Comme des milliers de personnes, recevez gratuitement chaque semaine Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais
Tout ce qui a un rapport avec l'apprentissage de l'anglais: grammaire, orthographe, aides aux devoirs, phrases etc.
rédaction sur la guerre
Message de sofita posté le 10-03-2007 à 13:31:20 (S | E | F | I)
Je sais que ca peut paraitre long, maissvp s'il vous plaît pouvez vous corriger ma rédaction? juste au niveau de la langue , car il faut l'avouer, je suis pas très forte en anglais.
The cartoonist has as an intention to reveal the absurdity of the war. He tries to show that the two sides are losers during a combat. He tempts to convince each reader that peace is better than a slaughter who leads to nothing. Thanks to characters who "play the war"; the cartoonist wants that the reader realizes the silliness of the war; who reaps each year a lot of dead, often innocent. Then, he presents the idea that the children have of this kind of action. For them, it is a null play where everyone is defeated. Thus, he tries to show the blunder of the war, and invites all those which cause it, to take part in a preferable play: the peace.
The situation did not change since this cartoon; it worsened. The war evolved through the ground, the sea, the air, space, and now information. It develops quickly, and the rate of dead also increases, for the greatest pleasure of the devastator: the man him even. Indeed, the man becomes increasingly greedy. He tries to possess all the grounds, even by having recourse to the force. The human thinks only of his own happiness, and kills out of innocent people. For multiple reasons, often banal, the man takes the weapon like companion and his brother the human one like target and prey. The law of the jungle found her place in our world since centuries. The strongest eats the weakest. The war attacks children too. The civil populations are aimed more and more. The destruction of the hearths, the schools and the villages makes more victims in the children that the balls and the bombs. I believe that the war, since 19xx, did not really change... The causes multiplied and the consequences worsened... It is necessary that people become aware of the damage of the war.
According to xxxx , "the war bursts when the States haven't any more conscience of their duties, a clear intelligence of their rights, and an exact concept of their respective interests. They cannot any more arrive at a common agreement; they cannot any more accept the laws that the law of nations in times of peace traced: they are withdrawn from it.”
-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 10-03-2007 13:53
+ retrait de toute référence précise.
Message de sofita posté le 10-03-2007 à 13:31:20 (S | E | F | I)
Je sais que ca peut paraitre long, mais
The cartoonist has as an intention to reveal the absurdity of the war. He tries to show that the two sides are losers during a combat. He tempts to convince each reader that peace is better than a slaughter who leads to nothing. Thanks to characters who "play the war"; the cartoonist wants that the reader realizes the silliness of the war; who reaps each year a lot of dead, often innocent. Then, he presents the idea that the children have of this kind of action. For them, it is a null play where everyone is defeated. Thus, he tries to show the blunder of the war, and invites all those which cause it, to take part in a preferable play: the peace.
The situation did not change since this cartoon; it worsened. The war evolved through the ground, the sea, the air, space, and now information. It develops quickly, and the rate of dead also increases, for the greatest pleasure of the devastator: the man him even. Indeed, the man becomes increasingly greedy. He tries to possess all the grounds, even by having recourse to the force. The human thinks only of his own happiness, and kills out of innocent people. For multiple reasons, often banal, the man takes the weapon like companion and his brother the human one like target and prey. The law of the jungle found her place in our world since centuries. The strongest eats the weakest. The war attacks children too. The civil populations are aimed more and more. The destruction of the hearths, the schools and the villages makes more victims in the children that the balls and the bombs. I believe that the war, since 19xx, did not really change... The causes multiplied and the consequences worsened... It is necessary that people become aware of the damage of the war.
According to xxxx , "the war bursts when the States haven't any more conscience of their duties, a clear intelligence of their rights, and an exact concept of their respective interests. They cannot any more arrive at a common agreement; they cannot any more accept the laws that the law of nations in times of peace traced: they are withdrawn from it.”
-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 10-03-2007 13:53
+ retrait de toute référence précise.
Réponse: rédaction sur la guerre de marlond, postée le 10-03-2007 à 18:22:38 (S | E)
J’ai corrigé la première partie:
The cartoonist has as an intention to reveal the absurdity of the war.
Avoir l’intention = ‘to intend’, usually in English, or ‘to have the intention’ less frequently, donc ‘the cartoonist intends to reveal…’
He tries to show that the two sides are losers during a combat.
‘Les deux’ = ‘both’, so ‘both sides’
‘during a combat’ should be ‘in battle’
He ATtempts to convince each reader that peace is better than (a) slaughter who leads to nothing.
‘who’ for a person, ‘which’ for an inanimate thing, donc ‘than slaughter which…’
No need for indefinite article before ‘slaughter’
Thanks to characters who "play (the) war"; the cartoonist wants that the reader realizes the silliness of (the) war; who reaps each year a lot of dead, often innocent.
‘Vouloir que quelqu’un fasse quelque chose’ = ‘to want somebody to do something’, donc ‘the cartoonist wants the reader to realise’
‘silliness of war’ is okay, but one often talks about the ‘futility of war’
Who/which – see above
‘reap’ is a strange word here, better: ‘which claims the lives of many each year, many of whom are often innocent’
Then (‘also’, ‘furthermore’, ‘moreover’ - you wouldn't say 'then' here), he presents the idea that the children have of this kind of action. For them, it is a null play where everyone is defeated.
‘he presents the idea that the children have of this kind of action’ – I don’t understand quite what you mean by this.
‘null play’ – I have never heard this expression – use ‘pointless game’ or something else.
Thus, he tries to show the blunder of (the) war, and invites all those which cause it to take part in a preferable play: (the) peace.
‘those’ refers to people, so you use ‘who’ rather than ‘which’
‘a preferable play’ – you mean ‘a preferable game’
Revise the difference between who/which and where a definite article is needed.
Réponse: rédaction sur la guerre de sofita, postée le 11-03-2007 à 18:46:22 (S | E)
mercii
Réponse: rédaction sur la guerre de sofita, postée le 11-03-2007 à 19:29:48 (S | E)
qui peut me corriger la 2éme partie, s'il vous plaît
"The situation did not change since this cartoon; it worsened. The war evolved through the ground, the sea, the air, space, and now information. It develops quickly, and the rate of dead also increases, for the greatest pleasure of the devastator: the man him even. Indeed, the man becomes increasingly greedy. He tries to possess all the grounds, even by having recourse to the force. The human thinks only of his own happiness, and kills out of innocent people. For multiple reasons, often banal, the man takes the weapon like companion and his brother the human one like target and prey. The law of the jungle found her place in our world since centuries. The strongest eats the weakest. The war attacks children too. The civil populations are aimed more and more. The destruction of the hearths, the schools and the villages makes more victims in the children that the balls and the bombs. I believe that the war, since 19xx, did not really change... The causes multiplied and the consequences worsened... It is necessary that people become aware of the damage of the war."
INDISPENSABLES : 