CESGRANRIO 2011 • Inglês • BNDES • Questão 24 • Profissional Básico

Cesgranrio
B3GE™ • Questão Comentada
CESGRANRIO 2011 • Questão Comentada
Inglês • Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES) • Profissional Básico
📄 Prova Oficial ✓ Gabarito Oficial
24
B3GE™ • Concursos Públicos Questão
CESGRANRIO 2011 • Inglês • BNDES • Profissional Básico
🎯 Reading & Interpretation | 09. Textual Reference & Coreference | 15. Business & Employment
Text
Are You Training Yourself to Fail?
Did you get done what you wanted to get done today?
By Peter Bregman. September 13, 2011
Psychology Today 
              
               Some people are naturally pre-disposed to being highly productive. They start their days with a clear and reasonable intention of what they plan to do, and then they work diligently throughout the day, sticking [05] to their plans, focused on accomplishing their most important priorities, until the day ends and they’ve achieved precisely what they had expected. Each day moves them one day closer to what they intend to accomplish over the year.
               [10] I am, unfortunately, not one of those people. Left to my own devices, I rarely end my day with the satisfaction of a plan well executed. My natural inclination is to start my morning with a long and overly ambitious list of what I hope to accomplish and push [15] myself with sheer will to accomplish it. I’m prone to be so busy — answering emails, multitasking, taking phone calls, taking care of errands — that, without intervention, I would get very little of importance done.               
               And then, exhausted by my busyness, [20] but unsatisfied by how little of importance I’d accomplished, I would distract myself further by doing things that made me feel better in the moment, if not accomplished — like browsing the internet or eating something sweet.
               [25] Our instincts most often drive us toward instant gratification. And the world around us conspires to lure us off task. Given total freedom, most of us would spend far too much time browsing websites and eating sweets. And being totally responsive to our [30] environments would just have us running around like crazy catering to other people’s agendas.
               For me, the allure of accomplishing lots of little details would often override my focus on the big things I value. Each morning I would try to change my [35] natural tendency by exerting self-control. I would talk to myself about how, starting this morning, I would be more focused, psych myself up to have a productive day, and commit to myself that I wouldn’t do any errands until the important work was done.
               [40] It almost never worked. Certainly not reliably.
               And so, without understanding it at the time, I was teaching myself to fail. People talk about failure — I talk about failure — as critical to learning. But what if we don’t learn? What if we do the same [45] things, repeatedly, hoping for different results but not changing our behavior?
               Then we are training ourselves to fail repeatedly.
               Because the more we continue to make the same mistakes, the more we ingrain the ineffective [50] behaviors into our lives. Our failures become our rituals, our rituals become our habits, and our habits become our identity. We no longer experience an unproductive day; we become unproductive people.
               You can’t get out of this pattern by telling yourself [55] you’re a productive person. You’re smarter than that; you won’t believe yourself and the data won’t support the illusion.
               You have to climb out the same way you climbed in: with new rituals.
               [60] For me, the best way to discover the most effective rituals to help me achieve my most important priorities was through trial and error. Every evening I looked at what worked and repeated it the next. I looked at what didn’t and stopped it.
               [65] What I found is that rather than trying to develop super-human discipline and focus, I needed to rely on a process to make it more likely that I would be focused and productive and less likely that I would be scattered and ineffective.
               [70] Rituals like these: Spending five minutes in the morning to place my most important work onto my calendar, stopping every hour to ask myself whether I’m sticking to my plan, and spending five minutes in the evening to learn from my successes and failures. [75] Answering my emails in chunks at predetermined times during the day instead of whenever they come in. And never letting anything stay on my to do list for more than three days (after which I either do it immediately, schedule it in my calendar, or delete [80] it).
               It doesn’t take long for these rituals to become habits and for the habits to become your identity. And then, you become a productive person.
               The trick then is to stay productive. Once your [85] identity changes, you are at risk of letting go of your rituals. You don’t need them anymore, you think to yourself, because you are now a productive person. You no longer suffer from the problem the rituals saved you from.
               [90] But that’s a mistake. Rituals don’t change us. They simply modify our behavior as long as we practice them. Once we stop, we lose their benefit. In other words, being productive — forever more — requires that you maintain the rituals that keep you productive — forever more.
               I would love to say that I am now one of those people who is naturally pre-disposed to being highly [95] productive. But I’m not. There’s nothing natural about productivity for me.

🔗 Texto adaptado de:
🔗 Available in: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-we-work/201109/are-you-training-yourself-fail. Retrieved on: Sept. 17, 2011.

The sentence “It almost never worked.” (line 40) refers to the fact that the author

A

tried to control his impulse of doing irrelevant errands before facing his commitments.

B

had to change his goals to concentrate only on the details of his daily tasks.

C

could never see the relevance of doing important work very early in the morning on weekdays.

D

believes that failure is critical to learning, so it is not essential to control oneself to do the right things.

E

thinks that the world conspires to make people deny their responsibilities and spend their time on leisure activities.

📊 Revisão da questão
B3GE™ Simulados • Concursos Públicos • Inglês
Cesgranrio • BNDES • Profissional Básico
Questão 24 • Gabarito: (A)
Enunciado:

The sentence “It almost never worked.” (line 40) refers to the fact that the author

(A) tried to control his impulse of doing irrelevant errands before facing his commitments.
(B) had to change his goals to concentrate only on the details of his daily tasks.
(C) could never see the relevance of doing important work very early in the morning on weekdays.
(D) believes that failure is critical to learning, so it is not essential to control oneself to do the right things.
(E) thinks that the world conspires to make people deny their responsibilities and spend their time on leisure activities.
🔎 Leitura Orientada
A questão avalia a competência de Referência e Coesão Textual (Textual Reference & Coreference) do SILO 2, operando na decodificação de rotinas de produtividade e foco atencional no ambiente corporativo do SILO 3 (Business & Employment). O comando exige o isolamento do antecedente situacional associado ao pronome neutro "It". Diferente da coesão nominal clássica, o item requer a resolução de uma anáfora conceitual, onde o conectivo encapsula toda uma sequência anterior de ações e esforços de autogestão operados pelo autor.

Para estabelecer o acoplamento referencial e ratificar o gabarito, mapeia-se a engenharia de coesão:
Preceding Action: Effort to contain impulses & avoid errands ──► Anaphoric Scope ──► It (A)
A Engine de distratores da Cesgranrio para essa classe de coesão conceitual aplica os gatilhos de Reducionismo de Escopo por Isolação de Cláusula e Alteração Factual. A prova desenha opções alegando uma falsa modificação nas metas do autor (opção B) ou inventando que ele considerava o trabalho matutino irrelevante (opção C). Também recorre a extrapolações morais sobre distração e o mundo contemporâneo (opção E) para capturar o candidato que lê o pronome isoladamente e se deixa guiar por frases de impacto ideológico espalhadas pelo texto, em vez de realizar o rastreamento sintático imediato do antecedente.
🟢 GABARITO VERDÃO: (A)
A alternativa (A) é o gabarito inatacável. No fluxo do parágrafo, Peter Bregman relata a sua rotina mecânica de tentar exercer o autocontrole: ele se impunha a obrigação de não resolver pequenas pendências irrelevantes antes de atacar os grandes projetos do dia. Logo em seguida, ele conclui: *“It almost never worked”* (Quase nunca funcionava). Pelas leis de coesão textual do tema **09. Textual Reference & Coreference**, o pronome **It** funciona como o núcleo anafórico que resgata toda essa tentativa de conter os impulsos dispersivos antes de encarar as responsabilidades.
🧠 Regra B3GE™:
Frente a comandos de **Textual Reference & Coreference** focados em pronomes neutros (*It / This / That*) operando como sujeitos de verbos de eficácia (*worked, failed, succeeded*), aplique a **Técnica do Resgate da Ação Complexa**. Lembre-se de que o pronome não está procurando um substantivo simples (como "computador" ou "lista"), mas sim um **fato, estratégia ou comportamento** explicitado na oração imediatamente anterior. Substitua o pronome pela ação descrita: se o encaixe lógico-semântico com o resultado de sucesso ou falha for perfeito, o antecedente foi decodificado de forma correta.
📝 Análise das alternativas
(A) 🟢 GABARITO VERDÃO
Competência avaliada: 09. Textual Reference & Coreference (Resolução de Anáfora Proposicional).
A opção traduz perfeitamente o escopo referencial do pronome. O termo It resgata a engenharia comportamental do autor de tentar domar o ímpeto por microtarefas vazias antes de processar os seus compromissos sérios.
(B) ❌
Distrator 01 — Reducionismo de Escopo (Falsa Alteração de Escopo de Metas).
O item desvirtua o texto ao propor que o autor alterou as suas metas finais de carreira (change his goals). O autor manteve as suas diretrizes intactas; o que falhava era a sua tentativa mecânica de blindagem de foco diário.
(C) ❌
Distrator 20 — Alteração de Dados Textuais (Falso Bloqueio de Percepção).
A Engine cria uma inverdade conceitual ao sugerir que o escritor não entendia a relevância de trabalhar duro pela manhã (could never see the relevance). Ele valorizava o período matutino; a sua queixa era estritamente operacional sobre a perda de constância.
(D) ❌
Distrator 06 — Contradição Semântica (Subversão da Lógica de Autocontrole).
A alternativa opera em sentido oposto à filosofia defendida pelo autor, abrindo margem para a premissa de que o autocontrole seria dispensável (not essential to control oneself). Toda a estruturação da obra prega que rituais impositivos são indispensáveis à sobrevivência profissional.
(E) ❌
Distrator 01 — Reducionismo de Escopo (Extrapolação de Ruído Contextual).
O item se apropria de uma reflexão genérica sobre as distrações do mundo moderno (the world conspires) e tenta acoplá-la de forma espúria como o antecedente imediato do conectivo de eficácia, violando as fronteiras sintáticas do período.
🧠 Resumo B3GE™ Master
A neutralização de armadilhas baseadas em cadeias de coesão complexa na Cesgranrio exige o domínio das relações anafóricas de largo espectro. Avalie os vetores desarmados nesta engenharia:
Mecanismo de Desconexão por Isca Moralista (E): A Engine captura uma observação existencial do autor sobre as pressões do cotidiano para seduzir o candidato pelo valor filosófico da frase, ignorando que o pronome exige amarração sintática localizada.
Sabotagem por Inversão Crítica de Conduta (D): Insere enunciados que relativizam a importância da disciplina com o intuito de testar se o aluno realiza o julgamento por mera familiaridade léxica de palavras isoladas (como failure ou learning).
Consagração do Alinhamento Anafórico Proposicional: Valida o acoplamento do pronome neutro singular à totalidade do esforço diário descrito, ratificando a incapacidade do autor de frear os seus impulsos sem o auxílio de rituais mecânicos.
Portanto, a alternativa (A) ergue-se como a única resposta logicamente indestrutível.
🏛️ Classificação B3GE™ Final
SILO 2 — Linguístico
thematic: Reading & Interpretation
theme: 09. Textual Reference & Coreference
Peça Operativa Principal: Conceptual Anaphora Resolution / Abstract Antecedent Tracking / Cohesive Scope Auditing

SILO 3 — Contextual
contentTopic: 15. Business & Employment
subtheme: Abstract Conceptual Reference in Workplace Productivity
🎯 Justificativa B3GE™

O item afere a proficiência avançada em rastrear e solucionar redes de coesão textual estruturadas sobre pronomes anafóricos abstratos, classificado sob o tema 09. Textual Reference & Coreference do SILO 2. A moldura contextual examina comportamentos operacionais, gestão do foco atencional e superação de distrações no ambiente corporativo, indexada ao tema 15. Business & Employment do SILO 3. A resolução correta exige a eliminação dos distratores de Reducionismo de Escopo e Alteração Factual (B, C e E) que desvirtuam as atitudes do autor, além de expurgar a contradição filosófica (D). A opção A chancela-se soberana por traduzir perfeitamente o evento encapsulado pelo conectivo sob análise.