Search results for 'tag:Negatives tag:Articles' matching tags 'Negatives' and 'Articles'

When is the best time to be born?

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 04:50:18 GMT

When is the best time to be born?

As the time past lifestyle changes as a result of advancement in technology and also new laws. In addition different generations have different cultures due to new ideas that come into play everyday.

Some people believe it was better if we have been born in the past. One reason that they express is that although advancement in technology help us to get rid of some boring and labor activities, it bring with itself new kind of difficulties which are more complex for human to face and endure, they bring examples like new kind of diseases or systematic and machine like lifestyle.

Another reason they argue is that advancement in technology lead to destruction of environment, they say human is so selfish that they donât even bother destroying environment and finally it will lead to extinction of human body like other species.

But I have not such a negative point of view, I believe living in future should be more interesting. I believe advancement in technology is brightening the future more and more. It help us live more comfortably and having less engagement.

In my opinion although technology may bring with itself some difficulties it would bring the solution for them too.

We have seen that technology may improve lifestyle and make it easier; however, it may bring some difficulties too.

To sum up I believe advancement in technology have much more advantages for human being than disadvantages and as result I think living in future is much more interesting.

I would appreciate everybody who bother himself and have look at my article, your advices would be of great importance for me.

thank you very much,

Sadeq Morshedloo.

When is the best time to be born?

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:01:10 GMT

When is the best time to be born?

As the time past lifestyle changes as a result of advancement in technology and also new laws. In addition different generations have different cultures due to new ideas that come into play everyday.

Some people believe it was better if we have been born in the past. One reason that they express is that although advancement in technology help us to get rid of some boring and labor activities, it bring with itself new kind of difficulties which are more complex for human to face and endure, they bring examples like new kind of diseases or systematic and machine like lifestyle.

Another reason they argue is that advancement in technology lead to destruction of environment, they say human is so selfish that they donât even bother destroying environment and finally it will lead to extinction of human body like other species.

But I have not such a negative point of view, I believe living in future should be more interesting. I believe advancement in technology is brightening the future more and more. It help us live more comfortably and having less engagement.

In my opinion although technology may bring with itself some difficulties it would bring the solution for them too.

We have seen that technology may improve lifestyle and make it easier; however, it may bring some difficulties too.

To sum up I believe advancement in technology have much more advantages for human being than disadvantages and as result I think living in future is much more interesting.

I would appreciate everybody who bother himself and have look at my article, your advices would be of great importance for me.

thank you very much,

Sadeq Morshedloo.

Re: Please check for me this discursive essay !

Grammar Geek — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:01:14 GMT

Hello redneon,
Highlights show potential problems. Remember to leave a space after a period or comma. English-speaking country, with a hyphen. You need some articles here and there.

Topic: Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of studying English in an English-speaking country

Bilions of people around the world study English as their foreign language. Many of them attribute a fluent English learner to living in an English speaking country, whereas others believe that there are many obstacles when studying overseas. Therefore,this essay will discuss about the benefits and negatives of studying English in an English-speaking country.

The first argument in favor of studying English in an English-speaking country is that students can enhance all their English skills with the support of good facilities. Firstly, surrounding environment with full-time speaking English wherever students go may help them improve speaking and listening dramatically. Furthermore, they have enormous oppotunities to approach a new culture and the modern living style in most English speaking countries. Those lead to the deeper understanding in English and indirectly make students' reading and writing skills become better. In brief, English skills will rise up when students live in an English speaking country.

Although there are some advantages, studying English in an English speaking country still have some disadvantages.

The primary negative for studying English in an English speaking country is that there are various obstacles when living alone in the new country. Many students who have not left their home before feel shocked with the new culture and they usually find difficult to live independently because of the lack of family support. --That was a very well-written sentence! In addition, most English speaking countries are developed. As a consequence, many students may encounter with the lure of the fashionable and luxurious society and they plunge themselves into that society without concious thinking. This needs a bit of development. Are you saying that will fall into the hedonistic lifestyle of the decadent Americans? What are the real dangers you're talking about?

Another disadvantage of studying English in an English speaking country is the financial problems. Living overseas for many years in order to studying may cost a large amount of money. For example, the aggregate of living cost and tuition fees for one year study in Australia may cost around 30,000 dollars. Moreover, the cost can increase each year as a result of inflation all over the world and that can be a burden for students' family finance.

In conclusion, this essay has identified both positive and negative aspects of studying English in an English speaking country. Despite the advantages to improve all English skills, it still have a pressure for students and their family. Consequently, students should think carefully about studying overseas to make sure that they can adapt easily to new environment. You list only "adapt" but you mention the financial aspect too. I think you should add something about that to your final sentence.

Re: help with grammar

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:50:09 GMT

In the article, "Only science can save us from climate catastrophe", political philosopher John Gray advocates the role of technology in environmental debate on how to tackle environmental problems. While the ecological footprint metric indicates, that "things are bad and getting worse" (Carter 2007, pp. 1), the author presents us with neo-liberal opinion that the best way how to solve the disruption of environment is science. Gray's technocentric thoughts opposes conservative New Right philosophy of G.W. Bush and ecological theory proposed by environmentalists. In article, he focuses selectively on particular areas of these philosophies and pragmatically justifies negative stance towards them. He doubts the rightness of Green's ecocentric action to environmental problems and their belief in sustainability arguing that these solutions are just temporary, leading to discomfort and they will not reduce "our impact on the Earth" (Gray, 2008). In similar vein, the author doesn't see any future in novelty of society and rejects opinion that "the world" can reconsider and change its values toward nature "There is not the remotest prospect that the world will renounce the use of fossil fuels"(Gray, 2008). This perspective is very close to G.W. Bush conservative politics. However, as Gray emphasises, Conservatives support organic gradual adaptation (Carter, 2007), prefer so called "appropriate technology" (bio fuels) and are sceptical about "radical technical experimentation" (Carter 2007, pp.67) - high technology. Gray builds optimistic claim that nothing more than expanding existing system e.g. nuclear energy, GM food, etc., with assistance from technologies, is the only way forward (Gray, 2008). He incorporates an ideology of development and shows that human ingenuity and technology are able to fix the environmental problems. According to Gray "any feasible remedy for the environmental crisis involves high-tech solutions" (Gray, 2008). Thus the author directly supports typical stance of neo-liberalism and call for "large capital investment and the proliferation of experts" (Radcliffe 2000, pp.6). Grays environmental policies represents anthropocentric world view and priority is given to economic goals. In article, the only intrinsic value (Carter, 2007) is accorded to humans, while nature has just instrumental value. However, the suggestion that "a world of fewer people would be far better place to deal with climate change than the heavily overpopulated one " (Gray, 2008) indicates, that he attributes intrinsic value just limited number of humans and thus indirectly employs theory of winners and losers. When building his arguments, he incorporates the fact about climate change and focuses on selective environmental problems such as global demand for energy and the overpopulation. The article follows logical flow; however author's arguments lack scientific evidence from other studies and direct quotation, what undermines their degree of certainty. Whole picture of environmental debate is quite simplified and article appears to be just statement against statement not very convincing for professionals. There is employed the notion of neo-liberal ideology referring to economic liberalism. In conclusion, his claims draw attention rather to sustained comfort raised from capitalism than "sustained capacity of realistic thinking" (Grey, 2008).

help with grammar

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:20:48 GMT

can you please check my grammar in this short analysis? thank you very very much

Gray's technocentric thoughts oppose conservative New Right philosophy of G.W. Bush and ecological theory proposed by environmentalists. In article, he focuses selectively on particular areas of these philosophies and pragmatically justifies negative stance towards them.

He doubts the rightness of Green's ecocentric action to environmental problems and their belief in sustainability arguing that these solutions are just temporary, leading to discomfort and they will not reduce "our impact on the Earth" (Gray, 2008). In similar vein, the author doesn't see any future in novelty of society and rejects opinion that "the world" can reconsider and change its values toward nature "There is not the remotest prospect that the world will renounce the use of fossil fuels"(Gray, 2008).

This perspective is very close to G.W. Bush conservative politics. However, as Gray emphasises, Conservatives support organic gradual adaptation (Carter, 2007), prefer so called "appropriate technology" (bio fuels) and are sceptical about "radical technical experimentation" (Carter 2007, pp.67) - high technology.

Gray builds optimistic claim that nothing more than expanding existing system e.g. nuclear energy, GM food, etc., with assistance from technologies, is the only way forward (Gray, 2008). He incorporates an ideology of development and shows that human ingenuity and technology are able to fix the environmental problems. According to Gray "any feasible remedy for the environmental crisis involves high-tech solutions" (Gray, 2008). Thus the author directly supports typical stance of neo-liberalism and call for "large capital investment and the proliferation of experts" (Radcliffe 2000, pp.6).

Grays environmental policies represents anthropocentric world view and priority is given to economic goals. In article, the only intrinsic value (Carter, 2007) is accorded to humans, while nature has just instrumental value. However, the suggestion that "a world of fewer people would be far better place to deal with climate change than the heavily overpopulated one " (Gray, 2008) indicates, that he attributes intrinsic value just limited number of humans and thus indirectly employs theory of winners and losers.

When building his arguments, he incorporates the fact about climate change and focuses on selective environmental problems such as global demand for energy and the overpopulation. The article follows logical flow; however author's arguments lack scientific evidence from other studies and direct quotation, what undermines their degree of certainty. Whole picture of environmental debate is quite simplified and article appears to be just statement against statement not very convincing for professionals. There is employed the notion of neo-liberal ideology referring to economic liberalism. In conclusion, his claims draw attention rather to sustained comfort raised from capitalism than "sustained capacity of realistic thinking" (Grey, 2008).

Re: Please check the grammar

Maple — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:06:21 GMT

You sound like a doctor of medicine!

Thank you!

I wouldn't use the before literature: Large as the amount of classical and modern literature is ...

I wanted to mean only TCM literature. In the light of this, should the still not be used?

You probably mean that patients and doctors' confidence decreases, right?

exactly!

Influence doesn't necessarily mean the influence is negative: The sun influences the weather. I would reword the sentence: ... opportunistic, which decreases doctors and patients' confidence in TCM therapy for stomach pains. I have omitted some articles as well, as you can see.

Just the kind of opinion I was seeking out.

Thanks a lot!

Re: Please check the grammar

Cool Breeze — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:19:36 GMT

Hi Maple

You sound like a doctor of medicine! I wouldn't use the before literature: Large as the amount of classical and modern literature is ...

Thus is perfectly acceptable in your sentence. ... thereby the doctors and patients' confidence in TCM therapy for the stomach pain is influenced is a little vague. You probably mean that patients and doctors' confidence decreases, right? Influence doesn't necessarily mean the influence is negative: The sun influences the weather. I would reword the sentence: ... opportunistic, which decreases doctors and patients' confidence in TCM therapy for stomach pains. I have omitted some articles as well, as you can see.

Cheers

Re: anybody to correct my English

Anonymous — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:16:19 GMT

It's now grammatically correct, but I still have a comment about organization. It's not obvious what country you're talking about until the middle of the article. That's quite unclear to the reader and confusing.

Survey: People Have a Feeling That Price Increase Is Much Higher Than It Really Is

People Think They Are Worse Off Than They Really Are

The average person's perception of cost of living increases is quite different from reality. Contrary to popular belief that the increase was 3.5% this year, cost of living expenses really went up by 5%. People thought last yearâs price increases were 5 times higher, when they were actually lower than in recent years.

Unemployment was estimated more realistically. The real figure was 19.2% in January, whereas people guessed 25% on average, according to a survey by the INEKO Institute.

Only one in every nine responses had a realistic view. Even in the most optimistic group of people, which was represented by the young, the university-educated, businessmen, and citizens of large cities, only about 16 â 20% estimates were accurate.

This distorted view of reality influences both peopleâs feelings and their growing dissatisfaction, and moreover, âhas a negative impact on the economy,â said Gabriel Sipos from INEKO Institute.

Psychologist Zuzana Jarossova explained that people are already born with a certain amount of pessimism.

âA born pessimist unconsciously organizes his/her life in an unsuccessful way and the loss he/she is expecting will be brought about,â Jarossova said.

Pessimism appeared right after 1989, according to Michal Vasecka, a sociologist and analyst of Institute of Public Question. It is connected with the challenges brought by the new era.

Another reason is that we compare Slovakia with the most developed countries and not with those that are at the same level, for example with Poland.

The fact that âthe rest of the world considers us as a country which is even at a lower level than Poland plays another role. This persuades Slovaks that there is something wrong,â says Vasecka.

Sipos blames the media for this "bad" mood. âThe mass media forms peopleâs behavior and expectations. It concentrates too much on the 20% unemployment, but says nothing at all about the inflation,â he said.

He said the extent of pessimism was not almost influenced by economic measures from the beginning of this year. âIn January, 85% of the respondents considered the economic situation of 2002 as worse or the same as in 2001. Similarly, it was estimated this way in October 2002, before the new government measures were introduced,â he explained.

Even the growth of real income, which was the highest in the last 5 years, did not influence the pessimism of the public.

Re: 'most vs. almost

Anonymous — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 02:10:35 GMT

Here's an interesting article with regards to the confusion amongst Japanese learners of English:

Almost a Problem...

In Whatâs in a Word? In Japan Currents, July 1997: http://www.trussel.com/jap/almost.htm

I'm often struck by errors in non-native English which arise from the confusion of the words 'most,' 'almost' and 'mostly.' Some cause unexpected ambiguity, when I find that I can't quite guess what the speaker is trying to say. Others often convey strikingly comical images. Both may provide potentially useful examples for revealing the native speaker's sense of these words.

When I hear that "almost my friends are going to Hokkaido," assuming that the error is with the use of 'almost,' I'm faced with the dilemma of whether she means that most of her friends are going, though some aren't, or that they'll spend their time mostly in Hokkaido, but will also go to some other places. What should have been 'most of' or 'mostly' came out as 'almost,' and left me up in the air.

In the case of errors like "Almost Americans are fat," the intended meaning is not elusive -- the target is no doubt "Most Americans are fat." "Americans are mostly fat," while grammatically possible, is not so likely: the human body is mostly water. If I hear that "the water is mostly hot enough for tea," which should be 'almost hot enough,' it doesn't confuse me so much as conjure up a humorous image -- I find myself imagining little pieces of hot-enough water floating among some not-yet-hot-enough ones.

Historically, both "almost" and 'most' date back nearly 1,000 years in English, with 'almost' being formed as a compound of all+most. There was apparently no word 'mostly' until late in the 16th century, and until that time the meaning of 'almost' included the idea 'mostly all, nearly all' which is quite close to the way it's often used in error by non-native speakers today. With the development of "mostly," that sense correspondingly disappeared from 'almost,' leaving it with only the slightly negative implication of "very nearly," "all but," "a little less than (completely)."

'Almost' seems to correspond in meaning and to a large extent in usage, to the Japanese [hotondo], and this is probably the root of the problem for Japanese speakers of English: ideas which are expressed with [hotondo] may appear as 'most (of)', 'almost' or 'mostly' in English, a one-to-three (or four) correspondence bound to result in confusion.

Among these three "confusables," the use of 'most (of)' seems the least likely to cause trouble, being so close to [hotondo no], though in fact less experienced speakers may be bothered by when to use the 'of.' It only appears when the modified noun is preceded by 'the, these, those, a possessive form, or before the pronoun 'them.' So, "most boys," or "most of the boys," but never "most of boys" or "most the boys."

Considering the usage of 'almost,' it appears as the first choice for numerical expressions like "That lesson cost me almost a hundred dollars," "They first settled here almost 75 years ago," or "Almost 1000 people showed up at the opening." These suggest a basic idea of modifying something complete, perfect, 100%, to make it less so. So when 'almost' is used with words like "finished, done, dressed, built, written" etc., or "ready, full, empty, dead..." it adds that meaning of "not quite, nearly." "Almost late" isn't late, and "almost empty" isn't empty. So, "I was almost asleep," "the vacation is almost over," or the old song title, "It's almost like being in love." 'Almost' appears frequently with time expressions like "I left there almost three hours ago," "We'd better leave; it's almost morning," or "I can't believe it's the 20th -- it's almost Christmas already!" with the similar sense of 'not yet.'

With 'mostly,' the historical 'newcomer' of the group, the idea of 'for the most part' shows up when it is used for expressing quantities without numbers, especially when in some sense they can be counted, like "I don't know why they call this beef stew -- it's mostly potatoes," or "The students in that school are mostly Chinese." English and Japanese seem to part ways here. "I'm mostly at home on weekends" might be a likely candidate for [hotondo] in Japanese, but it's not a case where "almost" could be used in English, unless it were as "almost always." In "That garden is mostly weeds," or "Those boys are mostly from the neighboring town," English isn't aiming for the "less-than complete" idea, and so "almost" doesn't fit.

It seems that the English 'almost' emphasizes 'less-than-ness' while the Japanese [hotondo] focuses on 'mostly-ness.' Of course these are two sides of the same coin, but there are clearly some times when they don't match well enough for 'translation' English to succeed. Like most areas of language fluency, it's an area where we have to strive to somehow get in touch with the spirit of the language, and put the dictionaries aside.

Stephen Trussel

Interestingly, in a short article on Correct American Usage, Russell (1940:431-2) criticises Strattonâs description of good usage:

âAlmost and most,â he writes, âdo not mean the same things, though from the numbers of supposedly educated writers and speakers who use the shorter most incorrectly for the longer almost, one would almost believe that the distinction has disappeared.â Again, the author notes that advertisement should eb accented on vert, not tise, even though âPractice in this country seems to be about evenly divided.â Obviously the philosophy of language implied in these two articles may seriously affect any judgment the author makes on usage.

I just happen to be looking into this at the moment ... probably more info but hey ...

Cheers,

Phil Brown
Tokyo

Re: Politeness using negative questions

Kooyeen — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:09:52 GMT

Hi again,
I think you guys are right. maybe now I understand. I just read some stuff on the net about negative questions, plus one of Jim's posts, and this "idea" I had seems the right one:

Kooyeen wrote:
Idea! Maybe that only works with modals and with requests, not permissions? So couldn't you, wouldn't you, won't you, can't you... are used for politeness, but can't I, couldn't I, don't you, aren't you... only sound like you're insisting, which is the opposite of being polite?

Negative questions are possible with modals, but they are not going to sound more polite, but a little less polite instead, because they imply a positive answer is expected and so they actually sound a little more demanding. -> Wouldn't you like a cookie? Couldn't you answer my question?
When there are no modals, a positive answer is still expected, and negative questions are not used to ask a neutral or polite question.

What made me change my mind was an article written by someone who had a non-native (Russian) boss who sounded really rude because of his negative questions, which he thought they were a polite way to ask everything. If I hadn't found out about this, I would have end up like him, LOL.

I still have a problem: I said asking negative questions with modal verbs is still considered "polite", even though it sounds a little bit more demanding (Could you...? ---> Couldn't you...? // Would you...? ---> Wouldn't you...? // etc.)
I'm afraid (but not sure) there are some exceptions.
First exception: not all modals. Can might be an exception (Can you...? ---> Can't you?) and he negative might not be accepted among the "polite" expressions. Can you give me one? ---> Can't you give me one?
Second exception: this might not work with the first person I or we (Can I...? Could I...? ---> Can't I...? Couldn't I?) and the negative wouldn't sound polite anymore. Could I go out? ---> Couldn't I go out?

Sorry if this thread is a mess... this is very different in Italian, and I'd like to avoid sounding rude or annoying someone without wanting to.
Thanks a lot in advance.

Search results for 'tag:Negatives tag:Articles' matching tags 'Negatives' and 'Articles'

When is the best time to be born?

When is the best time to be born?

As the time past lifestyle changes as a result of advancement in technology and also new laws. In addition different generations have different cultures due to new ideas that come into play everyday.

Another reason they argue is that advancement in technology lead to destruction of environment, they say human is so selfish that they donât even bother destroying environment and finally it will lead to extinction of human body like other species.

But I have not such a negative point of view, I believe living in future should be more interesting. I believe advancement in technology is brightening the future more and more. It help us live more comfortably and having less engagement.

In my opinion although technology may bring with itself some difficulties it would bring the solution for them too.

We have seen that technology may improve lifestyle and make it easier; however, it may bring some difficulties too.

To sum up I believe advancement in technology have much more advantages for human being than disadvantages and as result I think living in future is much more interesting.

I would appreciate everybody who bother himself and have look at my article, your advices would be of great importance for me.

thank you very much,

Sadeq Morshedloo.

When is the best time to be born?

When is the best time to be born?

As the time past lifestyle changes as a result of advancement in technology and also new laws. In addition different generations have different cultures due to new ideas that come into play everyday.

Another reason they argue is that advancement in technology lead to destruction of environment, they say human is so selfish that they donât even bother destroying environment and finally it will lead to extinction of human body like other species.

But I have not such a negative point of view, I believe living in future should be more interesting. I believe advancement in technology is brightening the future more and more. It help us live more comfortably and having less engagement.

In my opinion although technology may bring with itself some difficulties it would bring the solution for them too.

We have seen that technology may improve lifestyle and make it easier; however, it may bring some difficulties too.

To sum up I believe advancement in technology have much more advantages for human being than disadvantages and as result I think living in future is much more interesting.

I would appreciate everybody who bother himself and have look at my article, your advices would be of great importance for me.

thank you very much,

Sadeq Morshedloo.

Re: Please check for me this discursive essay !

Re: help with grammar

help with grammar

Re: Please check the grammar

Re: Please check the grammar

Re: anybody to correct my English

Re: 'most vs. almost

Re: Politeness using negative questions

Another reason they argue is that advancement in technology lead to destruction of environment, they say human is so selfish that they donât even bother destroying environment and finally it will lead to extinction of human body like other species.

Another reason they argue is that advancement in technology lead to destruction of environment, they say human is so selfish that they donât even bother destroying environment and finally it will lead to extinction of human body like other species.