Engelsk grammatikhjælp

Hej allesammen ;-)

Dette ville være rart hvis nogle ville rette i min grammatikaflevering.

Jeg har specielt svært ved at finde årsagen til rettelsen i spg. 2 i opg. 1?

Delprøve 1

Ret fejlene i følgende sætninger og forklar på dansk dine rettelser. Brug relevant grammatisk/faglig terminologi.

1. Where is my glasses?
Rettelse: Where are my glasses?
Forklaring: Glasses angiver et par, som derfor er pluralis. Dette medfører, at verbet skal være are, da dette bruges i pluralis.
2. I dislike to go by bus, but I cannot afford buying a car.
Rettelse: I dislike going by bus, but I cannot afford a car.
Forklaring:
3. She is visiting her old mother every day.
Rettelse: She visits her old mother every day.
Forklaring: Der skal benyttes simpel nutid, da det er noget, der ofte sker og gentager sig.
4. I live in the house which roof is red.
Rettelse: I live in the house whose roof is red.
Forklaring: Der bruges ejefald af det relative pronomine which i denne bestemmende relativsætning. Whose fører tilbage til substantivet house for at vise, at dette er dette hus, som har et rødt tag.
5. The dogs’ barked.
Rettelse: The dogs barked.
Forklaring: Genitiv s-apostroffen skal fjernes, da der ellers står ”hundenes gøede”, mens meningen nu er, at hundene gøede.

Hvilke præfixer skal følgende adjektiver have for at komme til at betyde det modsatte.

1. Predictable - unpredictable
2. Loyal – disloyal
3. Patient - impatient
4. Responsible – Irresponsible
5. Polite – impolite

Nedenstående er et afslag på en jobansøgning. Sætningerne er nummererede. Besvar følgende spørgsmål:
1. Beskriv tonen i afslaget.
2. Hvilke sætninger er overflødige?
3. Angiv hvilke sætninger der kunne være bruge som indledning og afslutning.

1. The tone in the refusal is very polite at first: “Your application for a job with us was received and was looked at carefully, examining all aspects of your letter and your resume” (sentence 1). But on the other hand it is not very polite to point out all the missing qualifications of the applicant in the way it is done in this refusal. The following quote is as an example very impolite because it accuses the applicant for not having checked up on all the statements in the job advertisement: “You should have noted that in our ad in the State, we specifically stated that we wanted someone with at least five years’ experience” (sentence 4). “Since you have no experience at all” (part of sentence 5) is an unnecessary information which could have been said in another way: “You don’t have the experiences we are looking for”.
2. The impoliteness is closely connected to the superfluous sentences in the refusal. Some of them are not directly superfluous, but the could have been written in another way. For example sentence 2, 4 and 5.
3. Sentence 7 and 8 could have been an introduction to the refusal because they introduce the background of the firm. But at the same time this kind of introduction maybe would have been better in a positive answer, where they could have been followed by: “And we are happy to welcome you in our firm”. This is anyway the best sentences to an introduction.
Sentence 9 is a natural way to end a refusal because it says better luck, which is relevant in a refusal.

Oversæt følgende tekst til engelsk.

The bag people er humans who have for years lived a normal life with job and family but are now in crises because of changes in their lives. It can be a divorce or a closely related death. Something goes wrong and they isolate themselves completely. They don’t speak with anyone, they just go around with their belongings in bags/or in a trolley. Some gets pension but some makes their living by collecting bottles and rummaging in garbage cans.

Tak for hjælpen :-) (på forh¨ånd :-) )