrument of communication, but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation, and that has been so from the early
beginnings of our profession. That is why from early times the first envoys of the Egyptian pharaohs, Roman legates, mediaeval Dubrovnik consuls, etc., had to be educated and trained people,
well-spoken and polyglots.
Let us first look into different aspects of diplomatic language in its basic meaning - that of a tongue. Obviously, the first problem to solve is finding a common tongue. Diplomats only exceptionally
find themselves in the situation to be able to communicate in one language, common to all participants. This may be done between, for example, Germans and Austrians, or Portuguese and
Brazilians, or representatives of different Arab countries, or British and Americans, etc. Not only are such occasions rare, but very often there is a serious difference between the same language
used in one country and another.
There are several ways to overcome the problem of communication between people who speak different mother tongues. None of these ways is ideal. One solution, obviously, is that one of the
interlocutors speaks the language of the other. Problems may arise: the knowledge of the language may not be adequate, one side is making a concession and the other has an immediate and
significant advantage, there are possible political implications, it may be difficult to apply in multilateral diplomacy, etc. A second possibility is that both sides use a third, neutral, language. A
potential problem may be that neither side possesses full linguistic knowledge and control, leading to possible bad misunderstandings. Nevertheless, this method is frequently applied in
international practice because of its political advantages. A third formula, using interpreters, is also very widely used, particularly in multilateral diplomacy or for negotiations at a very high political
level - not only for reasons of equity, but because politicians and statesmen often do not speak foreign languages. This method also has disadvantages: it is time consuming, costly, and sometimes
inadequate or straightforwardly incorrect. […] Finally, there is the possibility of using one international synthetic, artificial language, such as Esperanto; this solution would have many advantages,
but unfortunately is not likely to be implemented soon, mostly because of the opposition of factors that dominate in the international political - and therefore also cultural and linguistic - scene.
So, which language is the diplomatic one? The answer is not simple at all […].
Words are bricks from which sentences are made. Each sentence should be a wound-up thought. If one wants to be clear, and particularly when using a language which he does not master
perfectly, it is better to use short, simple sentences. On the contrary, if one wishes to camouflage his thoughts or even not say anything specific, it can be well achieved by using a more complicated
style, complex sentences, digressions, interrupting one's own flow of thought and introducing new topics. One may leave the impression of being a little confused, but the basic purpose of
withholding the real answer can be accomplished.
(adapted from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.PDF)

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

MRE/2016 – OFICIAL DE CHANCELARIA – FGV
Pronouns are words that take the place of a noun or a noun group. In the passage
“The term ‘language in diplomacy’ obviously can be interpreted in several ways.
First, as tongue (‘mother’ tongue or an acquired one), the speech ‘used by one
nation, tribe, or other similar large group of people’,” the pronoun “one” is
replacing:
(A) nation;
(B) mother;
(C) speech;
GABARITO: D
(D) tongue;
(E) diplomacy.

Estratégia Concursos – Teacher Andrea Belo

THANK YOU!
@teacherandreabelo

Teacher Andrea Belo Teacher Andrea Belo

Teacher Andrea Belo