Search results for 'tag:Essays tag:Clauses' matching tags 'Essays' and 'Clauses'

Re: Decision making

ngngmaiphuong — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:14:23 GMT

thank for your reply.
Can you show me some so-called "VNese English sentences"? ^^
I used a dictionary to edit my essay, not to translate. All the words in this essay result from a long process of studying SAT words.

'Just the idea ~~that~~ of wrong decisions would ruin the one's future can make anyone of us hesitate to decide anything'
Is it ok to use a clause after a preposition? :-?

Anyway, nice editing! ^^

Re: Please correct my essay thanks my friends!!

26TMNTJG2PG — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 11:23:07 GMT

Dipsik
...the streets were flooded but (~~the streets were)~~ not (~~flooded)~~ seriously enough to...

It can work this way also: ...the streets were flooded but (the streets were) not (~~flooded)~~ seriously enough to... having the sense which was stated by me earlier.

Many writers have now used one word, a phrase or a clause (or combination of them) as a sentence or even a paragraph. They do so relying on, I believe, ellipsis which is defined by a reference book as omission of words or sudden breaking off in mid-sentence for dramatic effect.

Re: Could anyone lookthrough my Illustration Essay? "The Impossible Peace"

Chibi — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:18:17 GMT

Sorry, there's a problem with the former posted entry!

There Is No "Together" In Jerusalem

For Jews and Muslims, Jerusalem has been a city of hope and loss. It has been their homeland but also their battlefield. Its history has been filled with great joy but also with tragedy. In Hebrew, the name "Jerusalem" literally means a "city of peace" Ironically, people there have not seem such thing for a long time.(people there have not seem to live in harmony for ages) There have been numbers of peace plans to settle this conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians but not even one has succeeded everything has failed to succeed); occasionally, they have even worsened the situation (U should write this clause as a separated sentence). One of the most well-known solutions is the Oslo Accord, the first official agreement signed by the leaders of both sides. It was first seen as a (the) hope to the end of the conflict (âto end the conflictâ is better) that (so that) they would live peacefully together in a bi-national state. Yet ( However â in written language, it is better not to start a sentence with Yet/ But), some groups did not accept it and launched a series of suicide bombings. This accord is now viewed to have brought more hatred and violation to the area. Nevertheless, there are still many attempts. It seems that they could live together peacefully since they are similar in many ways regarding their religions and ancestor.(try another expression Ã better) However, after carefully examined (examining) current situations and history, one (U mean who?) has to admit that they will never co-exist (word choice?) peacefully in this common area. It is due to their beliefs that Jerusalem belongs only to them and no one else. (I think the use of pronounce is not clear here. âTheyâ & âtheirâ mean who: Jews or Muslims?) Furthermore, they hate each other so much that they will never want to live together.

The first reason why two-state solution is impossible (be impossible to do sth) is because (Ã that) they believe that (omit this word) all areas of Jerusalem belong to only their people*. From the Jewish perspective, they have all the rights over this land due to God's will as well as their long close connection to it. According to the Bible, four thousands years ago, God promised that he will give Abraham, father of all the Jews, and his children the land of Canaan, or what is (omit) now the capital of the State of Israel. Since then, Jewish people have been waiting for that day to come (omit). The word "Jerusalem" is repeatedly mentioned several times in their daily prayers as well as in many special occasions, for instance, the Passover(Spiro, 2000). In addition, this area had once been under the reign of Jewish kings who had ruled for hundreds of years and built the first Jewish temple in this area. This temple has been the focus of (I guess a problem with word choice here) Jewish people around the world. They regard it as "the house of the Lord"(Bible in Spiro, 2000) and the direction (word choice, again?) in which they say their prayers to. If there is a place on earth that all Jews are willing to sacrifice their lives for, it would be this very place. A Jewish mayor once stated that this land represents, "the purist expression of all that Jews prayed for, dreamed of, cried for, and died for"(Pipes, 2001).
Conversely, from the Palestinian perspective, they are blessed people who deserve the rights over to this holy place, not the cursed Jews. In the Koran, Jerusalem is said to be blessed. It was where Prophet Muhammed was taken up to heaven and met other Prophets(Spiro, 2000). The significance of it had been emphasized several times by Prophet Muhammed himself through his teachings. He stated that it is where a single act of worship is equal to a thousand, and whoever die there or near by would directly go to heaven(Soufan, n.d.). These have made it one of the three holiest place in Islam. Furthermore, in the Koran, while Muslims are regarded to be the most prestigious group of people, Jews are the opposite, "cursed and condemned"(Abbadi, n.d.). Thus, as it is required in Muslim faith, it is their duty to protect a religious site from being contaminated by those corrupted people and bring the holy place back to the right owners.
The second reason two-state solution is impossible is because of the prolonged aversion that they will never agree to live with their enemies. In the last eight years, approximately 5,000 Palestinians have been killed with (Ã and) more than 33,000 have been injured(Palestine Red Crescent, 2008). The causes were mostly due to shootings as well as tear gas. (try another expression here) Many of the others have been forced to leave their home making approximately 4.4 millions Palestine refugees around the world now(United Nations, 2008). Owing to the loss of ones they love and the harshness of dispersing, hatred has developed. Their expression (word choice?) of hatred has been from incitement of violation to suicide bombings. Terribly, those who carried those horrors (repetition should not be occur) were of all ages including young children. In school textbooks, Israel is described to be “a country of gangs, born in crime"(Israel Ministry, 2001) with Jews who are "arrogant and sly traitors"(Israel Ministry, 2001). These are what all children in Palestinian school have been educated, or to be more accurate, "brainwashed." Not to mention the impacts from family and society in which those children have been raised. Thus, hatred has been deepening (deepened) in all Palestinian hearts both of this generation and the coming generation.
In responding to Palestinian violence, Israel has established a military force and checkpoints to limit the number of Palestinians coming to Israel. The primary objective was to prevent terrorists. However, the presence of humiliation during the search, suffering from long waits at checkpoints, and soldiers' attacks on innocent civilians, has only brought more hatred among them(The Nation, 2008, p. 9A).

It is ironic that a supposed city of peace is actually the most contentious (word choice) city on earth. Numerous peace plans have been made but then were collapsed. The hatred between Israelis and Palestinians has been strongly expressed though violation, and each has clearly stated that they are the only group whom Jerusalem belongs to. This contention has accumulated over a long period of time and it is getting worse. It is useless to force them to live together. No such plans have ever worked and will never work. At least they have given it a try, nevertheless. There is always a light in the dark, I believe. When the darkness disappears, the light would shine. Even though I have concluded that the Jews and Palestinians will never co-exist together in Jerusalem, I always wish that I have been wrong. Let the light shine and the city of peace becomes real. * If I were u, I will express like: Firstly, two-state solution fail to succeed because they believe that all areas of Jerusalem belong to only their people.

Re: Could anyone lookthrough my Illustration Essay? "The Impossible Peace"

Chibi — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:07:08 GMT

I have no ideas about the content or the organization of focused points. I just have some suggestions on word choices, expressions and grammar. The highlighted lines include possible problems and the red words are my suggestions to improve the writing.

Hope that it'll be useful!

There Is No "Together" In Jerusalem

For Jews and Muslims, Jerusalem has been a city of hope and loss. It has been their homeland but also their battlefield. Its history has been filled with great joy but also with tragedy. In Hebrew, the name "Jerusalem" literally means a "city of peace" Ironically, people there have not seem such thing for a long time.(Ã people there have not seem to live in harmony for ages) There have been numbers of peace plans to settle this conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians but not even one has succeeded (Ã everything has failed to succeed); occasionally, they have even worsened the situation (U should write this clause as a separated sentence Ã be clearer). One of the most well-known solutions is the Oslo Accord, the first official agreement signed by the leaders of both sides. It was first seen as a (Ã the) hope to the end of the conflict (âto end the conflictâ is better) that (Ã so that) they would live peacefully together in a bi-national state. Yet (Ã However â in written language, it is better not to start a sentence with Yet/ But), some groups did not accept it and launched a series of suicide bombings. This accord is now viewed to have brought more hatred and violation to the area. Nevertheless, there are still many attempts. It seems that they could live together peacefully since they are similar in many ways regarding their religions and ancestor.(try another expression Ã better) However, after carefully examined (examining) current situations and history, one (U mean who?) has to admit that they will never co-exist (word choice?) peacefully in this common area. It is due to their beliefs that Jerusalem belongs only to them and no one else. (I think the use of pronounce is not clear here. âTheyâ & âtheirâ mean who: Jews or Muslims?) Furthermore, they hate each other so much that they will never want to live together.

The first reason why two-state solution is impossible (be impossible to do sth) is because (Ã that) they believe that (omit this word) all areas of Jerusalem belong to only their people*. From the Jewish perspective, they have all the rights over this land due to God's will as well as their long close connection to it. According to the Bible, four thousands years ago, God promised that he will give Abraham, father of all the Jews, and his children the land of Canaan, or what is (omit) now the capital of the State of Israel. Since then, Jewish people have been waiting for that day to come (omit). The word "Jerusalem" is repeatedly mentioned several times in their daily prayers as well as in many special occasions, for instance, the Passover(Spiro, 2000). In addition, this area had once been under the reign of Jewish kings who had ruled for hundreds of years and built the first Jewish temple in this area. This temple has been the focus of (I guess a problem with word choice here) Jewish people around the world. They regard it as "the house of the Lord"(Bible in Spiro, 2000) and the direction (word choice, again?) in which they say their prayers to. If there is a place on earth that all Jews are willing to sacrifice their lives for, it would be this very place. A Jewish mayor once stated that this land represents, "the purist expression of all that Jews prayed for, dreamed of, cried for, and died for"(Pipes, 2001).
Conversely, from the Palestinian perspective, they are blessed people who deserve the rights over to this holy place, not the cursed Jews. In the Koran, Jerusalem is said to be blessed. It was where Prophet Muhammed was taken up to heaven and met other Prophets(Spiro, 2000). The significance of it had been emphasized several times by Prophet Muhammed himself through his teachings. He stated that it is where a single act of worship is equal to a thousand, and whoever die there or near by would directly go to heaven(Soufan, n.d.). These have made it one of the three holiest place in Islam. Furthermore, in the Koran, while Muslims are regarded to be the most prestigious group of people, Jews are the opposite, "cursed and condemned"(Abbadi, n.d.). Thus, as it is required in Muslim faith, it is their duty to protect a religious site from being contaminated by those corrupted people and bring the holy place back to the right owners.
The second reason two-state solution is impossible is because of the prolonged aversion that they will never agree to live with their enemies. In the last eight years, approximately 5,000 Palestinians have been killed with (Ã and) more than 33,000 have been injured(Palestine Red Crescent, 2008). The causes were mostly due to shootings as well as tear gas. (try another expression here) Many of the others have been forced to leave their home making approximately 4.4 millions Palestine refugees around the world now(United Nations, 2008). Owing to the loss of ones they love and the harshness of dispersing, hatred has developed. Their expression (word choice?) of hatred has been from incitement of violation to suicide bombings. Terribly, those who carried those horrors (repetition should not be occur) were of all ages including young children. In school textbooks, Israel is described to be “a country of gangs, born in crime"(Israel Ministry, 2001) with Jews who are "arrogant and sly traitors"(Israel Ministry, 2001). These are what all children in Palestinian school have been educated, or to be more accurate, "brainwashed." Not to mention the impacts from family and society in which those children have been raised. Thus, hatred has been deepening (deepened) in all Palestinian hearts both of this generation and the coming generation.
In responding to Palestinian violence, Israel has established a military force and checkpoints to limit the number of Palestinians coming to Israel. The primary objective was to prevent terrorists. However, the presence of humiliation during the search, suffering from long waits at checkpoints, and soldiers' attacks on innocent civilians, has only brought more hatred among them(The Nation, 2008, p. 9A).

It is ironic that a supposed city of peace is actually the most contentious (word choice) city on earth. Numerous peace plans have been made but then were collapsed. The hatred between Israelis and Palestinians has been strongly expressed though violation, and each has clearly stated that they are the only group whom Jerusalem belongs to. This contention has accumulated over a long period of time and it is getting worse. It is useless to force them to live together. No such plans have ever worked and will never work. At least they have given it a try, nevertheless. There is always a light in the dark, I believe. When the darkness disappears, the light would shine. Even though I have concluded that the Jews and Palestinians will never co-exist together in Jerusalem, I always wish that I have been wrong. Let the light shine and the city of peace becomes real. * If I were u, I will express like: Firstly, two-state solution fail to succeed because they believe that all areas of Jerusalem belong to only their people.

Re: English Grammer

Grammar Geek — Mon, 05 May 2008 22:16:28 GMT

Hello Anon,

Try using the search feature on this site and you will find plenty of examples of discussion on these topics. If you have any specific questions, please post them. It's easier to answer a specific question than write an essay on "adverbial clauses."

Re: Hi, I have a questions about my letter to my professor.

Anonymous — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:29:20 GMT

You wrote these sentences to respond to the original inquiring post: :

This is very informal - were you asked to do an informal letter or an essay?

Other than that, my main impression is that you haven't really answered the question - only a few words about your impression of the class.

I like your use of dashes -- they flow naturally and seem to convey your thoughts naturally. Having said that your first sentence of using a simple sentence and following that with a question with a dash to connect both is very interesting. In your second sentence, what follows the dash isn't a clause, nor does it seem to link to the previous clause in a way that natually connects them but rather have done in a way that is connecting but rather distant structually.

How can I use to learn to use a dash like you have done? I looked at online sources for help but they don't seem to go in detail about this punctuation mark.

Re: must have done = may have done?

Cool Breeze — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:44:29 GMT

Kooyeen
Hi,
are you guys sure "must" is ok used that way? Does that sound good?
I'm asking this because I think "must" usually becomes "had to" in the past. I don't like sentences like "When I was in high school one of my teachers told me I must write an essay about weapons". I say "had to".

Hi Kooyeen

There are people - and I am one of them - who consider it correct to use must + present infinitive in a "that" clause when must indicates a conclusion, not obligation:

I knew [that] he must be tired after having walked 20 kilometres.

Cheers

Re: Which he isn't

Clive — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:29:10 GMT

Hi,

If Harrison isnt playing (which he isn't) I think Colts aren't gonna win.

Is which is a relative pronoun? Yes.
Which doesn't have to refer a particular thing,right? It has to refer to something, but it does not have to be a noun. eg it can be a clause.
If it has to, where does which refer? The phrase 'Harrison isn't playing'. Please note that this type of grammar in this sentence is quite lax and informal. Don't use it when you are writing a college essay or speaking in a job interview. Another example is that 'gonna' is said, bit is only spelled thus in informal writing.

Finally, can I write this with commas?Yes.

If Harrison isn't playing, which he isn't, I think the Colts aren't gonna win.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Belly — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:39:50 GMT

Hoa Thai wrote:
Belly wrote:

Ok I understood that drinking implies a continuous activity, but it may violate with the parallelsim, may not it?

Not really! This sentence contains the vilolation: "He sat at the terrace and was drinking coffee." One clause uses the simple past tense and the other uses the past progressive tense. In your previous sentence, 'drinking' is a gerund (a noun form of a verb). 'Drinking coffee' is noun phrase acts as an adjectival component.

Belly wrote:

According to my grammar book, could isn't used in context like this. Could is used when we generally referring to the past.

I don't know what you mean. Please quote your book.

Belly wrote:

I'm with you in the last question, Hoa Thai, I don't know why my teacher corrected so. Notwithstanding, you can see my original work at http://www.englishforums.com/English/CorrectEssay/zwlkz/Post.htm. It's my orginal work befored it was modified by my teacher.

Could you show what I shared with you to your teacher and ask for his opinion?

My take:

1. 'go to (vocational) school' represents a task students do.
2. 'go to a (vocational) school' represents an undefinitive selection.
3. I am troubled by 'go to (vocational) schools' and would like to hear others' opinions.

Take care,
Hoa Thai
EDIT NOTE: I will look at your other post and share with you my opinion later.
EDIT NOTE #2: I saw 'school' instead of 'schools' in your other post!

I haven't seen that we can use past and past continuous in like that. I sat there drinking coffee. What is an adjectival component? I sat there drinking coffee, which occurs first? which later?

Yes, the original was school, but my teacher corrected it into schools

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Hoa Thai — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:51:07 GMT

Belly wrote:
Ok I understood that drinking implies a continuous activity, but it may violate with the parallelsim, may not it?

Not really! This sentence contains the vilolation: "He sat at the terrace and was drinking coffee." One clause uses the simple past tense and the other uses the past progressive tense. In your previous sentence, 'drinking' is a gerund (a noun form of a verb). 'Drinking coffee' is noun phrase acts as an adjectival component.

Belly wrote:
According to my grammar book, could isn't used in context like this. Could is used when we generally referring to the past.

I don't know what you mean. Please quote your book.

Belly wrote:

I'm with you in the last question, Hoa Thai, I don't know why my teacher corrected so. Notwithstanding, you can see my original work at http://www.englishforums.com/English/CorrectEssay/zwlkz/Post.htm. It's my orginal work befored it was modified by my teacher.

Could you show what I shared with you to your teacher and ask for his opinion?

My take:

1. 'go to (vocational) school' represents a task students do.
2. 'go to a (vocational) school' represents an undefinitive selection.
3. I am troubled by 'go to (vocational) schools' and would like to hear others' opinions.

Take care,
Hoa Thai
EDIT NOTE: I will look at your other post and share with you my opinion later.
EDIT NOTE #2: I saw 'school' instead of 'schools' in your other post!