Hi Billyxu 1. I have not been visiting China since 1997. Without additional context, it is difficult to say exactly what is intended in that sentence. You are right to think that there are different possible ways to interpret it. It really is not

First of all thanks to AlpheccaStars and Avangi for explaining the difference. I got the meaning that pragmatic is more about a practical and possible way while radical is some unheard idea. But I can't understand the meaning of

" Yet in China, too, the present downturn is jangling nerves. The country is a statistical haze , but the trade figures for last month—with exports 2% lower than in November 2007 and imports 18% down—were shocking. Power generation,

I have been required to respect a number of "Chinese ... be interested to see an actual example of such use. Not "Chinese screen", but just plain old "screen". Clearly, if it's a real change (so far the only evidence I

It has come to my attention that in the AmE ... usage of the term "Chinese wall" in favor of "screen". I have been required to respect a number of "Chinese walls" over the years. I have never heard the term

It has come to my attention that in the AmE lawyer world there's been a decline in the usage of the term "Chinese wall" in favor of "screen". I have been required to respect a number of "Chinese walls" over the

On 12 Jun 2004 02:23:01 GMT, CyberCypher Django Cat wrote on 11 Jun 2004: Well, this could probably easily get into one of those Micks type debates on 'it is because I say so' lines. No, it isn't one of those debates. I'm not

Adrian Bailey wrote on 06 Jun 2004: There are definitely differences in usage. But (in an EFL context) using "made of" where one should use "made from" (or vice versa) I would class as a "zero" mistake: one that only

Dylan Nicholson wrote on 03 Jun 2004: Why do we say that "I will leave tomorrow" is in the future tense but "I leave tomorrow" or "I am leaving tomorrow" are not? Because it's a special case that doesn't

"Peter T. Daniels" (Email Removed) wrote on 26 Dec 2003: Tell me, o clever dean, why would someone apply the label "phonogram" to an entity that contains no phonetic element, but only a semantic indicator? Maybe because 85% of