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

depriving them of contributing

Abil — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:37:59 GMT

Micro-credit is certainly not a cure-all. But it has been certainly a
benediction to the thousands of village folks (women) for whom "credit" was
always out of reach, thus depriving them of contributing in the economic
activity of the nation.

Do you think the highlighted part of the sentence is correct?

Re: Aborted coup attempt...

Avangi — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:21:21 GMT

I hope your French is better than mine. There's an expression "coup d'etat," *** which we use in English because there doesn't seem to be any equivalent. It applies when a group of "public servants" (often army officers) conspire to act outside the law to overthrow the duly authorized government, or a head of state whom they don't like. If they succeed, they then install their own government, perhaps a "junta" or a committee of generals who rule by decree.

An aborted coup attempt would be one that was cancelled, or failed to materialize. IMO one which was thwarted would properly be called a failed coup attempt. Of course that's arguable, as I said in my last post. In the transitive sense, someone other than a co-conspirator may have caused it to abort   -    someone like the subject's bodyguards.

This would differ from a failed/aborted assassination attempt, which would have been mounted by enemies of the state or persons unknown   -    not by "public servants."

***   I suppose if you had to translate it you could say (literally) "stroke (cut) of state." (like a stroke of lightning or a stroke of luck)

- A.

Re: Of whom, About whom are you speaking?

Kooyeen — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:36:22 GMT

Those expressions seem so strange I wouldn't even understand them. Is that archaic English? I've never learned anything about it...
Here's some answers I would say:

1) She was very tall, but very sweet.
Who?
Who are you talking about?

2) Your friend sold me drugs!
Oh, do you have any left?
Who?
Who did that?
Who are you talking about?

I am not sure about "Who was it?" though. I think it's ok, isn't it? To identify the person... "Who was it (that sold you that stuff)?"

EDIT: I think I should try reading the post completely before answering. I skipped a piece. So:

About whom are you talking? Literary, poetic, old use. Not used in modern English.
Who are you talking about? Normal wording in modern English.

Just my opinions.

Re: Best regards, Kind regards, or Yours sincerely, - which is correct

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 04:51:44 GMT

Yours sincerely and Yours faithfully

In the UK, traditional valedictions have been mainly replaced by "Yours sincerely" or "Yours faithfully".

(Do not paste and copy lengthy material without citing references-- MM)

I personally feel that Kind Regards or Best Regards sounds cold and distant. Yours Truely.....or anything starting out with YOURS is to personal. A simple Thank You is warm, professional, and friendly.

Petyon/ HR Manager

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.

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

T_nattawat — Sun, 25 May 2008 18:21:00 GMT

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. There have been numbers of peace plans to settle this conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians but not even one has succeeded; occasionally, they have even worsened the situation. 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 hope to the end of the conflict that they would live peacefully together in a bi-national state. Yet, 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. However, after carefully examined current situations and history, one has to admit that they will never co-exist peacefully in this common area. It is due to their beliefs that Jerusalem belongs only to them and no one else. Furthermore, they hate each other so much that they will never want to live together.

The first reason two-state solution is impossible is because they believe that 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 now the capital of the State of Israel. Since then, Jewish people have been waiting for that day to come. 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 Jewish people around the world. They regard it as "the house of the Lord"(Bible in Spiro, 2000) and the direction 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 more than 33,000 have been injured(Palestine Red Crescent, 2008). The causes were mostly due to shootings as well as tear gas. 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 of hatred has been from incitement of violation to suicide bombings. Terribly, those who carried those horrors 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 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 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.

A study in Oratory - Part One

Jackson6612 — Mon, 05 May 2008 18:08:50 GMT

Churchill: A Study in Oratory

Seven Lessons in Speechmaking From One of the Greatest Orators of All Time
By Thomas Montalbo, DTM

Published in Finest Hour 69

He wasn't a natural orator (=someone who is good at making speeches and persuading people), not at all. His voice was raspy (=If someone has a raspy voice, they make rough sounds as if they have a sore throat or have difficulty in breathing). A stammer and a lisp often marred (=to make less effective, spoil) many of his speeches. Nor was his appearance attractive. A snub nose (=a snub nose is short and flat and points slightly upwards) and a jutting (=sticking out) lower lip made him look like a bulldog. Short and fat, he was also stoop-shouldered (=bent forwards and down).

Yet this manâSir Winston Churchillâbecame probably the greatest orator of our time and won the Nobel Prize for his writings and "brilliant oratory." How did he do it? And what lessons can all Toastmasters (=someone who introduces the speakers at a formal occasion such as a banquet) learn from him to help them make better speeches?

In school, Winston Churchill was a backward student. But he wasnât stupid. He later explained, "Where my reason, imagination or interest were not engaged, I would not or I could not learn." But the English language fascinated him. He was the best in his class.

Macaulay and Gibbon, two of Englandâs most famous historians, dazzled (=to make someone feel strong admiration) him with their styles of writing. The impact these authors made on his mind stayed with him for life, as his speeches show. Because their styles were markedly different and yet both charmed him, he believed this showed, as he put it, "What a fine language English is. . ."

His English teacher once said, "I do not believe that I have ever seen in a boy of 14 such a veneration (=respect) for the English language." Churchill called the English sentence "a noble thing" and said, "The only thing I would whip boys for is not knowing English. I would whip them hard for that." Lord Moran, his physician and intimate friend, wrote: "Without that feeling for words, he would have made little enough in life. -. ."

Lesson #1
for Toastmasters from Churchill:

Know, respect and love the English language.

An Avid (=doing something as much as possible) Listener The greatest influence in his early life was his father, the leader of the House of Commons. Young Winston often visited Parliament and heard all the speeches. Sitting, watching and listening, he absorbed the oratory as if by osmosis (=if you learn facts or understand ideas by osmosis, you gradually learn them by hearing them often). Devotedly, he read and reread his fatherâs speeches, many of which he knew by heart (=to remember all of something exactly). He also read and studied the speeches of Oliver Cromwell, William Pitt, William Gladstone and many others.

At age 21, Churchill came to the United States and met Bourke Cockran, a New York Congressman whom he described as "a remarkable man. . .with an enormous head, gleaming (=to shine softly) eyes and flexible countenance (=mental composure, expression, look)." But most of all, Churchill admired Cockran for the way he talked.

The Congressman had a thundering (=awesomely great, intense, or great) voice and often spoke in heroic and rolling (=if drums or thunder roll, they make a long low series of sounds) phrases. When Churchill asked his advice on how he could learn to spellbind (=extremely interesting and holding your attention completely) an audience of thousands, Cockran told him to speak as if he were an organ, use strong words and enunciate (to pronounce words clearly and carefully) clearly in wave-like rhythm (=a regular pattern of changes). They corresponded (=to write letters to someone and receive letters from them) for many years.

Adlai Stevenson, himself a notable speaker, often reminisced (=to talk or think about pleasant events in your past) about his last meeting with Churchill. "I asked him on whom or what he had based his oratorical style. Churchill replied, âIt was an American statesman who inspired me and taught me how to use every note (=a particular musical sound) of the human voice like an organ.â Winston then to my amazement started to quote long excerpts from Burke Cockranâs speeches of 60 years before. âHe was my model,â Churchill said. âI learned from him how to hold thousands in thrall (=controlled or strongly influenced by someone or something).â"

Lesson #2:

See and hear good speakers in action, and study the texts of their speeches.

Stimulated (=encouraged) by his fatherâs career, young Churchillâs ambition (=strong desire) was to go into politics, but he worried about his speech impediment (=a physical problem that makes speaking, hearing, or moving difficult). So he consulted a throat specialist. The doctor found no organic defect and told young Churchill only practice and perseverance (=persistence, steadfastness) would help him.

Diligently (=someone who is diligent works hard and is careful and thorough) and faithfully (=in a loyal way, in a regular way), he practiced and persevered. He believed people should never submit to (=to agree to obey, accept - give in) failure. Years later he said in a speech, "Never give in! Never give in! Never give in except to convictions (=a very strong belief or opinion) of honour and good sense."

Question: What does the bold text mean?

He rehearsed (=practised) aloud to make sure he wouldnât muff (=say wrongly) words or stumble (=to stop or make a mistake when you are reading to people or speaking) over them, particularly words starting with "s." While walking on the street he repeated such sentences as, "The Spanish ships I cannot see since they are not in sight." Eagerly (=enthusiastically) he sought (=tried to find) opportunities to speak. All this helped him to lose the inhibition (=restriction, prevention) that had caused his stammering, though he never totally lost his lisp.An Attention-Getter

But even this turned into an advantage. Randolph Churchill once theorized that his father may have exploited (=to use something fully and effectively) the residual (=remaining) impediment to advantage to achieve an individual style (=distinctive style) of oratory. When Winston was 23 he wrote an unpublished article on oratory, "The Scaffolding (=raised platform to do a certain job) of Rhetoric." Describing the physical attributes of the orators, he wrote, "Sometimes a slight and not unpleasing stammer or impediment has been of some assistance in securing (=getting) the attention of the audience. . ."

Re: Shall I write my name and address at the top right side of my Motivation Letter..?

Tanit — Fri, 02 May 2008 08:41:02 GMT

Hi Tamguatlay,

I am not Nona, and you probably won't trust me because I'm not a native speaker of English. I only wanted to share my experience, which can add something to the topic.

As an ESL student of BrE, I was taught to end a letter with "Your faithfully" when it addresses an unknown addressee (i.e., when it begins with "Dear Sir or Madam") and with "Yours sincerely" when you know his/her name (i.e., the letter begins with "Dear Mr/Ms/Miss [+surname]").

However, during my year in the UK, I saw the expression "Your faithfully" only twice, in two letters written by members of my University staff. Funnily enough, the first one began with "To whom it may concern" (another extremely rare expression ) and the second with "Miss [+ my surname]", two opening formulae I was taught NOT to use, when having classes ... none of them actually began with "Dear Sir or Madam"! Both the letters I mentioned (I've still got them) come from a University, so I'm obviously not talking about illiterate writers.

Another thing I can say is that my British teacher on the one hand strongly advised us to close formal letters in our CAE and CPE exams with "Yours faithfully" or "Yours sincerely" (depending on the circumstances) because those were the expression the examiners were looking for. On the other hand, he also warned us that these day most people, also in the UK, will close those letters with "Sincerely", "Regards", "Kind regards".

If my experience is anything to go by, what we learn sometimes can differ from what is actually done nowadays, just as Clive said.

Re: also vs too

Avangi — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 01:17:30 GMT

I think I've seen this discussed before. Check the search.

A/B would be clear with either also or too, because of the question/answer thing.

I also love you, as you say, should not replace B, but is ambiguous in the use you propose. It could mean, "I love two people, one of whom is you." It could also mean "Two people love you, one of whom is I." I'm afraid I too love you would only mean the second choice to most people.

I'm sorry, I have to ask, what expression does your last question refer to?

Best wishes, - A.