Questão nº 35
Questão de Língua Inglesa · CEBRASPE CÂMARA DOS DEPUTADOS 26 PLF 2026 (nº 35)
The security risks faced by Parliaments, legislatures, elected representatives, and the officials who support them, differ greatly according to their evolving national and local circumstances, among other things. For some, the biggest security risks may stem from disruptive protesters and cyber criminals, but terrorism may pose the most concerning risks for others. In fact, threat actors differ enormously in their intentions and capabilities, which also change over time.
Given that risk is a product of threat, vulnerability, and impact, it follows that ultimately there are only three ways to reduce security risk — namely, by reducing the threat, reducing the vulnerability, or reducing the impact (or some combination thereof). Reducing the threat element of security risk is difficult, especially in the case of determined and capable threat actors. Responsibility for reducing threats tends to lie mainly with national law enforcement, security, and intelligence agencies. That said, parliaments and other organisations can contribute to threat reduction through deterrence — in other words, by influencing the intentions of threat actors. Carefully crafted security-minded communications can convey a discouraging message to potential attackers, to the effect that they should expect to confront professional security measures and face a substantial risk of being caught. For instance, a parliamentary website might advertise that visitors will undergo ‘airport-style screening’, without explaining precisely what that entails. The public should be reassured by such message, whereas some threat actors might be deterred.
Considering the preceding text, judge the following items.
In the excerpt “threat actors differ enormously in their intentions and capabilities, which also change over time” (first paragraph), “which” refers to “threat actors”.
Resposta comentada
O pronome relativo "which" em inglês, nesse tipo de construção, não se refere a um substantivo isolado, mas sim à ideia inteira da oração anterior (ou ao núcleo mais próximo, que aqui é "capabilities"). A pegadinha clássica é o aluno achar que "which" sempre volta para o sujeito da frase, quando na verdade ele pode retomar o termo imediatamente anterior ou a ação toda.
- Correta: Errado. O "which" retoma "their intentions and capabilities" (ou a ideia de que essas coisas mudam), não "threat actors", pois o verbo "change" concorda com o plural de "capabilities", e a lógica é que as intenções e capacidades mudam com o tempo, não os atores em si.
Como ficaria certo: No trecho, "which" refere-se a "intentions and capabilities" (ou à ideia de que ambos mudam), e não a "threat actors".
Fonte: CEBRASPE CÂMARA DOS DEPUTADOS 26 PLF 2026 Técnico Legislativo – Especialidade: Policial Legislativo Federal. Reproduzida para fins de estudo.