Search results for 'tag:Expressions tag:Spelling' matching tags 'Expressions' and 'Spelling'

(Urgent!!!) Please help me with this argumentative essay

Chibi — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 01:52:12 GMT

Hi there,

Please help me to check grammar, expression, word choices and also the content of this essay. I found hard to develop the ideas when dealing with this topic.

By the way, in your opinion, should a nation have the same natinonal curriculum for all their students? And why?

Thank you very much!

Topic 2: A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer.

There have been many arguments about whether or not a nation should have the national curriculum for all its students till they enter college. The advocates for the national curriculum assert that it ensures the same basic background for all students before essential skills for jobs are trained in colleges. However, it would be better if the nation only maintains the same curriculum in primary and lower-secondary schools and allows upper-secondary schools to determine their own courses on the basis of the national standards.

It is conceded that basic background (spelling, reading, simple calculating, understanding history, geography, simple physic and chemist phenomena) is important to all students. Before being able to attend a more complicated science lessons, they must know how to read, how to spell and how to identify items related to such lessons. Before being able to judge the wrong and the right, they must be taught with some simple models in life. There is little difference to direct studentsâ perception at the age of fifteen and below. Therefore, a national curriculum is necessary and suitable here.

However, from sixteen on, students should leave free to develop their passion in specific fields. Lessons in upper-secondary schools are required to provide them with as much knowledge on such fields as possible. That will prepare them for more practice on skills in college, relating the perceived background of the same fields. In that case, it is wise to let upper-schools design their own specialized programs or lessons which can meet their own studentsâ needs and wants. Moreover, each upper-school must has its strengths; thus, allowing it to determine the possible courses means giving it an opportunity to well develop itself as well as providing students with enriching environment to show off their ability and interest. Nonetheless, it is necessary that these programs or lessons are under a censor of the Education Ministry so that all the schools will not be out of the national control and meet the certain focus.

In conclusion, it is necessary to have a national curriculum for all lower-secondary students and under. Moreover, upper-schools should determine valuable courses to well prepare students for college levels according to their own strengths and national standards.

Re: line against/along

Avangi — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:23:22 GMT

The prepositions are both fine and natural, but in AmE we'd add a third, so to speak. We use the expression (idiom) "line up" to form a line. I guess BrE is "que." I don't know if it can stand alone, or if it's "que up," or if I'm spelling it correctly.

I wonder if "up'" becomes an adverb in "line up."

Re: i have a question releating to "get"

Mister Micawber — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 09:02:30 GMT

.
Get is a common verb in various verb phrases. These are used:

Could you please get my car working? It doesn't seem to work.

Could you please get my car to work?

I will get my staff to work on it. -- Get to do has 2 common meanings here: (1)convince or coerce, or (1) cause to begin

I will get my staff working on it -- This means only 'cause to begin'.

There are many 'get' expressions. HERE are some.

In future, please use care in spelling and capitalization. This is an English grammar website.

Re: true and correct

Kooyeen — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 19:16:03 GMT

Hoa Thai
What I am trying to figure out is this: before everyone says it, it must be invented by a person or a small group of people; so how does it eventually get accepted by everyone? Is it because it sounds good or it is backed up with some acceptable rule(s) / logical reasoning? I could be wrong - but I tend to think that without conforming to certain standards - for example, a fundamental grammar structure - it would not survive.

Hi Hoa,
I don't know, I think that's something for linguists.
Anyway, I'm sure not all changes happen the same way and for the same reasons. Some things could be logical and expected, like changing the spelling of "colour" to "color", but others might not make much sense... where does the expression "I could care less" come from? LOL, I have no idea. Or why is it "quarter of ten" in the US?
So I think this is rather complicated to explain, and since I am not a linguist, I can't tell you more. Sorry!
But I believe today the media plays an important role in deciding what will be part of modern English and what will not. If someone makes up a new term in high school, if they are popular chances are all the others in the school will start to use that term. But not all the others in the rest of the US. But if that term is put in an important movie, on TV shows, on The Simpsons, on commercials... heh, I bet that term is more likely to be listed in dictionaries in the future... even thought I think only young people are likely to actually pick up "new language."

Hoa Thai
In other words, in any language, words might be born as we search for a new way to express our thoughts, but they must satisfy some basic principle(s). In the end, wouldn't it be true that rules make up the foundation of languages?

Yes, but we all follow implicit rules, that might not be the same for everyone. You could say "It don't matter" is wrong according to your rules, but those who say it consider it a possible sentence, according to their own rules. Because that's what they have always heard from most people around them. They are not breaking any rules or corrupting anything. Maybe they break the rules of "standard English", which is what people call the variety spoken in somewhat formal situations, for example by newscasters, or the variety you find in newspapers. Well, since few people can talk like newscasters or write like journalists, I'm starting to think that maybe most native speakers don't speak "standard English". It seems everyone is allowed to have their own accent but not their own grammar, according to prescriptivists, although native speakers pick up both of them the same way during their lives. That's curious, isn't it? LOL

Re: Word to complete phrase

Clive — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 23:58:10 GMT

Hi,

New to this part of the forum. Welcome. Can anyone help with the folllowing, please?

Supply a suitable word to complete the following phrases (my suggested answers are in red font - sometimes more than one answer when not sure):

a bellow of (rage)
a gush of (water, goodwill)
a snarl of (teeth) This sounds odd. The wood focuses on the emotions, eg a snarl of anger/rage.
a clattering of (hooves, keyboards, irons) What kind of irons clatter?
a rolling of (seas, hills, irons) This is a bit tricky, because it sounds like an odd and literary kind of thing to say. Perhaps 'a rolling of thunder'. How about 'a rolling of wheels'? 'He rolled his eyes' is a common expression to express scepticism.
a whir of (wings) The spelling 'whir' is OK. 'The variant form 'whirr' is also OK.
a rustling of (leaves, silk)
a swishing of (skirts, curtains)

Best wishes, Clive

What are areas of weakness?? grammar, spelling , punctuation etc.

Aliwaqasmalik — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 12:02:58 GMT

Dear teachers kindly check this short aticle and highlight my weak areas and give me score out of 10. Grammar, Punctuations, expression etc.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

President of Pakistan as a chief of Pakistan Army staff declared the state of emergency in Pakistan today. In this recent speech to the nation he announced the reasons behind this act. These are:non coordination among the pillars of state, rising religious extremism.

Presidentâs act of declaring emergency can be seen as an act of realism. Realism states that human by nature can not be true,nice and honest all the times. He always tries to protect some interests. As a president of a country, Musharraf has the right to do anything illegal and evil in the benefit of Pakistanâs national interest. According to him the prime interest of Pakistan in the restoration of democracy and for this âstate of emergencyâ is inevitable. In his message to the critics he said,â Do not expect the level of democracy you learnt over a period of centuries. We are trying to learn it and I know we are doing well. Do not expect the level of human rights you learnt over a period of centuries. We are trying to learn it and I know we are doing well.â He also quoted the statement of Abraham Lincoln , âSometimes we amputate limbs to preserve life; similarly, presidents must occasionally violate the Constitution to save it.â He says that he is violating and suspending the constitution to save it.

Non coordination among the pillars of state â judiciary, legislatives and executivesâ is the main cause of this recent emergency. The situation started after a presidential reference against the chief justice of Pakistan, Chudhry Iftrkhar. The reference brought a wave of law violation ad mass level and involvement of political elements in the protest against the reference. Supreme judicial council gave decision in favour of Justice and Govt. accepted the decision. Afterwords there erupted a legal war among the pillars of state where judiciary was the main dominating factor. This resulted in a chaos and unstable Government.Pakistanâs presidential elections 2007 were plunged into this war too.

There is a rising wave of religious extremist in Pakistan.July 2007 Lal Masjid militants in Islamabad, march 2004 to present Talibans in Wazeristan and FATA and oct. 2007 Swaat operation are recent examples of this. Moreover, Judiciary is continuously victimizing the Govt. in Lal Masjid crisis. 100 arrested people were freed by supreme court of Pakistan. President says that those people might be a part of recent bomb blasts in Pakistan.

What do to next? In Musharrafâs view, â Democratic transitionâ will continue as normal. He will be launching the 3rd phase of this transition â a fully democratic elected Government under a civil president , Musharraf if elected â. He defines democratic transition as a continuous process in which first he maintained the military rule upto 2002 then from 2002 to 2007 a fully functional democratic Govt. under a military president and now the third phase.

Act of announcing emergency was right or wrong itâs your own choice. But these were the views of Mr. President.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: explaining "it"

Terryxpress — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 21:35:01 GMT

Thank you for making me actually think about some of the idioms we take for granted.
The meaning is the same as saying, The rumour is..." (Rumor is the American spelling, rumour is the British spelling) - and that is what people 'hear' when someone uses those words, rather than the individual words, especially the "it" part.
It actually comes from the expression "to have it", meaning "how one has understood something, grasped the meaning of something" but implying there is some doubt as to whether one is correct, as there may be different ways of looking at some situation. So, I might say: "Well, (as I understand the situation you are in from what you have told me)= (as I have it), you can either do (this) or (that). That's my opinion, (but someone else may see things differently.)"
So, in the idiom "rumour has it" from "to have it" ( I have, it has, you have, he/she has, they have) the "has it" would then literally mean, "rumour is of the opinion that she will marry soon (but until they actually announce the date we can't really be sure.)"
Hope that helps.

Re: just to... A weird doubt

Yankee — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 16:45:53 GMT

Kooyeen wrote:
Yes, but it's not correct to say that one consonant is not pronounced at all.

Ah, but I do think it is correct to describe "stop pushing" that way -- at least at normal, unstressed conversational speed.

Your example with "used to do" (as in "I used to live in Germany") is not a good comparison. The reason the comparison is not good is that the only other word pronounced like the first three letters in the expression "used to do" is the NOUN "use". I think that's as much (if not more) the source of the spelling mix-ups as the fact that the D in "used to do" is not pronounced.

Re: Proficiency alongside "poverty".

Cool Breeze — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:02:24 GMT

Hi Forbes

Thank you for your long reply. I do appreciate it. I would just like to say that I my opinion is based on the knowledge I have of the Germanic and Romance languages and it is of course very subjective. I fully understand that not everyone agrees with me and what I consider easy may be difficult for some others as I have already said. However, I have given my honest opinion and I don't think you or anybody else would want me to lie on this forum? I'll add some comments.

I thought that might be what you were getting at.

I think it is a mistake to equate complexity solely with the degree of inflectional morphology of a language. I agree. I was talking about morphology only. To my mind I made no mistake. I do know what is difficult about English.

I have never studied Finnish, but I would be willing to bet that at least one of the following is true:

1. that a language with at least 30 cases has a corresponding lack of prepositions

There are only about 15 cases in Finnish - I don't actually remember the exact number and didn't bother to check, but we always
have a different form for the plural and that explains the 30. It is true that Finnish has fewer prepositions than English. In my opinion the number of changes made to words and the number of inflections cause far more difficulties for nonnative learners than the number of English prepositions, though..

2. that word order is fairly free and is used to express different emphases Correct.

3. that the inflectional morphology, though complex, is regular Correct again. Someone has said that there are ten rules in English grammar and 10,000 exceptions and 10,000 rules in Finnish grammar and ten exceptions. That's not quite true, though.

4. that it is perhaps not quite so difficult to learn once you begin to get the hang of it That is a matter of opinion and dispute. Quite a few nonnatives have said it is very difficult. They say it is hopeless to try and master the grammar from books. There may or may not be some truth in this. The number of "rules" must seem endless to some and people say it's a better idea not to worry too much about all the inflections and changes in the middle of the words but just go where people talk and learn the grammatical complexities by ear.

I have to say that I have met one or two Finns and they do seem to relish the idea that Finnish is a "difficult" language. I have also met some "Swedish Finnish" (I am not sure what the correct term is) and they all tell me that they are bilingual in Swedish and Finnish. They will of course have been helped in acquiring Finnish because either they live in a bilingual community or started to learn the language at an early age (I am not sure how it works) so they would not have been prejudiced by any concept of "difficulty". I expect that your idea that Finnish is difficult is confirmed by the fact that you do not know many foreigners living in Finland who have mastered it. This will be because:

1. It is more difficult to learn any language when you are an adult That is true about all languages.

2. Someone who is working full time will not be able to devote more than an hour or two a week to learning the language That is true about all languages.

3. Everyone will find it more convenient to speak to foreigners in English and there is therefore little incentive for them to learn Finnish There is a lot of truth in this. However, there are lots of people who have come to Finland for good and want to learn the language.

4. You keep harping on about how difficult the language is and put them off! I have spoken to Brits in Finland who say the opposite. They say they get encouraged in their efforts to speak Finnish. I don't think we are any better or worse than other people in this respect.

(I live in Spain and all the above applies to expats.)

You think that English is "simple". I venture to suggest that this is because you started to learn it at an early age and were introduced to it gradually so that you did not perceive its difficulties; you acquired your mastery over a long period. Also, I suspect that Finns are "subjected" to English in a way that the English are not subjected to foreign languages. A lot can be learned without realising it.

No. I have perceived its difficulties all right. They are the spelling and the idioms and the exceptions, for me anyway. The grammar, as I understand it, and structure are the easiest of the languages I am familiar with. Mind you, I don't pretend to be perfect in English. Actually, I don't think I deserve the icon, or whatever is the right word, that says I have a good grasp of the language. I would say I have a good grasp of the grammar but my vocabulary isn't at all on a par with native speakers. My knowledge of idioms and colloquialisms could also be much better.

Consider the following:

There is no single way of negating verbs in English. I do not eat, but I must not. I do not have any eggs, but I have not got any eggs.

There is no single way of forming questions. Do you come here a lot? but Can I go out?

True. And a third way: Who came? What happened?

It is not always easy to know when to use the continuous form of the verb. Try and explain why you can say Are you having cakes for tea? but cannot go into a shop and say Are you having cakes?

The meaning of prepositional verbs is not always transparent. John has got it in for me.

English is a highly analytic language and meaning is often derived from context:

A. You keep complaining. Have you got it in for me?

B. I asked you to bring in the shopping. Have you got it in for me?

These are just a tiny example of the complexities of English and they have nothing to do with inflectional morphology.

I am familiar with these things and I admit I make mistakes using expressions and tenses. However, I was referring to the fact that English words have only a handful of forms and the fewer inflections there are the easier it is to learn them. Using them correctly is indeed another thing, I agree with you there. Other languages have their "difficulties" too. I admit that English is difficult, at least for me, in this respect. No language is easy in every respect, or if there is one, then it is impossible to express nuances in that language.

As I said in my previous post, what is easy for some may be difficult for others. My views are based solely on my experience and I certainly don't expect everybody to agree with me.

Cheers

Re: I need help to check mistakes. Please give qucik replay it is very urgent

Grammar Geek — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 23:16:35 GMT

Hello Pojo,

Welcome to the forums.

I know this isn't a grammar issue, but by picking apart an e-mail's spelling mistakes your are lowering yourself. I also don't know this expression "when a dog barks on the moon." What does it mean? And why are YOU saying you're sorry?

No one has the right to harass or make fun of others. Your e-mail showed your own shortcomings and lack of maturity, not those of others.