Engelsk
Rettelse af engelsk stil- den er ikke særlig lang
27. marts 2007 af
zuzu_dk (Slettet)
Hvis nogen vil være rigtig søde at kigge på min stil. Hvis nu I synes der er grammatiske eller sproglige fejl. Tak på forhånd;)
"Shooting an Elephant" is an essay by George Orwell.
I believe it is important to know a little of the bagground of the text, to make it easier understanding the essay.
Britain occupied Burma over a period of sixty-two years (1824 - 1886), during three Anglo-Burmese Wars took place, and incorporated it into its Indian Empire. Burma was administered as a province of India until 1937 when it became a separate, self-governing colony; independence was achieved as a result of an agreement which guaranteed Burmese independence.
In ‘‘Shooting an Elephant,’’ Orwell employs a carelessly assumed first-person point of view; what readers know of the incidence described in the story, they know first and foremost from the narrator’s direct and it seems that it is like an open confession. Couching the essay in the first person enables Orwell connect the rhythm of consideration and action without it seeming forced; because the narrator is recalling about the event, which took place some time in the past. His interweaving of essayistic signs with the main action strikes the reader as quite natural.
As an anti-imperialist author, Orwell lets the narrator often and clearly states his annoyance with colonial Britain: "I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing... I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British." Trapped in a system not of his own, he adds, "all I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served ... I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind." Thoughtfully, the narrator realizes that being forced to inflict authoritarian laws and to shoot the elephant, he declares his feelings against the act, but accepts after comprehending he "had got to shoot the elephant" shows a natural problem of domination: "when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys." By putting into effect the strict British rule, he is forfeiting his freedom while at the same time keeping down the Burmese. A call to end imperialism, "Shooting an Elephant", paradoxically, appeals to the British to cease colonialism to uphold their liberty.
The point of the story happens very much in our normal life, in fact everyday. People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves to get a certain group or person to finally give them respect. George Orwell describes an inside conflict between his personal principles and his duty to his country to the white man’s reputation. The author’s point is to explain the spectators (who are both English and Burmese) about the kind of life he is living in Burma, about the environment, circumstances he is facing and to tell the British Empire what he think about their imperialism and his growing discontent for the imperial domination of British Empire.
"Shooting an Elephant" is an essay by George Orwell.
I believe it is important to know a little of the bagground of the text, to make it easier understanding the essay.
Britain occupied Burma over a period of sixty-two years (1824 - 1886), during three Anglo-Burmese Wars took place, and incorporated it into its Indian Empire. Burma was administered as a province of India until 1937 when it became a separate, self-governing colony; independence was achieved as a result of an agreement which guaranteed Burmese independence.
In ‘‘Shooting an Elephant,’’ Orwell employs a carelessly assumed first-person point of view; what readers know of the incidence described in the story, they know first and foremost from the narrator’s direct and it seems that it is like an open confession. Couching the essay in the first person enables Orwell connect the rhythm of consideration and action without it seeming forced; because the narrator is recalling about the event, which took place some time in the past. His interweaving of essayistic signs with the main action strikes the reader as quite natural.
As an anti-imperialist author, Orwell lets the narrator often and clearly states his annoyance with colonial Britain: "I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing... I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British." Trapped in a system not of his own, he adds, "all I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served ... I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind." Thoughtfully, the narrator realizes that being forced to inflict authoritarian laws and to shoot the elephant, he declares his feelings against the act, but accepts after comprehending he "had got to shoot the elephant" shows a natural problem of domination: "when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys." By putting into effect the strict British rule, he is forfeiting his freedom while at the same time keeping down the Burmese. A call to end imperialism, "Shooting an Elephant", paradoxically, appeals to the British to cease colonialism to uphold their liberty.
The point of the story happens very much in our normal life, in fact everyday. People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves to get a certain group or person to finally give them respect. George Orwell describes an inside conflict between his personal principles and his duty to his country to the white man’s reputation. The author’s point is to explain the spectators (who are both English and Burmese) about the kind of life he is living in Burma, about the environment, circumstances he is facing and to tell the British Empire what he think about their imperialism and his growing discontent for the imperial domination of British Empire.
Svar #1
27. marts 2007 af sokade (Slettet)
Ok har sat nogle x'ser i parentes forskellige steder hvor der mangler noget eller hvor det ville være bedre at skrive noget andet. Hvis x'serne er i starten af en sætning, så betyder det at det er en god ide at skrive den på en anden måde. Men ellers er det ikke særlig mange fejl.
"Shooting an Elephant" is an essay by George Orwell.
I believe it is important to know a little of the bagground(x)of the text, to make it easier understanding the essay.
Britain occupied Burma over a period of sixty-two years (1824 - 1886), during(x) three Anglo-Burmese Wars took place, and incorporated it into its Indian Empire. Burma was administered as a province of India until 1937 when it became a separate, self-governing colony; independence was achieved as a result of an agreement which guaranteed Burmese independence.
In ‘‘Shooting an Elephant,’’ Orwell employs a carelessly assumed first-person point of view; what readers know of the incidence described in the story, they know first and foremost from the narrator’s direct(x) and it seems that it is like an open confession. Couching the essay in the first person enables Orwell connect the rhythm of consideration and action without it seeming forced; because the narrator is recalling about(x) the event, which took place some time in the past. His interweaving of essayistic signs with the main action strikes the reader as quite natural.
As an anti-imperialist author, Orwell lets the narrator often and clearly states(x) his annoyance with colonial Britain: "I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing... I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British." Trapped in a system not of his own, he adds, "all I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served ... I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind." (x)Thoughtfully, the narrator realizes that being forced to inflict authoritarian laws and to shoot the elephant, he declares his feelings against the act, but accepts after comprehending he "had got to shoot the elephant" shows a natural problem of domination: "when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys." By putting into effect the strict British rule, he is forfeiting his freedom while at the same time keeping down the Burmese. A call to end imperialism, "Shooting an Elephant", paradoxically, appeals to the British to cease colonialism to uphold their liberty.
(x)The point of the story happens very much in our normal life, in fact everyday. People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves to get a certain group or person to finally give them respect. George Orwell describes an inside conflict between his personal principles and his duty to his country(x) to the white man’s reputation. The author’s point is to explain the spectators (who are both English and Burmese) about the kind of life he is living in Burma, about the environment, circumstances he is facing and to tell the British Empire what he think(x)about their imperialism and his growing discontent for the imperial domination of British Empire.
"Shooting an Elephant" is an essay by George Orwell.
I believe it is important to know a little of the bagground(x)of the text, to make it easier understanding the essay.
Britain occupied Burma over a period of sixty-two years (1824 - 1886), during(x) three Anglo-Burmese Wars took place, and incorporated it into its Indian Empire. Burma was administered as a province of India until 1937 when it became a separate, self-governing colony; independence was achieved as a result of an agreement which guaranteed Burmese independence.
In ‘‘Shooting an Elephant,’’ Orwell employs a carelessly assumed first-person point of view; what readers know of the incidence described in the story, they know first and foremost from the narrator’s direct(x) and it seems that it is like an open confession. Couching the essay in the first person enables Orwell connect the rhythm of consideration and action without it seeming forced; because the narrator is recalling about(x) the event, which took place some time in the past. His interweaving of essayistic signs with the main action strikes the reader as quite natural.
As an anti-imperialist author, Orwell lets the narrator often and clearly states(x) his annoyance with colonial Britain: "I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing... I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British." Trapped in a system not of his own, he adds, "all I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served ... I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind." (x)Thoughtfully, the narrator realizes that being forced to inflict authoritarian laws and to shoot the elephant, he declares his feelings against the act, but accepts after comprehending he "had got to shoot the elephant" shows a natural problem of domination: "when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys." By putting into effect the strict British rule, he is forfeiting his freedom while at the same time keeping down the Burmese. A call to end imperialism, "Shooting an Elephant", paradoxically, appeals to the British to cease colonialism to uphold their liberty.
(x)The point of the story happens very much in our normal life, in fact everyday. People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves to get a certain group or person to finally give them respect. George Orwell describes an inside conflict between his personal principles and his duty to his country(x) to the white man’s reputation. The author’s point is to explain the spectators (who are both English and Burmese) about the kind of life he is living in Burma, about the environment, circumstances he is facing and to tell the British Empire what he think(x)about their imperialism and his growing discontent for the imperial domination of British Empire.
Svar #2
27. marts 2007 af Kim E (Slettet)
Hejsa...Jeg giver det da lige et forsøg...Tekst skrevet med stort er forslag til rettelser...
I believe it is important to know a little of the BACKGROUND of the text, to make it easier understanding the essay.
during three Anglo-Burmese Wars took place, and incorporated it into its Indian Empire. - DURING THREE WHAT??
Couching the essay in the first person enables Orwell TO connect the rhythm of consideration and action without FORCING IT
because the narrator is recalling about the event, which took place some time in the past. - DETTE HER GIVER IKKE RIGTIG MENING...EFTER RECALLING SKAL DER I HVERT FALD VÆRE ET ORD...ELLERS SKAL DET MÅSKE OMFORMULERES TIL "RECALLING THE EVENT"
Orwell lets the narrator often and clearly states INTET S PÅ STATES! his annoyance with colonial Britain EVT. FLYT OFTEN AND CLEARLY FORAN LETS SÅ DET BLIVER "ORWELL OFTEN AND CLEARLY LETS THE NARRATOR STATE HIS ANNOYANCE WITH COLONIAL..."
Thoughtfully, the narrator realizes that being forced to inflict authoritarian laws and to shoot the elephant, he declares his feelings against the act, but accepts after comprehending he "had got to shoot the elephant" shows a natural problem of domination TROR DU HAR LAGT BILLET IND PÅ TITLEN "VERDENS LÆNGSTE SÆTNING"...DER MANGLER NOGLE PUNKTUMMER - JEG ER I HVERT FALD IKKE HELT MED PÅ HVAD STARTEN BETYDER.
The point of the story JEG VIL GERNE VIDE HVAD DET BETYDER. MENER DU POINTEN ELLER MENER DU MORALEN? HVIS DET ER MORALEN VILLE JEG NOK OMFORMULERE TIL "THE MORALE OF THE STORY IS STILL HIGHLY RELEVANT IN OUR EVERYDAY LIFE" (ELLER NOGET I DEN STIL...)
People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves MOVES = THINGS/DEEDS
point is to explain the spectators EXPLAIN = TELL
Derudover synes jeg den er ganske god. Mange "lærerord" - de elsker synonymer og fremmedord, så længe det ikke er i en direkte oversættelse...
Jeg håber du kan bruge det. Skulle der være spørgsmål, kan du bare skrive, så skal jeg gerne besvare.
I believe it is important to know a little of the BACKGROUND of the text, to make it easier understanding the essay.
during three Anglo-Burmese Wars took place, and incorporated it into its Indian Empire. - DURING THREE WHAT??
Couching the essay in the first person enables Orwell TO connect the rhythm of consideration and action without FORCING IT
because the narrator is recalling about the event, which took place some time in the past. - DETTE HER GIVER IKKE RIGTIG MENING...EFTER RECALLING SKAL DER I HVERT FALD VÆRE ET ORD...ELLERS SKAL DET MÅSKE OMFORMULERES TIL "RECALLING THE EVENT"
Orwell lets the narrator often and clearly states INTET S PÅ STATES! his annoyance with colonial Britain EVT. FLYT OFTEN AND CLEARLY FORAN LETS SÅ DET BLIVER "ORWELL OFTEN AND CLEARLY LETS THE NARRATOR STATE HIS ANNOYANCE WITH COLONIAL..."
Thoughtfully, the narrator realizes that being forced to inflict authoritarian laws and to shoot the elephant, he declares his feelings against the act, but accepts after comprehending he "had got to shoot the elephant" shows a natural problem of domination TROR DU HAR LAGT BILLET IND PÅ TITLEN "VERDENS LÆNGSTE SÆTNING"...DER MANGLER NOGLE PUNKTUMMER - JEG ER I HVERT FALD IKKE HELT MED PÅ HVAD STARTEN BETYDER.
The point of the story JEG VIL GERNE VIDE HVAD DET BETYDER. MENER DU POINTEN ELLER MENER DU MORALEN? HVIS DET ER MORALEN VILLE JEG NOK OMFORMULERE TIL "THE MORALE OF THE STORY IS STILL HIGHLY RELEVANT IN OUR EVERYDAY LIFE" (ELLER NOGET I DEN STIL...)
People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves MOVES = THINGS/DEEDS
point is to explain the spectators EXPLAIN = TELL
Derudover synes jeg den er ganske god. Mange "lærerord" - de elsker synonymer og fremmedord, så længe det ikke er i en direkte oversættelse...
Jeg håber du kan bruge det. Skulle der være spørgsmål, kan du bare skrive, så skal jeg gerne besvare.
Skriv et svar til: Rettelse af engelsk stil- den er ikke særlig lang
Du skal være logget ind, for at skrive et svar til dette spørgsmål. Klik her for at logge ind.
Har du ikke en bruger på Studieportalen.dk?
Klik her for at oprette en bruger.