 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / ESL Teaching / May 2007Need help the sentence
Is the following sentence correct? Since these certificates are in French, an English translation of these documents is also attached. Should we use *an English translation of these documents is* or *an English translation of these documents are*? Thanx NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Is the following sentence correct? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Should we use *an English translation of these documents is* or *an > English translation of these documents are*? The first is correct "A translation ... is attached" Regards, Einde O'Callaghan In one of the grammar books I found the following: * She told me that you'hv just been taken on by one of the biggest bank in the City. I feel this sentence should be as follows: * She told me that you had been taken on by one of the biggest bank in the City. Please advise why they have used the present perfect in the second sentence and why NOT past perfect. Thanx NSP On Feb 12, 7:06 pm, "n o s p a m p l e a s e" <nospam.ple...@alum.com> wrote: > In one of the grammar books I found the following: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Thanx > NSP Hi, If you email me: askaboutenglish@gmail.com I will answer any question you like about English. www.askaboutenglish.com Matt n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > In one of the grammar books I found the following: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Please advise why they have used the present perfect in the second > sentence and why NOT past perfect. She told me something that is still true, i.e. "you have just been taken on ..." - if I used the past perfect it could be understood to mean that I doubt the truth of what she told me or that I think that what she told me is no longer true. Is the following sentence correct especially use of pending? You can send me a scanned copy of the document by email *pending* dispatch of the same by DHL. On Feb 15, 10:30 am, "n o s p a m p l e a s e" <nospam.ple...@alum.com> wrote: > Is the following sentence correct especially use of pending? > > You can send me a scanned copy of the document by email *pending* > dispatch of the same by DHL. Hi, I would probably start the sentence: Please send me..... The use of pending is fine if you mean the following: DHL will send the document to the other person (who the you refers to), and when that is done the other person will send a scanned copy to you.. Also I would write "pending the dispatch", or maybe "Please send me a scanned copy of the document pending your receipt of the said document from DHL". M www.askaboutenglish.com askaboutenglish@gmail.com schrieb: > On Feb 15, 10:30 am, "n o s p a m p l e a s e" > <nospam.ple...@alum.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > scanned copy of the document pending your receipt of the said document > from DHL". Huh? Are you sure? Who's got the document now and who's going to get it via DHL? Regards, Einde O'Callaghan n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Is the following sentence correct especially use of pending? > > You can send me a scanned copy of the document by email *pending* > dispatch of the same by DHL. It's OK but a bit formal. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Thanx Einde for help. Below is a sentence. * John had a go at his neighbour I know the meaning of every word in above sentence but I could gather the meaning of the sentence. Please help me. Thanx/NSP Thanx Einde for help! Below is a sentence. * John had a go at his neighbour for trying it on with his wife.* I know the meaning of every word in above sentence but I could gather the meaning of the sentence. Please help me. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Thanx Einde for help! Below is a sentence. > > * John had a go at his neighbour for trying it on with his wife.* > > I know the meaning of every word in above sentence but I could gather > the meaning of the sentence. Please help me. John attacked his neighbour (probably verbally) for flirting with his wife. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Thanx. What is *about* doing in the sentence below? * I can just about make him out.* Regards/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Thanx. What is *about* doing in the sentence below? > > * I can just about make him out.* I can recognise him, but with difficulty, e.g. on a blurred photo, or on a phote of a large group. It could also refer to someone in the far distance. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Thanx. What is the best book/technique to sharpen skills in such type of English? Regards/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Thanx. What is the best book/technique to sharpen skills in such type > of English? I don't think there is really any book that is guaranteed to be of use with such idiomatic phrases. A good dictionary of idioms might help. Reading books - particularly if there is a good translation into your own language with which you can compare the bits you don't understand - can also be helpful - but with some books in translation, I must admit, I get the impression that the translator didn't quite understand an idiom properly. Watching movies in English, perhaps with undertitles in your own language, can be helpful if you have no great difficulties understanding the spoken language. Living in a country where English is spoken is also useful for picking up idiomatic language. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Thanx Einde for help. Below is a sentence. > > * John had a go at his neighbour > > I know the meaning of every word in above sentence but I could gather > the meaning of the sentence. Please help me. John attacked his neighbour (either verbally or physically). Regards, Einde O'Callaghan On Feb 12, 1:06 pm, "n o s p a m p l e a s e" <nospam.ple...@alum.com> wrote: > In one of the grammar books I found the following: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > * She told me that you had been taken on by one of the biggest bank in > the City. My take is that both are possible. You have been taken on prior to the moment that I am speaking with *you* (now) You had been taken on prior to the moment when I spoke with *her* (at that moment in the past). Karen On 13 Feb 2007 in the message <1171303563.087783.220020@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, <nospam.please@alum.com> wrote: > In one of the grammar books I found the following: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Please advise why they have used the present perfect in the second > sentence and why NOT past perfect. The main error that the book seems to be inviting you to detect is the singular "bank", which should be the plural "banks". (I assume that the book doesn't say "you'hv".) But I would love to know which of the "grammar books" you're talking about. -- Aybeecee > On 13 Feb 2007 in the message > > The main error that the book seems to be inviting you to detect is the > singular "bank", which should be the plural "banks". (I assume that the book > doesn't say "you'hv".) It is *banks* only and I made mistake while typing. > But I would love to know which of the "grammar books" you're talking about. Practical Everyday English Steven Colins ISBN 91-646-1481-6 NSP Which is the better construction? * I do not know anyone there to be able to speak to him. * I do not know anyone there who I can speak to. Thanx NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Which is the better construction? > > * I do not know anyone there to be able to speak to him. > * I do not know anyone there who I can speak to. The second one is correct English and the first isn't - although it would be understood (more or less). Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Someone who knows better English than I, wrote me as follows: * It truly is a wonderful place to live and work. I feel it should be as follows: * It is truly a wonderful place to live and work. Which is a better construction? NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Someone who knows better English than I, wrote me as follows: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Which is a better construction? The second is the neutral position of the adverb, however the first is more emphatic. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Suppose I am sending a mail to 10 people and I am requesting each one of them to write me if anyone of them happen to my city. How do I do it? * I would love to meet you/all of you/anyone of you/every one of you/ if you/all of you/anyone of you/every one of you/ happen to XYZ. What should I have at the first place and the second place in the above sentence? NSP > Suppose I am sending a mail to 10 people and I am requesting each one > of them to write me if anyone of them happen to my city. How do I do [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > What should I have at the first place and the second place in the > above sentence? "you" and "you". The English "you" covers singular, plural, collective and any other number of people. If you wrote "you all" it would suggest that you are meeting all 10 people as a group, not individually. And it should be "happen to be in my city" or "happen to visit my city". Owain * I would like to strength my acquaintance with each one of you. How would a native speaker write above? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * I would like to strength my acquaintance with each one of you. > > How would a native speaker write above? I'd like to get to know all of you better. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan A) I am satisfied. B) I am quite satisfied. I am told B means less satisfied as compared to A. Is this correct? Regards/NSP "Upto". How should it be written i.e. as "upto" or "up to"? I guess both are correct but gmail's spell check shows "upto" as wrong. n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > "Upto". How should it be written i.e. as "upto" or "up to"? I guess > both are correct but gmail's spell check shows "upto" as wrong. Two separate words - "upto" is never correct. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan "n o s p a m p l e a s e" <nospam.please@alum.com> wrote in message > A) I am satisfied. > B) I am quite satisfied. > > I am told B means less satisfied as compared to A. Is this correct? I would use either to mean the same thing. n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Suppose I am sending a mail to 10 people and I am requesting each one > of them to write me if anyone of them happen to my city. How do I do [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > NSP I would rephrase it: If any of you should ever come to XYZ, I'd love to meet you, so let me know if you are coming. Or perhaps something like: I'd love to meet all of you (or: you all) some day, and if any of you should ever come to XYZ, please let me know. The second one seems better to me. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan "n o s p a m p l e a s e" <nospam.please@alum.com> wrote in message > Which is the better construction? > > * I do not know anyone there to be able to speak to him. > * I do not know anyone there who I can speak to. The latter, however it is not usual to finish a sentence with a preposition. If I wrote this sentence, I would probably write "I do not know anyone there to whom I can speak". However, that way of writing is probably considered to be rather old fashioned these days FarmI schrieb: > "n o s p a m p l e a s e" <nospam.please@alum.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to whom I can speak". However, that way of writing is probably considered > to be rather old fashioned these days Exactly - there is absolutely nothing wrong with ending a sentence with a preposition in modern English. Only in very very formal English is it generally avoided. Indeed you could write the sencond sentence (the only correct one): ""I don't know anyone there I can talk to" as you can omit the relative pronoun in identifying relative clauses when it's the object of the sentence or a preposition placed at the end of the clause. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan * He was going off to night school when he saw a firework lying *in* the road. In a book titled "Practical Everyday English Steven Colins ISBN 91-646-1481-6", I found the above sentence. Why should it be *in*? I feel it should be *on*. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * He was going off to night school when he saw a firework lying *in* > the road. > > In a book titled "Practical Everyday English Steven Colins ISBN > 91-646-1481-6", I found the above sentence. Why should it be *in*? > I feel it should be *on*. "On" implies on the surface of the road, whereas "in" implies in the middle of the road. "In" seems more natural to me, but I wouldn't be disturbed by "on". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan http://www.thefreedictionary.com/needful suggests *needful* is adjective. Why do then the use of *needful* in the following sentence correct? * Please do the needful. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/needful suggests *needful* is > adjective. Why do then the use of *needful* in the following sentence > correct? > > * Please do the needful. It is possible to create a collective noun by putting the word "the" before an adjective: "the rich" means "all rich people", "the sick" means "all sick people". In this case "the needful" is "everything that is needed/necessary". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan * Headed a team of about fifteen personnel comprising of about six junior engineers and other supporting staff. How can the above sentence be bettered? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * Headed a team of about fifteen personnel comprising of about six > junior engineers and other supporting staff. > > How can the above sentence be bettered? This isn't a sentence at all - it doesn't have a subject. The use of "about" twice is also a bit much. Why the imprecision? - you name two specific numbers. Why can't you simply state them? Also: What do you mean by "junior engineers"? Young ones? Ones in training? Inexperienced ones? "He headed a team of fifteen consisting of 6 junior engineers and other support staff." If the team varied in size, you could try: "The team he headed usually consisted of 15 people, among them about 6 junior engineers and other support staff." Regards, Einde O'Callaghan * I tried phoning her office, but I couldn't get through. This shows there was some problem with phone system. Can we use *get through* even when she didn't pick up the phone or she wasn't there to attend the phone. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * I tried phoning her office, but I couldn't get through. > > This shows there was some problem with phone system. Can we use *get > through* even when she didn't pick up the phone or she wasn't there to > attend the phone. Nobody answered the phone, probably because the phone was engaged - but the phone could also have been out of order. Regaqrds, Einde O'Callaghan On May 4, 4:45 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- interkom.de> wrote: > n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb:> * I tried phoning her office, but I couldn't get through. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Regaqrds, Einde O'Callaghan What if there is an answering machine at the other end telling us XYZ can't receive the call at the moment. Can we still say "I couldn't get through to you" even though both the parties know that phone was not out of order. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > On May 4, 4:45 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- > interkom.de> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > through to you" even though both the parties know that phone was not > out of order. If the answering machine allows you to leave a message, you have got through. If it only has a message saying that so-and-so isn't available at the moment and to call back, later you haven't got through. Regaqrds, Einde O'Callaghan >* Headed a team of about fifteen personnel comprising of about six >junior engineers and other supporting staff. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Comprising only. Remove the 'of'. If this is part of a list in a resume the grammar is otherwise fine but you might want to add what the team accomplished while you headed it. Should also be more definite in number. You don't want to give the impression you did not know how many people worked for you. If it varied just say, 'varying from 12-15 or whatever numbers are appropriate. > >* Headed a team of about fifteen personnel comprising of about six > >junior engineers and other supporting staff. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > If it varied just say, 'varying from 12-15 or whatever > numbers are appropriate. Thanx. Yeah, it is CV. Is the following better? * Headed a team of supporting staff varying fifteen to twenty comprising six junior engineers. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: >>>* Headed a team of about fifteen personnel comprising of about six >>>junior engineers and other supporting staff. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > * Headed a team of supporting staff varying fifteen to twenty > comprising six junior engineers. * Headed a team of fifteen to twenty support staff including 6 junior engineers. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Consider the following sentence: * I was put off the idea of travelling through jungles; my brother picked up malaria in that way. Why is it *I was put off .....*? Why not *I put off .......*? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Consider the following sentence: > > * I was put off the idea of travelling through jungles; my brother > picked up malaria in that way. > > Why is it *I was put off .....*? Why not *I put off .......*? "I was put off ..." means "I was dissuaded ..." whereas "I put off ..." means "I postponed ..." Regards, Einde O'Callaghan On Mar 2, 8:08 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- interkom.de> wrote: > n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb:> Consider the following sentence: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "I was put off ..." means "I was dissuaded ..." whereas "I put off ..." > means "I postponed ..." Thanx. Then it should be like * I was put off by the idea.......* Why *by* has not been used? Thanx and regards NSP On Mar 2, 8:08 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- interkom.de> wrote: > n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb:> Consider the following sentence: > > * I was put off the idea of travelling through jungles; my brother > > picked up malaria in that way. > > Why is it *I was put off .....*? Why not *I put off .......*? > "I was put off ..." means "I was dissuaded ..." whereas "I put off ..." > means "I postponed ..." Thanx. Then it should be like * I was put off by the idea.......* Why *by* has not been used? Thanx and regards NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > On Mar 2, 8:08 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Why *by* has not been used? Perhaps I should have been clearer. It wasn't the idea that put the speaker off, rather the the speaker was dissuaded FROM doing something, in this case, "I was dissuaded from travelling through the jungle." Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Which of the following is correct? * I am clueless what this difference might be due to. * I am clueless what to this difference might be due. * I am clueless to what this difference might be due. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Which of the following is correct? > > * I am clueless what this difference might be due to. > * I am clueless what to this difference might be due. > * I am clueless to what this difference might be due. I'm clueless about what the difference is due to. But his is clumysy. If I had to use the word "clueless" I'd say "I'm clueless about the reason for the difference." More naturally I'd say "I haven't a clue why they're (or: these things are) different." This is an idiomatic use of "haven't" that I wouldn't teach in class as this usage is largely obsolete now except in the phrase "I haven't a clue". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan * It's time we were off; it's getting on. What is the meaning of the above sentence? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * It's time we were off; it's getting on. > > What is the meaning of the above sentence? It's time for us to go, it's getting late. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Are the following sentences grammatically correct? * I will be *more than happy* to .............. * He is a *first class first* student. Thanx NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Are the following sentences grammatically correct? > > * I will be *more than happy* to .............. This sentence is OK, but most people would probably more often say "I would be more than happy to ..." > * He is a *first class first* student. I'm not sure what you are trying to say but it feels wrong to me - BTW it should be "first-class" since it is a compound adjective, i.e. one concept made up of 2 words. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > > Are the following sentences grammatically correct? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > This sentence is OK, but most people would probably more often say "I > would be more than happy to ..." Your alternative is used in a slightly different context though. E.g. I WILL be more than happy to give you a refund if you CAN show proof of purchase. I WOULD be more than happy to give you a refund if you COULD show proof of purchase. I think. Non-native English speakers come up with really tough questions. BFN. Paul. Paul Edwards schrieb: >>n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I think. Non-native English speakers come up with really tough > questions. I was thinking of a different context (a higher level of politeness), e.g. Old lady asks young man: "Can you help me with this suitcase, please?" Young man to old lady as he takes the suitcase: "I'd be more than happy to help you." You're right about tough questions. I come across this every day in my work as an English teacher. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > Paul Edwards schrieb: > > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Young man to old lady as he takes the suitcase: "I'd be more than happy > to help you." Well, although that is common usage, it is technically incorrect. That statement technically should require a disclaimer: I'd be more than happy to help you BUT I'm allergic to suitcases. The technically correct version would be: I'm more than happy to help you. The original use of "will" would be: I will be happy to help you AFTER I make a short phone call. But again, the technically incorrect "would" can be substituted here too. And anyhow, if we're talking politeness, "delighted" is more usual than "happy". All this is caveated with "I think". :-) > You're right about tough questions. I come across this every day in my > work as an English teacher. I'm sure glad I don't have to learn this language! I think children should learn it as a dual mother tongue so that they don't need to really learn it. BFN. Paul. Thanx Einde and Paul for earlier help. I read somewhere as follows: * If a 400 kg person sits on you, they will crush you. My question is why it is they and why not he or she. I tried to understand but couldn't figure out. They is plural and it is referring to person which is singular. Thanx/NSP > Thanx Einde and Paul for earlier help. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > They is plural and it is referring to person which is singular. Well, technically it should be "he/she" rather than "they". But "he/she" is a bit cumbersome. So in these sorts of situations, "he" is often used. But "they", although technically incorrect, is also often used (which makes it correct by definition, since English is defined by common usage). The basic problem is that there is no gender-neutral word in English. You can say that English is a sexist language. Maybe not as bad as French where every object in the world needs to be arbitrarily made male or female and get a "le" or "la" put in front of it. BFN. Paul. > Well, technically it should be "he/she" rather than "they". > But "he/she" is a bit cumbersome. So in these sorts of situations, > "he" is often used. But "they", although technically incorrect, is > also often used (which makes it correct by definition, since English > is defined by common usage). Oh, and rarely, a feminazi will throw in "she" instead of "he" or "they" in that circumstance, and stuff up the comprehension, because you wonder if you missed something that made it clear that the person in question was female, or that perhaps this piece of information is only applicable to women. It's bloody annoying. It's not the men of today's fault that the language has no gender-neutral term. Given that English is my MOTHER tongue, if women have any complaints with the language they can take it up with my mother. My father was presumably too busy delivering mail to talk to me in English anyway. BFN. Paul. n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Thanx Einde and Paul for earlier help. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > They is plural and it is referring to person which is singular. In modern conversational English the pronoun "they" is often used to refer back to impersonal constructions (a person, somebody and similar constructions), even if technically gthe original construction is singular. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Paul Edwards schrieb: >>Paul Edwards schrieb: >> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Well, although that is common usage, it is technically incorrect. > That statement technically should require a disclaimer: I disagree. It's a question of using distancing (in this case a tense shift) to achieve a higher level of politiness. Regards, Einde O'callaghan On Mar 26, 10:39 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- interkom.de> wrote: > n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > > * He is a *first class first* student. > > I'm not sure what you are trying to say but it feels wrong to me - BTW > it should be "first-class" since it is a compound adjective, i.e. one > concept made up of 2 words. My US educated professor used to often use *first class first student*. I wanted to investigate if it is correct or incorrect to say so. Thanx NSP >On Mar 26, 10:39 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- >interkom.de> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Thanx >NSP Too bad you did not ask the prof at the time. He was indulging in wordplay. first class means high marks but first also means from the start. *first class first student* could mean the student is dedicated to being first class/getting high marks from the start but first class is also the top luxury in travel so the prof may have meant the student wanted to always go first class but was more interested in that than actually working for it > >On Mar 26, 10:39 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- > >interkom.de> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > is dedicated to being first class/getting high marks > from the start I would reword that and say: *first class first student* could mean the student is dedicated to being first class/getting high marks AS HIS HIGHEST PRIORITY. But yeah, you have to ask the prof for clarification. It is not proper English (as in, understandable to another English speaker). BFN. Paul. * Responsible for contract management of large projects. Supervised execution and ensured contract performance of large projects. This is part of a CV list. How can the above the reworded to make it more meaningful? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * Responsible for contract management of large projects. Supervised > execution and ensured contract performance of large projects. > > This is part of a CV list. How can the above the reworded to make it > more meaningful? It seems quite clear to me. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Does "career trajectory" have the same meaning as "career history" and can we replace "career history" a title in the CV by "career trajectory"? Regards/NSP * September 10th to 14th is convenient to everyone. Should it be *is* or *are* in the above sentence? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > * September 10th to 14th is convenient to everyone. > > Should it be *is* or *are* in the above sentence? "is" - the period is singular - BTW "convenient FOR everyone". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan On May 9, 6:06 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- interkom.de> wrote: > n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb:> * September 10th to 14th is convenient to everyone. > > > Should it be *is* or *are* in the above sentence? > > "is" - the period is singular - BTW "convenient FOR everyone". Thanx. I guess *for* and *to* has to do with British or American English (http://pewebdic2.cw.idm.fr/display/display.html? search_str=convenient). Is this correct? Thanx/NSP A) Finely honed skills in use of various software This is a part of the list in a CV. At http://pewebdic2.cw.idm.fr/display/display.html?unfolded=46324&ids=46323,46324,4 6325,46326,46327 I found as follows: *the use of something is the ability or right to use something* My question is as follows: Is A correct or should I use *the* before use? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > A) Finely honed skills in use of various software > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Is A correct or should I use *the* before use? I think it would be better with "the". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Does the order of adjectives matter? Consider the following sentences: A) I work for a first-rate, world-class company. B) I work for a world-class, first-rate company. Do A and B have the same meaning? Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > Does the order of adjectives matter? Yes, there is a usual order of adjectives of different types before a noun: colour origin material purpose noun Other adjectives usually go before these, e.g. size, length, height and age, but it's difficult to give any hard and fast rules here for the exact order. Before these would come adjectives expressing judgements or attitudes and before all else come numbers. > Consider the following sentences: > > A) I work for a first-rate, world-class company. > B) I work for a world-class, first-rate company. Here we have 2 adjectives expressing judgements or opinions, so the above order isn't really any help! :-( > Do A and B have the same meaning? In my opinion, however, the first sounds better than the second. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: > On May 9, 6:06 pm, Einde O'Callaghan <einde.ocallag...@planet- > interkom.de> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > English (http://pewebdic2.cw.idm.fr/display/display.html? > search_str=convenient). Is this correct? In my opinion, the US usage for "convenient to" is only applicable to the meaning "close and easy to reach", i.e. not for the meaning in your sentence, "suited to personal comfort". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan A) From XXX to YYY tended to home functions and stayed at home with young children to support demanding career of my spouse. This is a part of the list in a CV. How can I better the above especially *stayed at home with young children to support demanding career of my spouse*? Thanx/NSP > A) From XXX to YYY tended to home functions and stayed at home with > young children to support demanding career of my spouse. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Thanx/NSP It would seem that the resume writer is trying to account for a period of time by describing the 'child-rearing' activity. That the spouse had a demanding career is not relevant. Why the resume writer chose to stay at home and raise children and not go to work is a matter of personal choice and does not need to be defended. " Raised and supported young children at home." seems to get the job done. > It would seem that the resume writer is trying to account for a period of > time by describing the 'child-rearing' activity. That the spouse had a > demanding career is not relevant. Why the resume writer chose to stay at > home and raise children and not go to work is a matter of personal choice and > does not need to be defended. If there is a wide gap in CV, it needs to be explained. It is the ability of resume writer how best she explains this gap. Thanx/NSP n o s p a m p l e a s e schrieb: >>It would seem that the resume writer is trying to account for a period of >>time by describing the 'child-rearing' activity. That the spouse had a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If there is a wide gap in CV, it needs to be explained. It is the > ability of resume writer how best she explains this gap. Child-rearing would be sufficient. Indeed, to suggest that her career choices are dependent on her husband's job might lessen her chances of being considered. Regrds, Einde O'Callaghan |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.