Questão nº 38
Questão de Língua Inglesa · CEBRASPE CÂMARA DOS DEPUTADOS 26 PLF 2026 (nº 38)
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.
The passage “some combination thereof”, in “reducing the threat, reducing the vulnerability, or reducing the impact (or some combination thereof)” (second paragraph), necessarily indicates a combination of the two last factors mentioned: vulnerability reduction and impact reduction.
Resposta comentada
O conceito-chave aqui é coesão referencial por retomada: quando o texto diz “some combination thereof”, o pronome “thereof” retoma a lista inteira citada antes — “threat, vulnerability, and impact” — e não apenas os dois últimos itens. A pegadinha está em restringir o sentido da palavra “some” (que significa “alguma”, ou seja, qualquer combinação possível) a uma combinação específica.
- Correta: Errado. O item afirma que a combinação é “necessariamente” entre os dois últimos fatores, mas o texto diz “or some combination thereof”, o que inclui qualquer combinação entre os três fatores (ameaça, vulnerabilidade e impacto), não só vulnerabilidade + impacto.
No item, o detalhe torcido está na palavra “necessariamente” e na expressão “two last factors” — o texto original não impõe essa restrição; “thereof” retoma os três elementos listados.
Como ficaria certo: A expressão “some combination thereof” indica uma combinação qualquer entre os três fatores mencionados (ameaça, vulnerabilidade e impacto), podendo incluir também ameaça + vulnerabilidade, ameaça + impacto, ou os três juntos.
Fonte: CEBRASPE CÂMARA DOS DEPUTADOS 26 PLF 2026 Técnico Legislativo – Especialidade: Policial Legislativo Federal. Reproduzida para fins de estudo.