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

past continuous tense versus simple past tense

sebayanpendam — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 09:22:22 GMT

Dear sir/madam,

I heard this question uttered in a movie in which a scene is about a child asking her guardian about a man whom she has met. the question is 'Was he wearing any ring?' the past continuous tense is used here. Would there be any difference if the question is asked this way, 'Did he wear any ring?'

Thanks.

Re: Felt like...

Avangi — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:42:54 GMT

Hi Mad, With this scant context, it could be taken either way. It's pretty confusing.

"Friends" is plural. Was she paired with one particular guy?

Whom is she talking to? Her date??

"Felt" is past tense, but "is" is present tense. Is she still on the date with this guy (or guys) (or girls) when she makes this statement? (like maybe at the very end of it?)

Is Neil her main squeeze? (Sorry, my eyes are getting bad.) Is Nell her main squeeze? Who the h--- is Nell? (Is Lana a guy?)

Anyway, I'm assuming "tonight" is a noun rather than an adverb. "I had to explain about tonight." Not, "Tonight, I felt like I had to explain to Nell."

It's still "tonight" when she makes the statement. It sounds like Nell is not present. If she has already explained to Nell, she must have covered a lot of ground.

But on the other hand, we don't know what it is she wants to explain. Did she feel she had to explain what happened tonight, or did she feel (in the past) that she had to explain that she was planning to go on a date without him/her??

If she's talking to the guy and they're still on the date, maybe it's, "I felt like I had to explain to Nell, but, you know what? I don't feel that way any longer." Maybe she's just telling him that she feels wierd about having felt obligated to tell Nell all her private business.

Or maybe she's warning "him" that this "date" is no secret from Nell, because she felt obligated to tell her/him.

You're asking me, "Did Lana explain to Nell about tonight?" I'll tell you. I don't know.

A question about Style

Ant_222 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:56:47 GMT

Hello everybody!

Probably, you already know of my infamous venture âthe translation of an adventure game called Star Heritage.

Below I'll repeat part of my answer to Huevos, whom I shall thank for accidently reminding me of the problem that I now ask you to help me with:

Â«I have tried to preserve the original (Russian) way of narraion, which is done:

1) From the first person perspective,
2) In the past tense,
So most of the time it looks pretty much like a diary.Â»

...Such is the most of the narration, but the descriptions of various items â those which you'd get in response to the "examine" command in traditional text adventures â are provided in the Present tense. Keeping the player envolved, this doesn't sound unnatureal in Russian, but...

Is it acceptable in English?

EXAMPLE (no, it's not from the game I just thought it out):

> GO NORTH
I easily went down the hill and found myself in(on?) a gloomy lowland. Only the strained buzz of moscitoes making their way through the thick, moist air disturbed the silence. They were the only creatures here, but that was more than compensated by their number.
> examine mosquito
Nothing unusual, except for the very long proboscis, probably useful for some animals covered with fur
> examine air
The air is extremly moist and smells of decaying plants.

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: Help me please.

julielai — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 14:13:20 GMT

You need to fix the part in red.

Anonymous
Ok... so basically I need to do a five paragraph essay (Paragraph model?) by analyzing 3 quotes from this a passage I read "No name woman" by Maxie Hong Kingston. I'm just having trouble with a few things... some I understand, and others I don't. I tried fixing some errors that I made.. (ie: spelling, grammar). This is just the a 2nd draft. I would apprcieate some help and tips. Thanks in advance!
This is what I need help with:

-Verb Tense

`Unpacking language of quotes -Introducing all quotes fully

-Run on sentences?

         No Name Woman

            Maxine Hong Kingston begins to learn the story of her aunt who in the story is known as âNo Name Womanâ. Kingstonâs mother begins in the first passage, warning her to not tell anyone what she is about to say, referring to the story of her aunt. She explains that the aunt was Kingstonâs fatherâs sister, who killed herself in the family ~~well~~, but thereâs no mention of her at all, because it is as if she had never been born. The aunt brought shame to the family. She became a disgrace to the village, because the ~~action of~~ adultery committed. As a result of that, she ended up with an unwanted pregnancy. This caused so much commotion with the villagers, who were enraged, and raided the family house. The villagers destroyed and broke their possessions, wanting to get rid of the aunt from their community; because the villagers did not permit the coupleâs breaking tradition. As a child, Kingston did not fully understand this part of her Chinese culture. She starts making up her own stories. As an adult, Kingston looks back at her childhood years, to understand the story and her culture.

            Roughly around the age of 12, Kingston starts receiving warnings, and semi-threats from her mother about any unwanted pregnancies. Kingstonâs mother sets the aunt as an example. The mother says:

"Don't let your father know that I told you. He denies her. Now that you have started to menstruate, what happened to her could happen to you. Don't humiliate us. You wouldn't like to be forgotten as if you had never been born. The villagers are watchful;" (325)

The mother warns young Kingston, and talks about the aunt who brought disgrace to the family. Kingston is being guided, not to fall in the wrong path as her aunt did. The mother warns her at this moment, because it is the moment Kingston goes into a new stage of life that she must go through carefully (be specific). The mother wants Kingston to learn the values of her culture, traditions, and the people she represents. She describes that the villagers are watching (watching whom?), because they are a community who stick together as a group. It is part of their culture, having private lives is a dishonor to the culture. (doesn't make sense) The aunt dishonored it, by having a baby without a father. The mother is preventing young Kingston from bring shame to the family again. ~~Kingstonâs mother told stories~~

            Adult Kingston remembers when her mother use to tell her stories to warn her about life, and the realities ~~that existed~~. ~~She would tell stories, to teach Kingston morals.~~ Kingston explains:

âWhenever she had to warn us about life, my mother told stories that ran like this one, a story to grow up on. She tested our strength to establish realities. Those in the emigrant generations who could not reassert brute survival died young and far from home. Those of us in the first American generations have had to figure out how the invisible world the emigrants built around our childhoods fit in solid America.â (325)

Adult Kingston discusses ~~about~~ the emigrants who were struggling with poverty, and moved to America. This was the old generation, who struggled with survival. The emigrants re-assert themselves with the new life; some endure (tense) brute survival. Poverty was an issue in old China. The new generation is growing in America. China was the âinvisible worldâ for ~~most that was part of~~ the new generation. Kingston they never been there, but only hear stories about it. ~~America was solid, because~~ the new generation was adapting to new changes. Kingston wanted to uncover more of this Chinese cultural history.

            As an adult, Kingston starts to question if her aunt is really guilty~~, to commit such an act,~~ ~~which would lead to her own demise~~. Kingston searches for answers, because the stories only seem to confuse her. She did not fully understand the Chinese cultural as a child, because she is part of the new generation. This leads Kingston to form her own perspective of the story that her mother had told. She starts rewriting the story in her own words, and her own point of view. Kingston thinks:

âAdultery is extravagance. Could people who hatch their own chicks and eat the embryos and the heads for delicacies and boil the feet in vinegar for party food, leaving only the gravel, eating even the gizzard lining--could such people engender a prodigal aunt? To be a woman, to have a daughter in starvation time was a waste enough. My aunt could not have been the lone romantic who gave up everything for sex. Women in the old China did not choose. Some man had commanded her to lie with him and be his secret evil. I wonder whether he masked himself when he joined the raid on the family.â (326)

Adult Kingston does not believe that her aunt gave up everything for adultery. She questions, and thinks how cruel the villagers are towards the aunt. Kingston describes her aunt as a âprodigal auntâ ~~meaning she is yielding profusely~~. She questions, if a human being is capable of bringing a newborn to this world, and then getting rid of it without any remorse. She realizes that ~~in Chinese culture, woman had no right to rule, because they had to obey the rules set by the husband. We~~women in that time ~~of Chinese culture~~ did not have a choice because they had to obey their husbands. Kingston wonders if the man responsible for impregnating her aunt wasnât man enough to try to be responsible. She also believes the man might have been responsible for organizing the raid in the first place. Kingston, somehow wanted to defend her aunt. She tries to analyze the possible reasons behind her aunt's unwanted pregnancy~~, in~~ which dishonored her entire family.

            Kingston as an adult, finally realized her aunt was not fully guilty. The aunt ~~went through injustice, and~~ was the victim of rape. While the entire society rejected her aunt, Kingston honored her aunt instead. The motherâs aim was to warn young Kingston, not to humiliate the family by making the same mistake as her aunt did. The motherâs aim also had another purpose, in which she wanted to show the values of her culture, traditions, and making Kingston a better person in life~~, without any disruptions~~. Kingston as an adult reflects back on what she has learned from her mother, and her unnamed aunt. She has also discovered the world that was once invisible to her.

Re: plzzz helm me

Anonymous — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:15:14 GMT

The nub of leadership: Managing the culture and policy contexts of educational organisations Hugh Busher and Bernard Barker, University of Leicester, School of Education Paper presented to the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Leeds, 13-15 September 2001 Abstract This paper explores how senior leaders in one school in England and Wales manage policy at three different levels: the micro-level within school and within departments within schools; the mezzo level with local government and local communities; and the macro-level of central government and government agencies, such as OFSTED (The Office for Standards in Education) To cope with and influence these three arenas successfully involves leaders in creating particular cultures within school that encourage members of the school to feel empowered to take part in decision-making; to feel valued as people and as workers; and to feel they are respected and are encouraged to respect other people. The members here are defined as all staff and students in a school. It also involves leaders in generating a culture with the local community and local authorities that makes members feel they are partners with the staff and students of the school. So members feel welcome into the school and excited by and involved with the practices of the school. In large measure this is achieved by leaders having and creating particular types of knowledge, and helping members of the school to gain access to particular types of knowledge. This knowledge can be categorised into: knowing how to act effectively in particular policy contexts e.g. classrooms, or local civic communities; interpreting external policy contexts effectively, i.e. understanding what powerful people in the external context of an organisation want and value and will use power to see implemented; knowing how other people (e.g. staff, students, parents) are likely to respond to particular actions; knowing how to assert self effectively in a principled way (i.e. in line with a public proclaimed or enacted vision) to gain oneâs own preferred interests, which may be portrayed as in the interests of the common weal. Introduction This paper presents part of a larger study undertaken by Busher, Barker and Wortley (2001) in urban schools in the East Midlands of the UK during the late 1990s. It explores processes of school transformation and leadership. Names and locations are fictional to protect the anonymity of participants in tense political situations, but the situations really occurred. It explores how different headteachers tried to cope with the changing circumstances in their schoolsâ external socio-political environments and how they attempted to help the teaching and support staff, students, governors and parents to respond to the changing demands that were placed upon them by central and local government. This, in turn, raises questions about how their actions modified the cultures, organisational structures and teaching and learning processes which existed in their schools and the relationships which they had with other members of their schools. We wondered how the headteachersâ actions, and the external pressures on them and the schools altered the sense of engagement which staff, students, governors and parents claimed to feel with the school. How headteachers cope with change seems to contain several interlocking micro-political processes, which this study set out to explore: how school leaders read and respond to the pressures in the external environment of a school; how headteachers mediate the external pressures on their school to the other members in the school, interpreting and offering possible solutions for these; how members of a school respond to the external pressures and to the headteacherâs mediation of these âthe dialectic between agency and structure to which Giddens (1984) refers; what is the nature of a school leaderâs own knowledge of how to bring about change â access to and defining what constitutes appropriate knowledge is a source of power (e.g. Foucault, 1990); how school leaders offer support, practically, to their colleagues in coping with the pressures to change; how school leaders represent a school to its residential community. There is an important personal dynamic in the potent mixture of micro-political and cultural factors which fuel processes of change in schools: There are leaders as well as leadership. Who the headteacher of a school is and how he /she interacts personally with staff, students and parents seems to be an important element in the explanation of how people in schools are helped to change to meet pressures in a schoolâs external environment. Cerberus , the site of this study, was an 11â16, co-educational, multi-cultural comprehensive school, situated in a mixed residential area on the outskirts of an urban area in the Midlands. It was located in a unitary local authority (LEA) that was newly established at the time of this study and was distracted from processes of school improvement by its urgent need to create a more cost-effective organisation of its schools. There were over 500 students on roll in the school, of whom more than 20% were entitled to free school meals. The schoolâs Special Educational Needs (SEN) register included over one hundred names. Despite improved GCSE results nationally, the number of local children reaching the 5 A*-C threshold was stable and below average.

Re: Help proofreading "A Doll's House"

Mister Micawber — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 05:53:58 GMT

I have underlined some problem areas:

The Woman Within the Doll

The Baltimore Sun wrote that back in 1879, âA Doll's Houseâ by Henrik Ibsen âshocked and offended people wherever [it] was played,â and that the dramatist assured it was not about a woman, but about âanyone who had to live according to the rules created by othersâ (Hyder). Society thought to be outrageous that a woman would get involved in manly things, for her role in society was exclusively to care for the family and please her husband. Women did not enjoy the rights women do now. They were not taken seriously, and decisions were made by the man who was and still is considered the head of the family. Nora's choice to become free, independent and leave her husband, along with some of the characters' actions made this play to be scandalous for its time.

Ibsen wrote in a letter that the story in âA Doll's Houseâ was about a woman who feels:

" Oppressed and bewildered by belief in authority, she loses her faith in her own moral right and ability to bring up her children... [She is bittered because,] like certain insects, (ought to) go away and die when she has done her duty towards the continuance of the species... [she shakes] off of cares, [but then she feels] a sudden return of apprehension and dread. She must bear it all aloneâ (Doll).

Nora had a beautiful life, she had a husband, beautiful children, and everything she wanted. Earlier in her marriage, his husband suffered of an illness of which he needed to recover somewhere in the south, but this was concealed from him by the doctor and Nora. Not having the means to afford a trip so costly and out of love and desperation, Nora decides to ask for a loan without letting Tolvard know. She forges her father's signature to obtain the loan because she does not want to trouble her father either, who is very ill himself too. However, she is responsible and works secretly from home in order to make the payments. Eventually, Tolvard finds out about her secret and feels that his life, happiness and reputation will be lost once Krogstad, who lent the money, publishes the then scandalous situation out of revenged for having fired him from the bank he now manages. He quickly turns against her. That is the moment when Nora starts to understand things she did not understand before; she realizes she does not love Tolvard anymore just as he does not really love her as she thought, and decides to leave for good to discover herself. [Too many pronouns-- I don't know who's doing what to whom]

The scenery consists of the Helmer's apartment and nowhere else. The description of the apartment depicts the decision that Nora will have to make. There is a door to the right which leads to the entryway and another to the left which leads to Helmer's study. Nora will have to decide which door to take: freedom or Helmer [Tolvard / Helmer: we don't know if they are one or two]. The place is not âexpensively furnishedâ, but it is comfortable, just like Nora's marriage, she lives a comfortable life, but there are certain things she lacks that are more important than riches. No woman could even consider back in the 1800s doing such a scandalous things as to leave not only the husband, but her children too.

The main character in the story is Nora, a seemingly selfish, materialistic woman who cares a lot about money and in living a good life. This is to be expected since her father liked to spend money himself and live a life he could only could afford with credit. He used to called her his âdoll-child, and he played with [her] the way [she] played with [her] dollsâ (Ibsen 1041). She was obviously very protected and spoiled by both, her father and her husband, who provided anything she needed or wanted. Her father raised her not think for herself and just play her role in society. âWhile [she] was at home with [her] father, he used to tell [her] all his opinions, and [she] held the same opinions. If [she] had others [she] said nothing about them, because he wouldn't have liked itâ (1041) [All the bracketed pronouns are distracting; it would be better to give the exact quotes]. This repeated again as a married woman; she would not express her opinion to Tolvard, for they never talked seriously, but seemed to have trusted Dr. Rank better. Norah was greatly misunderstood. She was a loving person, she loved her husband so much that she was willing to forge her father's signature to obtain a loan to take her husband south in order for him to recover from a deadly illness [You said all this before; cut it.]. She is willing to do anything for him. Eventually she realized she does not have to play the doll anymore. One can only imagine people's reaction throughout the play's events.

Tolvard Helmer seemed [Be consistent in verb tenses] to be an ideal husband. He is loving, admirable, honest, ethical, hard-working and successful, but there seems to be a dark side of him. He is a prideful man, he won't ask for money to anyone, to [Commas are not conjunctions.] do so would be humiliating. To him, honor and appearances are more important than family. He does not believe people can change and become good, as he did not believe Krogstad was a good person although he had been honest for a long time already. Also, he is so affectionate that makes one wonder of his sincerity; he calls Nora diminutive names such as featherbrained, spendthrift [These are not diminutives.] , a squirrel, a song-bird, lark, strange little being all the time (994). One cannot think of a woman who would like being called like that and who would not be affected emotionally. Tolvard's reaction after finding out Nora's secret is amusing. He had told Nora that sometimes he wished â[she] was in some terrible danger, just so [he] could take [his] life and soul and everything, for [her] sakeâ (1038), yet he quickly turns against her calling her a wretched woman, a criminal, unprincipled, untrustworthy of raising her children, incapable, etc. His hypocrisy is clearly revealed when as soon as he realizes that Nora's mistake won't affect his reputation he forgives her (1039-1949). There's a saying that goes something like a good friend is hard to find, specially during difficult times; Tolvard was nor a good friend neither that perfect husband he seemed to be. He loved to have control of his wife's life, and his conversations usually tend to imply that Nora would be lost without him; that she needed his guidance and teaching. Tolvard did not love Nora, â[he] thought it fun to be in love with [her]â (1041).

Dr. Rank is in love with Nora, and that seems to have been the main reason he visited the Helmer's house. This character is not essential in the play, but it causes outrage when he dares to reveal Nora his secret. This is almost vulgar for him to do, and very dishonorable, specially during those times in which people were very conservative. It is as if he had taken advantage of the trust the family had in it and ended up tarnishing his reputation.

Mrs. Linde is one of Nora's old friends from school. She gave up her true love for money, but in the end things did not turn out the way she had expected. Her husband died leaving her in a terrible financial situation making [On the other hand, commas are essential for separating dependent clauses.] it necessary for her to work in order to sustain her mother and brothers. After her mother passed away and her brothers did not need her help she left town. Not to have someone to take care of made her feel âcompletely alone in the worldâ, and it frightened her âto be so empty and lostâ (1032). She needed âsomeone to take care ofâ, she wanted to be a mother and wanted the companionship of a husband. In the end, she was supposed to have helped Nora hide her secret. She could have convinced Mr. Krogstad to get the letter back, but she did not intercede (1033). She might have been envious of Nora, after all, Nora had all she was longing for; a husband, beautiful children, and a good life.

Lastly, Krogstad is the one who lent Nora money to save her husband, and threatens her to tell her husband if she does not convince Tolvard to let him keep his job at the bank, but just as Nora did, he once made a mistake, which caused him to loose his reputation. He was a man who seems to have been harden by life's difficulties. When he was left by the woman he dearly loved âit was as if all the solid ground dissolved from under [his] feetâ (1031). This might have caused him to become the âhalf-drownedâ kind of man, as he refers to himself. After finding love in his life he turns from the revengeful person into a forgiving one.

In conclusion, Nora realized of her true value as a human being and as a woman. She decides to leave everything and everyone, husband, children, luxuries to a journey to liberate herself. To do such thing was unthinkable at that time and caused turmoil, but it was the best choice she could ever make. To leave one's children is a terrible things to do and was not necessary, but looking beyond that, without prejudices, it is not hard to understands she is trying to figure out who she really is and what she believes in. This is essential to one's happiness; therefore she is determined to make necessary changes in her life even if people think bad of her. It seems that daring to do so back in the 1800s was just as bad as selling drugs or prostituting oneself.

Re: Proficiency alongside "poverty".

Cool Breeze — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:58:49 GMT

Anonymous
In that respect, I would like to know when and how the auxiliary "do" appeared in English. What kind of people introduced it into the English language?
I would like to know who decided about the value of tenses of the Past. They do not correspond to the value of the tenses of the Past in latinoÃ¯d languages. Who can give me answers ?
In this debate, I do not think there is an evolution towards simplicity nor towards more complicated structures. The
communities of native speakers of a language constantly change the rules and the meaning of words (although the main core remains more or less stable for facility reasons.)
Ethnic languages are tools of inclusion and mainly exclusion (internal and external). That is why there are so many exceptions.
No ethnic language is that easy to learn. When I say "to learn" I mean to learn it to be on equal footing with a native speaker of the language. There will always be a difference, a discrimination.
From what I have experienced ( I am very interested by languages), there is no easy language. All has been done by training.
There is no natural language : everything has been constructed by Man.
I invite the readers to learn an interlanguage such as Esperanto, compare it with your mother tongue and with languages you have studied later. 90% to 95% of the time is spent to the learning of exceptions. That is why a language without exception such as Esperanto is ten to twenty times faster to learn than ethnic languages.
It is fascinating to see how a universal congress of Esperanto works and to compare it with an international congress in only one language. Many prejudices fall.
Maybe I am opening new interests in the debate..
George/Belgium

Do existed in Old English more than a thousand years ago as a regular verb and meant to cause. It is impossible to say who introduced it to English. It's use as an auxiliary in questions and negations was established in Shakespeare's day when it was correct to say both

I know not him
and
I do not know him.

It is very common that the usage of tenses varies from language to language, especially if the languages are not closely related. No reasons can usually be given for this. You might just as well ask why the usage of tenses in the Romance languages differs from that in English. Linguistic changes are often shrouded in the past and there is no knowing why they occurred.

All words and grammatical structures people are not used to sound wrong and/or odd and therefore people usually object to changes that are about to happen in their lifetime and think the language is deteriorating. This is true about all languages, not just English. People tend to think a language is at its most beautiful right now and any change will just make it worse.

English grammar has become so simple over the centuries that I cannot envisage it becoming any simpler without the risk of English becoming even more inexact than it is now. However, not all changes have made the language simpler in structure. In Old English there was just one relative pronoun and it had only one form. That made communication with relative clauses very awkward and it wasn't a great surprise that who, whom, whose, what and which began to be used as relatives to facilitate communication.

CB

Re: Please review my experience letter

Vb.rahul — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:23:32 GMT

Nona The Brit wrote:

This is quite long? Perhaps you need to cut it down a little bit. If you put in too much shameless self-promotion then it is obvious that the letter was written by you rather than your company. Companies tend to take a dry attitude to these things.

EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE

May 0000000

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

This is to certify that Mr. MH was employed by ABC from 02.01.2001 till 01.03.06. ABC has almost 350 employees .During his final year Mr MH was a Project Manager of the Software Development Section, which has 60 employees.Mr. MH is a responsible, hard working and honest person. The management was highly pleased and satisfied with his performance.

Mr. MH joined us as a Junior Software Engineer in January 2001 and his duties included development using Microsoft Technologies such as Visual Basic 6.0, ASP (Active Server Pages), XML and Microsoft SQL Server. He also took part in designing and documenting the project with UML (Rational Rose 2000).
It is our company policy that we have a 6 month probation period for new hirings but on the basis of his performance and good technical skills, his employment was confirmed within 3 months.

In September 2001, Mr MH worked in a team to develop a paperless virtual back office system for the UK based company; APL Pvt. Ltd. In January 2002, he was promoted to Software Engineer and his new responsibilites were: preparing the Detail Design Specification document, communicating design with other developers, participating in development by Microsoft SQL Server 2000, VB 6.0, XML, ASP and UML, project documentation and client meetings.

In August 2002, we won another UK contract to develop the accounting, payroll and financial systems for GGP PLC. We held an in-house competition (is that really the right word?)to choose the team to work on the account. Mr. MH was among top three employees in that competition so he was put in the team as Senior Software Engineer. Now his responsibilities were: correspondence with our UK clients, understanding their requirements, preparing the documents, designing the system, getting approval from the client and developing it. He used ASP and SQL Server 2000.

In 2003, Mr MH was promoted to Team Leader for a major software project that involved computerisation of land records in Pakistan. His responsibilities were: meeting with clients to prepare the specification document, functional specification, project plan, maintaining schedules for rest of the team members, designing the architecture of the applications and managing the whole team..

In October 2004,we participated in GITEX in Dubai, and we selected Mr MH to represent us there.

In November 2004 we started developing a product named UREMIS and keeping in view the leadership, motivating, analytical and designing capabilities of Mr. MH, he was appointed its Project Manager. He was responsible for the recruitment of the team, monitoring day to day functions of the project, defining standards and processes, supervising and guiding the project team, monitoring and evaluating the progress. He was actively involved in the day to day administration of the activities, appraisal of staff performance, coordinating and managing the overall performance of the staff. He was then involved in presenting the product to prospective clients and won several accounts for us.

Since he has been employed by us, MR MH has shown an excellent attitude to his work, has been a popular member of our team, and contributed to our success. By implementing a continuous improvement strategy he has made his department an example for the other departments. He has proved a good trainer and mentor for his staff. He has redesigned and reengineered the software development infrastructure and procedures to meet the intense and ever increasing demand of latest technologies of Information technology.

Due to his skills, commitment and continued hard work, we wish him success in his ambitions.

For ABC (Pvt) Ltd

XYZ
Human Resource Manager.

Re: What he said were distortions

Liveinjapan — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:06:00 GMT

Pter wrote:

Mr. Obama was as heated and intense as he has been at any debate over the last year. At times, he appeared angry and close to expressing it at Mrs. Clinton â and also at her husband, Bill Clinton, whom Mr. Obama criticized frequently during the debate for what he said were distortions of his views and record by the former president.

Then, I should have said:

Mr. Obama criticized Mr. Clinton frequently during the debate for what he said were distortions of his views and record by the former president.

Thanks
LiJ
(I was Anon.)