Associate the expressions with their respective synonyms.

EXPRESSIONS

1. Best man

2. Man of means

3. Man in the street

4. Man about town

5. Man of his word

SYNONYMS

( ) An average person.

( ) A fashionable, high-living man.

( ) A man who keeps his promises.

( ) A person who is wealthy and has substantial resources.

( ) An official supporter of the bridegroom at a wedding ceremony.

The correct sequence of this association is

Indicate whether each of the following statements presented by Jeremy Harmer, in The practice of English language teaching, about the advantages of nonnative-English-speaker teachers, is true (T) or false (F).

( ) They have often had the same experience of learning English as their students.
( ) They are frequently considerably more familiar with local customs and learning styles.
( ) On the vast majority of contexts, in countries all over the world, English is taught by non-nativeEnglish-speaker teachers.
( ) They represent a “Western culture” from which spring the ideals both of the English language and English language teaching methodology.

According to the statements, the correct sequence is:

According to the Hodgsoniana blog, regarding Sam Gafford’s work, it is correct to say that

Texts for question 60.

"The white man is very clever. He came quietly and peaceably with his religion.… He has put a knife on the things that held us together and we have fallen apart.”

ACHEBE, Chinua. The African Trilogy: Things Fall Apart; Arrow of God; No Longer at Ease. New York: Penguin Classics, 2017.

“No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distant from the oppressed; nor can it afford to impose the teacher’s cultural patterns upon them.”

FREIRE, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Translated by Myra Bergman Ramos. New York: Herder and Herder, 1970.

"Once critical pedagogues see schools as cultural arenas where distinct social and ideological forms find themselves in constant conflict, what they shall be seeking is society transformation through education, including language education."

SIQUEIRA, Sávio. Critical pedagogy and language education: Hearing the voices of Brazilian teachers of English. Education Sciences, Basel, v. 11, n. 5, p. 235, May 14, 2021.

It is reasonable to affirm that Freire (1970) is the main author in Brazil to propose Education as a social practice. In the field of English language teaching, there are many approaches and perspectives aligned with Freire’s ideas, such as Siqueira’s (2021) way of rethinking the English teaching process in the context of 21st-century Brazil.Considering the relationship between these two authors perspectives and the quotation from the main author of African literature, it is correct to affirm:

The words wafted and sizzling could be correctly replaced by:

Analyze the following excerpt: "The laboratory implemented a new security protocol. This decision aimed to reduce chemical exposure." Following Halliday and Hasan’s theory, the bolded term functions as:

HALLIDAY, M.A.K.; HASAN, R. Cohesion in English. London: Longman, 1976.

Available in: https://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/m/marriage_misconceptions.asp?srsltid=AfmBOoo13-VO8MyPIb8Kuv7orn0VhJe8xm_l8yXx6ljoeNsbQt3DXwTh. Acess on: Jan. 15, 2026.

According to the cartoon,

Can the subaltern speak?

Gayatri Spivak

Some of the most radical criticism coming out of the West today is the result of an interested desire to conserve the subject of the West, or the West as Subject. The theory of pluralized ‘subject-effects’ gives an illusion of undermining subjective sovereignty while often providing a cover for this subject of knowledge. Although the history of Europe as Subject is narrativized by the law, political economy, and ideology of the West, this concealed Subject pretends it has ‘no geo-political determinations.’ The much-publicized critique of the sovereign subject thus actually inaugurates a Subject. I will argue for this conclusion by considering a text by two great practitioners of the critique: ‘Intellectuals and power: a conversation between Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze.

I have chosen this friendly exchange between two activist philosophers of history because it undoes the opposition between authoritative theoretical production and the unguarded practice of conversation, enabling one to glimpse the track of ideology. The participants in this conversation emphasize the most important contributions of French poststructuralist theory: first, that the networks of power/desire/interest are so heterogeneous, that their reduction to a coherent narrative is counterproductive – a persistent critique is needed; and second, that intellectuals must attempt to disclose and know the discourse of society’s Other. Yet the two systematically ignore the question of ideology and their own implication in intellectual and economic history.

Although one of its chief presuppositions is the critique of the sovereign subject, the conversation between Foucault and Deleuze is framed by two monolithic and anonymous subjects-in-revolution: ‘A Maoist’ (FD, p. 205) and ‘the workers’ struggle’ (FD, p. 217). Intellectuals, however, are named and differentiated; moreover, a Chinese Maoism is nowhere operative. Maoism here simply creates an aura of narrative specificity, which would be a harmless rhetorical banality were it not that the innocent appropriation of the proper name ‘Maoism’ for the eccentric phenomenon of French intellectual ‘Maoism’ and subsequent ‘New Philosophy’ symptomatically renders ‘Asia’ transparent.

Deleuze’s reference to the workers’ struggle is equally problematic; it is obviously a genuflection: ‘We are unable to touch [power] in any point of its application without finding ourselves confronted by this diffuse mass, so that we are necessarily led… to the desire to blow it up completely. Every partial revolutionary attack or defense is linked in this way to the workers’ struggle’ (FD, p. 217). The apparent banality signals a disavowal. The statement ignores the international division of labor, a gesture that often marks poststructuralist political theory. 3 The invocation of the workers’ struggle is baleful in its very innocence; it is incapable of dealing with global capitalism: the subject-production of worker and unemployed within nation-state ideologies in its Center; the increasing subtraction of the working class in the Periphery from the realization of surplus value and thus from ‘humanistic’ training in consumerism; and the large-scale presence of paracapitalist labor as well as the heterogeneous structural status of agriculture in the Periphery. Ignoring the international division of labor; rendering ‘Asia’ (and on occasion ‘Africa’) transparent (unless the subject is ostensibly the ‘Third World’); reestablishing the legal subject of socialized capital – these are problems as common to much poststructuralist as to structuralist theory. Why should such occlusions be sanctioned in precisely those intellectuals who are our best prophets of heterogeneity and the Other? [...].

Available in: https://archive.org/stream/CanTheSubalternSpeak/Can_the_subaltern_speak_djvu.txt. Acess on: Jan. 25, 2026.

Considering the sentences, regarding the highlighted (underlined) discourse marker,

I. [...] first, that the networks of power/desire/interest are so heterogeneous, that their reduction to a coherent narrative is counterproductive [...]

II. Although one of its chief presuppositions is the critique of the sovereign subject, [...]

III. [...] moreover, a Chinese Maoism is nowhere operative [...]

IV. Intellectuals, however, are named and differentiated [...]

V. Why should such occlusions be sanctioned in precisely those intellectuals who are our best prophets of heterogeneity and the Other?

it is found that only the following are correct

Read the excerpt.

The standard-language ideology has been under attack for some time. Two discourses were active in the 1960s in opposition to it. One was centred around the Idea that what would later be called outer-circle varieties should be treated as valid and encouraged to be endonormative. Through the work of Kachru and Smith in the 1980s, this developed into the World Englishes position, arguing for teaching varieties independent of inner-circle culture and appropriate to the needs of local users. World Englishes focuses on and celebrates the differences between and individuality of varieties, as used on their home ground within a community of speakers. The other development of the 1960s was what came to be called ‘Real English’, which focuses on the actual spoken usage of inner-circle native speakers of all varieties and is critical of the status that is granted the minority of standard-language users and written grammar. A critique of these positions argues that, in fact, in any country, the standard language and the prestige accent are associated with power, and worldwide it is Standard English with an American or RP accent that is ‘powerful’ in this way. To fail to teach these is to deprive learners of the power that might accrue to them from having the standard. Such an argument serves to maintain established power relations, although this does not mean that it outlines a bad strategy for an individual.

MELCHERS, Gunnel; SHAW, Philip; SUNDKVIST, Peter. World Englishes. London and New York: Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group, 2019, p. 205. (Adapted).

On reading the excerpt, we can infer that, according to the text, that

Excerpt 1

We are interested in communication between native and non-native speakers for one very important reason: this is the kind of communication for which all teachers are essentially preparing students. Regardless of the level of our students, whether they are beginners or already near-native speakers, if they want to use their second language, they need to enter this type of communication. We need to help them to participate in this communication with dignity and power, and to close the gap between their language skill and those of the native speakers. In order for us to prepare our students in this way, we must be knowledgeable about the specific nuances of verbal communication between native and non-native speakers.

The most obvious distinction between the language performance of native and non-native speakers is the dramatic difference in levels of language accuracy and fluency. While native speakers usually talk effortlessly, naturally and correctly; non-native speakers consistently experience difficulties in expressing their thoughts, struggle for the right words, and typically lack confidence in their communication. When trying to speak a foreign language, non-native speakers think extensively in their own native language and, worse, they often translate directly from their native language into the foreign language. This frequently leads them to create utterances that do not make sense to native speakers, further diminishing their confidence in their speaking ability and often causing them to dread native speakers’ questions that they are then likely to answer very abruptly and awkwardly.

SHEKHTMAN, Boris; KUPCHANKA, Dina. Teaching Foreign Language on the Basis of the Native Speaker’s Communicative Focus. California: MSI Press, 2007. (Adapted).

Excerpt 2

From a sociocultural perspective, language phenomena reflect contextual needs, which, together with learner needs, have implications for language teaching. These phenomena pertain to both language use and language learning; the former is a function of an interaction of attitude, function, context, and competence; the latter has to do with language educational systems, institutional practices, and learner beliefs and attitudes. Understanding these components that inform language use and learning is a prerequisite to any pedagogical innovation. To understand English language use and learning within the context of Taiwan, a study delineated a sociolinguistic profile of English use and learning within a four-dimensional framework: attitude, function, pedagogy, and learner beliefs. Data were both quantitative and qualitative and included teacher, learner, and parent questionnaire responses and interview accounts.

This chapter presents only a small part of the study concerning teacher educators’ perceptions of English language teaching and learning in Taiwan. The interview accounts contribute to a fuller understanding of present day English teaching and learning in Taiwan, where curricular innovation has been both encouraged and challenged. Another reason for presenting this qualitative part of the much larger study is that it provides rich information necessary for in-depth analysis and addresses research questions for which quantitative methods alone are insufficient.

SAVIGNON, Sandra (Ed.). Interpreting Communicative Language Teaching. Contexts and Concerns in Teacher Education. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2002. (Adapted).

In these two excerpts of texts, there is a discussing teaching non-native speakers to communicate. According to their reading, choose the alternative that best presents the views carried out by the texts.