What exactly mean??

Off topic discussions. Feel free to talk about anything here.

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, darshana, stuward

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:55 am

Sorry for late respond,i had an incredible stomachache and diarreha during in work, i spend in hospital for15hours.but now i feel better than before :wink:
Is that explanation clear enough?
Very clear,thanks peter.In fact i prefer to use "i have a feelings" or "i have a forboling" than Premonion.
What I would work on, if I were you, is past tense. Other than past tense you seem to get things right more often than not.
From now,im going to learn these past tense,i understand myself
if i want to develop my writing skill,it is necessary of studying english grammer but there is too much to study.Would you mind if you explain me
about what grammer should i do at least??? Present Perfect?or a preposition?

[/quote]Are you able to get Australia Network on TV

Thanks for warm help,Jungledoc :grin:
Iam not able to watch it.,In my TV,i have only CNN of USA but this news`s
trasmission is so few!Imean only 10minute a day.I cant learn english just watching only 10minute,It`s impposible so i decide to watch on the internet.Reading articles in internet,listening on the it.But It is really fun.



Would you mind telling us a little more about yourself? What work do you do? Where do you live? (I assume you are in Japan, but where exactly?)




First thing, I live in Osaka,Osaka is second epicenter of Tokyo.
Iam student of university,and my major is radiology but remeber iam not
going into Doctor.I am going to be the Asisstant of doctor.
My father is from italy and my mom is Japanese-Chinese.
I born in Rome and we went in japan and lived untill i was 14years old, then come back in italy for six years then come back again in osaka.
About you??

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:53 am

Just taking it one thing at a time is the best way.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:45 am

pdellorto wrote: I'm looking for something like that in Japanese, so please tell me if you know.
here,it is site for grammer and you can learn new vocabolary and you can know how other people study japanese.


http://www.japanese-nihongo.com/


http://www.sabotenweb.com/bookmarks/language.html

if you dont like these sites tell me and i will bring another one.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Thu May 07, 2009 2:59 am

I have few questions about Reading Newspaper.

From last week i have begun reading New york Times news paper
for my english development.

the question is that the level of vocabolary which useing in New York Times is very high?

second question is that;
Who want to master English Language is necessary to understand completely what writes in it??

Third Question;
Reading Newspaper has changed something in your Englsih skill?

And i have found a similiar vocabolary in paper which makes me a litter
confound.

ASSERT,ALLEGE and DECLARE; :frown: :con:

hoosegow
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2003
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:40 am
Location: Texas

Post by hoosegow » Thu May 07, 2009 6:54 am

I believe most newspapers are written at the 8th grade level.

Second and third question, you might want to rephrase. I aint got a clue as to what you are asking my amigo.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Thu May 07, 2009 5:50 pm

Amico mio,grazie tanto!! Sei Spangnoro??

Assert;I assert that real value of education is undervalued in this country.

Allege;she alleged that we need to evalute our position in the matter
before making a decision

Declare:the President declares war against a country.

Iam still confused by these three words because its meanings is very similiar.I think i could say "the president asserts war against a country"
even you can use allege.when i ask teacher for its sence,he said these words is all the same meanings... :neu:
It is True??

I know that this isnt for English Learner Site,but you know i have a great opporutunity to ask you of Really english language.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Fri May 08, 2009 10:15 pm

assert means to state something with which you are saying is absolutely correct.

Then allege means you are saying something that is unproven. It is from 2 different points of view.

When you say someone asserts something you are saying that they are assured they are correct. You are communication how they feel about their statement.

When you say allege, You are communication the fact that nobody has verified the statement.

It could be that both of those things are true, the person is sure of themselves AND nobody has verified it.

Now if you say the persons stated something, that is neutral. It does not communicate any details about the statement.

To say both you would probably say what the statement is and then add that the person is asserting that the allegations are true.

this can be complicated because it can be used to slant opinion. If you say it was asserted, you are slanted towards the statements truth. Where as if you say allege, you are slanted towards it being false.

No declare is different. If you declare something you say it passionately or you are announcing it in a public and/or formal way.

The example of the president declaring war is not good. That is completely different. That is a verb meaning to enact a declaration. In this case a declaration of war. So it is a little different then just declaring something.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Sun May 10, 2009 6:37 pm

Thanks for teaching me,Sir.I feel myself that i definitely should need to learn vocabolary.

I understnad that assert means something that your statement with no doubt or with an evidence.

assert:the Minister of Health asserted that recently childrean have
abused by parents and killed.

allege;WHO manager allege that a propagation season of swine flu
will be in autumn.

I think it is good phrases :roll: what do you think??

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Sun May 10, 2009 7:16 pm

You got the meaning of the words right, but your sentence structure was pretty mixed up. It's complicated because the situations are subtle. Some words that may be similar in some situations can be different in another. It's something that just takes practice.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Thu May 21, 2009 5:19 pm

In this morning i read journal about swine flu article and there were two
things which i cant understand about Relative pronun..

here is article;

"Tamiflu was shown to shorten the time IN WHICH influenza patients have symptoms like fever,headache,cough,muscle ache and fatigue.Patients who received the drug fely ill for 1.3fewer days than tose who received a plcebo did.
But it would be goog to know more about watch both tamiflu and relenza can do for patients with new h1n1,FOR WHICH we have as yet no vaccine.

What is this? On which,In which or For which.... :con:

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Fri May 22, 2009 2:30 am

You have it right, "For which" makes sense. "For" is used with objects your sentence is talking about. "In", would be if it is time, or the contents of something. In the first sentence, time is what you are referring to, so "in" works. In the second one "for" works because you are referring to a vaccine *FOR* h1n1. It just matches what you are talking about. "On" would be used like this. Larry King was a guest on the Daily Show, on which he discussed his new book. We use "on" because he discussed it ON the Daily Show. He was on for 5 minutes, in which he discussed his book. It is IN, because we are talking about the 5 minutes. It was IN the 5 minute period of time. Larry was asked many questions, for which he provided amusing anecdotes in reply. We use FOR, because it we are referring to the questions, we are saying what those anecdotes were FOR, they FOR answering the questions, that was their purpose.


You are now using sentence structure that is beyond the ability of most Americans. However you still get a few minor things wrong.

"In this morning i read journal about swine flu article and there were two
things which i cant understand about Relative pronun.. " Should be "This morning I read a journal article about swine flu and there were two things which I can't understand about relative pronouns."

Just a couple minor details. Just make sure to include your indefinite articles and remember when talking about morning "in" and "this" are mutually exclusive. You will do something IN the morning. You did something this morning. Relative pronouns are rather complicated, so that's really very good.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Sat May 23, 2009 5:38 am

Grazie,grazie tanto!!!

About In Which and On which i totally understand of its meanings but
i cant see For which things.
You said Larry was asked many questions, for which he provided amusing anecdotes in reply that means he provided amusing anecdotes in reply FOR QUESTION??? :neu: If it is right, im clear.

please,look at my example phrase...

I think to destory this Swineflu virus from which people suffer,
the scientists need to examine.......

about for which, a little difficult to make the sentence..
ummm..... like this one??


[/u]Japanese people find hardly newly infect people for which HIN1, when
lapsed into a panic

i have no confidence in second sentence :roll:

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Sat May 23, 2009 12:26 pm

Yes the first thing is right, It was in reply to the questions he was asked.

Your "from which" sentence is right. Let me give you another example of the for which.

Japanese people find hardly any flu cases, for which h1n1 is the virus that caused it.

in this sentence it is referring to the flu cases of the Japanese. It is very specific too because when we say "hardly any" we are speaking about a small minority of all people that have the flu. So it is this small percentage of the flu cases, for which h1n1 was the cause. So the majority of the cases are probably caused by the usual rino virus.

hari
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Osaka

Post by hari » Sun May 24, 2009 6:50 pm

Ironman wrote:Yes the first thing is right, It was in reply to the questions he was asked.

Your "from which" sentence is right.
Yeahhh :grin: correct!




Parliament scandal puts newspaper in spotlight


"It is disgraceful that a national newspaper should stoop so low as to buy information which wiil be in the public domain in july,"

a verb stoops which i find on the internet and in dictionary refer in this case;

1;stoop for the bottom.
2:stoop from fatigue

I think that i cant adapt to these two words in that article.In this case do you know that meanings of stoop??

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Sun May 24, 2009 10:26 pm

stoop normally means to bend and reach for something low at the bottom. Like you stoop to reach things on the bottom shelf.

In this case they stoop in a metaphorical way. Low here means low not in close to the ground, but low in a moral way. lower morals, means worse morals, or bad or dishonest.

So when it says they stoop so low, it is saying they are doing something that is considered low, dirty, disgraceful, dishonorable, dishonest.

In business people understand a certain amount of looking out for ones own interests, but there come a point where the behavior is lacking enough honesty or integrity that people start to take offense.

So when they stoop so low, they are behaving with a lot more dishonesty, selfishness and unfairness than people expect or are willing to accept. It may be legal, but they have done something most people consider disgraceful.

Like if a company did something to cheat a certain vulnerable group of people out of money to make a lot of profit. Like the elderly or children. People would feel the company stooped very low and that they have no honor or ethics. That they are being shameful.

Post Reply