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.
To smoke / correction
Message de titus1258 posté le 19-11-2006 à 17:21:15 (S | E | F | I)
Bonjour.
J'ai une expression écrite à corriger car mon niveau d'anglais n'est pas terrible
expression:
The french governement decide to forbid smoke on public place, it is a good thing for no-smoker but a bad thing for smoker and tobacconist.
In the first we want to show that this law is a good thing, indeed there are more no-smoker so what they must undergo the smoke of tobacco when they walk in publics places, it is normal that no-smoker can breath normally without his health either attack by the action of smoker.
The passive smoke kill lots of people but they are not the author so what let kill people where are innocent, why not let no-smoker in peace. In public places no-smoker are with smoker but cigaret no touch only smoker, it attck the health of no smoker.
The cigaret kill more and more people each year and it is useless so if governement forbid smoke in publics places, it will permit to decrease the number of dead man because of cigarettes.
Besides the tabacco is very dangerous it causes of cancer, it is dangerous for children, pregnant so why cigarets are not forbid everywhere.
This law is a reached about freedom of smoker, indeed smoke is allow for many year so what forbid it now.
If it is impossible to smoke in publics places lost of them lost people, indeed tobacconist live about cigarets it is a big parts of their receipts, and sometimes people who buy cigarets drink and smoke in it so if it is forbid in this publics places people will lost their job.
Already the price of cogarets increase in this year besides it is impossible for smoker to smoke in public place so smokers are considerate like ennemy of society.
Cigaret is a bad thing, this forbidden in publics is a very good thing because no smoker musn’t undergo misdemeanors about it. it would be better if cigarets will be forbid everywhere because it serve to nothing and it is cause of cancer.
Je remercie(s) d'avance ceux qui m'aideront à corriger cette expression.
-------------------
Modifié par bridg le 19-11-2006 17:35
Titre
Message de titus1258 posté le 19-11-2006 à 17:21:15 (S | E | F | I)
Bonjour.
J'ai une expression écrite à corriger car mon niveau d'anglais n'est pas terrible
expression:
The french governement decide to forbid smoke on public place, it is a good thing for no-smoker but a bad thing for smoker and tobacconist.
In the first we want to show that this law is a good thing, indeed there are more no-smoker so what they must undergo the smoke of tobacco when they walk in publics places, it is normal that no-smoker can breath normally without his health either attack by the action of smoker.
The passive smoke kill lots of people but they are not the author so what let kill people where are innocent, why not let no-smoker in peace. In public places no-smoker are with smoker but cigaret no touch only smoker, it attck the health of no smoker.
The cigaret kill more and more people each year and it is useless so if governement forbid smoke in publics places, it will permit to decrease the number of dead man because of cigarettes.
Besides the tabacco is very dangerous it causes of cancer, it is dangerous for children, pregnant so why cigarets are not forbid everywhere.
This law is a reached about freedom of smoker, indeed smoke is allow for many year so what forbid it now.
If it is impossible to smoke in publics places lost of them lost people, indeed tobacconist live about cigarets it is a big parts of their receipts, and sometimes people who buy cigarets drink and smoke in it so if it is forbid in this publics places people will lost their job.
Already the price of cogarets increase in this year besides it is impossible for smoker to smoke in public place so smokers are considerate like ennemy of society.
Cigaret is a bad thing, this forbidden in publics is a very good thing because no smoker musn’t undergo misdemeanors about it. it would be better if cigarets will be forbid everywhere because it serve to nothing and it is cause of cancer.
Je remercie(
-------------------
Modifié par bridg le 19-11-2006 17:35
Titre
Réponse: To smoke / correction de titus1258, postée le 19-11-2006 à 19:22:41 (S | E)
Je sais que c'est assez long mais pourriez-vous corriger quelques parties ou juste une phrase cela m'aiderait vraiment
Merci d'avance pour vos reponses
-------------------
Modifié par aimen7 le 19-11-2006 19:39
Réponse: To smoke / correction de pyan, postée le 19-11-2006 à 19:27:37 (S | E)
The (1)french (2)governement (3) decide to forbid smoke on public (4) place, it is a good thing for no-smoker but a bad thing for (6)smoker and (6)tobacconist.
(1)A CAPITAL letter is needed.
(2) The spelling is incorrect.
(3) The government is singular so the verb “to decide” must agree.
(4) Place is singular but this should be plural.
(5) Non-smokers (a place is a no-smoking area, but people are non-smokers)
(6) Should be in the plural.
Cigaret is American English.
Réponse: To smoke / correction de jamesuk, postée le 21-11-2006 à 18:39:57 (S | E)
Cigaret isn't any type of english!
It's cigarette, comme en francais
Réponse: To smoke / correction de gizmo2937, postée le 22-11-2006 à 22:15:31 (S | E)
Hi !
In the first ne se dit pas utilises plutôt Firstly ou alors In the first time.
indeed there are more no-smoker than smoker so
Je ne suis pas certain qu'il soit essentiel mais dans le doute...
so what they must undergo ...
Why serait plus adapté que what mais la tournure de la phrase n'est pas correcte.
so they don't have to undergo ...
when they walk in publics places
Je ne pense pas que public soit à mettre au pluriel, c'est un adjectif.
it is normal that no-smoker can breath normally without his health either attack by the action of smoker
Après without il faut que tu utilises un verbe comme without damage
Bon courage
INDISPENSABLES : 