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.
Correction !!
Message de chichou44 posté le 04-04-2007 à 17:01:32 (S | E | F | I)
Bonjour !!
J'ai besoin d'aide!!
J'aimerais qu'on me corrige cette rédaction !!
Je pense que j'ai fait plusieurs erreurs surtout dans la formulation de certaines phrases !!
At first sight, it looks a poster, maybe an advert which we can find in the street. We don't know who is the autor. The picture is a black and write photofraphy which is low angle shot. There is a slogan underneath a picture . Finally, the scene takes place outdoors.
Let's go further! On the foreground, a standing woman see us. She is in the middle of the picture. She must belong to a tribe, so she is certainly a Indian squaw because she wears a blanket with geaometrical patterns. Moreover, she has a feather in her dark hair. Also, she overlooks the landscape, she is on a cliff. She conveys an impression of peaceful. She embody the quietness and looks in harmony with the nature. She is in osmosis with the nature, il's almost utopian.But, it stand out of the woman's look a unrest. She looks very alone, around threre is nothing (no tree, no ni life ...), the void. Whereas, she must be rather in forest or some where else.
In fact, the picture deliver ,above all, a message. The slogan written at the bottom of the picture is the second thing which hail us. This four sentences denounces explicitly our consumer society at insisting on ecolgic things such « the tree », « the fish » ... things, today, threaten by our greed and selfishness. It blames our society for interesting to money and nothings else. From what I can see I would say that the photographer's aim is to warn about the ecological risks and question us. The woman show us that without money it's possible to live thanks to the nature. And, it's necessary to pay heed to it because we destroy the life of tribes.
To conclude, I can't help thinking that agree with this message. I'm convinced that everyone can use effort to preserv the planet and espacially the big powers such the United States... And I think that I'm not idealistic !
-------------------
Modifié par bridg le 04-04-2007 17:02
Titre
-------------------
Modifié par chichou44 le 05-04-2007 10:57
Message de chichou44 posté le 04-04-2007 à 17:01:32 (S | E | F | I)
Bonjour !!
J'ai besoin d'aide!!
J'aimerais qu'on me corrige cette rédaction !!
Je pense que j'ai fait plusieurs erreurs surtout dans la formulation de certaines phrases !!
At first sight, it looks a poster, maybe an advert which we can find in the street. We don't know who is the autor. The picture is a black and write photofraphy which is low angle shot. There is a slogan underneath a picture . Finally, the scene takes place outdoors.
Let's go further! On the foreground, a standing woman see us. She is in the middle of the picture. She must belong to a tribe, so she is certainly a Indian squaw because she wears a blanket with geaometrical patterns. Moreover, she has a feather in her dark hair. Also, she overlooks the landscape, she is on a cliff. She conveys an impression of peaceful. She embody the quietness and looks in harmony with the nature. She is in osmosis with the nature, il's almost utopian.But, it stand out of the woman's look a unrest. She looks very alone, around threre is nothing (no tree, no ni life ...), the void. Whereas, she must be rather in forest or some where else.
In fact, the picture deliver ,above all, a message. The slogan written at the bottom of the picture is the second thing which hail us. This four sentences denounces explicitly our consumer society at insisting on ecolgic things such « the tree », « the fish » ... things, today, threaten by our greed and selfishness. It blames our society for interesting to money and nothings else. From what I can see I would say that the photographer's aim is to warn about the ecological risks and question us. The woman show us that without money it's possible to live thanks to the nature. And, it's necessary to pay heed to it because we destroy the life of tribes.
To conclude, I can't help thinking that agree with this message. I'm convinced that everyone can use effort to preserv the planet and espacially the big powers such the United States... And I think that I'm not idealistic !
-------------------
Modifié par bridg le 04-04-2007 17:02
Titre
-------------------
Modifié par chichou44 le 05-04-2007 10:57
Réponse: Correction !! de jean31, postée le 04-04-2007 à 18:23:29 (S | E)
Bonjour,
Voici quelques remarques destinées à te faire corriger un certain nombre d'erreurs qui ternissent ton travail fouillé. Dommage.
=> ... it looks LIKE a poster...
=> ... which we can SEE in the street.
=> ...who the author is. <= ce n'est pas une question. Donc il faut employer l'ordre des mots d'une affirmation, ie sujet + verbe.
=> ...black and white photography (fautes de frappe)
=> In the foreground, a standing woman is looking at us. (elle ne nous voit pas mais nous regarde, nuance !)
=> Revois la règle d'emploi de l'article indéfini a/an.
=> ...peaceful est un adjectif. Rectifie-le.
=> Revois aussi la sacro-sainte règle du S au verbe quand son sujet est singulier au présent simple ! (Le y se transforme en i)
=> Revois aussi les cas d'omission du déterminant "the". Il est capital de le savoir.(quietness, nature)
=> Ne sépare pas un verbe de son COD, c'est toujours préférable. =>(the picture deliverS a message...)
=> This = these au pluriel et pas de S au verbe quand son sujet est pluriel ! It's the other way round, remember?
=> ... I can't but agree with this message.
N'hésite pas à revenir faire vérifier le résultat de tes cogitations.
See you.
Réponse: Correction !! de chichou44, postée le 04-04-2007 à 20:03:18 (S | E)
Merci beaucoup!!
J'ai effectué toutes les corrections.
Par contre, je ne comprends pas l'erreur avec "quietness" et le cas d'omission du determinant "the".
Voilà le résultats après toutes les corrections:
At first sight, it looks like a poster, maybe an advert which we can see in the street. We don't know who the author is. The picture is a black and white photograph which is low angle shot. There is a slogan underneath a picture . Finally, the scene takes place outdoors.
Let's go further! On the foreground, a standing woman see us. She is in the middle of the picture. She must belong to a tribe, so she is certainly a Indian squaw because she wears a blanket with geaometrical patterns. Moreover, she has a feather in her dark hair. Also, she overlooks the landscape, she is on a cliff. She conveys an impression of peacefulness. She embodies the quietness and looks in harmony with the nature. She is in osmosis with the nature, il's almost utopian.But, it stands out of the woman's look a unrest. She looks very alone, around threre is nothing (no tree, no ni life ...), the void. Whereas, she must be rather in forest or some where else.
In fact, the picture delivers a message. The slogan written at the bottom of the picture is the second thing which hail us. These four sentences denounce explicitly our consumer society at insisting on ecolgic things such « the tree », « the fish » ... things, today, threaten by our greed and selfishness. It blames our society for interesting to money and nothings else. From what I can see I would say that the photographer's aims is to warn about the ecological risks and question us. The woman shows us that without money it's possible to live thanks to the nature. And, it's necessary to pay heed to it because we destroy lifes and tribes.
To conclude, I can't but agree with this message. I'm convinced that everyone can use effort to preserv the planet and espacially the big powers such the United States... And I think that I'm not idealistic !
Encore merci !!
See you !
Réponse: Correction !! de jean31, postée le 04-04-2007 à 21:56:36 (S | E)
Bonsoir,
C'est déjà beaucoup mieux ainsi.
Compte tenu de ton application et implication au travail, j'ai rectifié directement les quelques erreurs restantes.
At first sight, it looks like a poster, maybe an advert which we can see in the street. We don't know who the author is. The picture is a black and white photograph which is low angle shot. There is a slogan underneath a picture. Finally, the scene takes place outdoors.
Let's go further! In the foreground, a standing woman IS LOOKING AT us. She is in the middle of the picture. She must belong to a tribe, so she is certainly aN Indian squaw because she wears a blanket with geaometrical patterns. Moreover, she has a feather in her dark hair. Also, she overlooks the landscape, she is on a cliff. She conveys an impression of peacefulness. She embodies (0) quietness and looks in harmony with (0) nature. She is in osmosis with (0) nature, iT's almost utopian. But AN UNREST stands out of the woman's look. She looks very loneLY, there is nothing around (no tree, no life ...), (0) EMPTINESS. YET
she must be in A forest or somewhere else.<=(contradiction : tu dis qu'il n'y a aucun arbre puis tu ajoutes qu'elle doit se trouver dans une forêt. Bizarre, non ? Ou bien je me trompe ?)In fact, the picture delivers a message. The slogan written at the bottom of the picture is the second thing which QUESTIONS us. These four sentences denounce explicitly our consumer society BY insisting on ecolOgicAL ISSUES such AS « the tree », « the fish » ... ISSUES THAT ARE threatenED today by our greed and selfishness. It blames our society for BEING interestED IN money and nothing else. From what I can see I would say that the photographer aims AT warnING us about the ecological risks and questionING us. The woman shows us that without money it's possible to live thanks to (0) nature. And it's necessary to pay heed to it because we destroy liVes and tribes.
To conclude, I can't but agree with this message. I'm convinced that everyone can STRIVE to preservE the planet and espEcially (0) GREAT powers such AS the United States... And I think that I'm not being idealistic !
Réponse: Correction !! de chichou44, postée le 05-04-2007 à 10:50:05 (S | E)
Merci !! ça m'aide beaucoup et ça rend beaucoup mieux!
une dernière petite question !
=> she must be in A forest or somewhere else.<=(contradiction : tu dis qu'il n'y a aucun arbre puis tu ajoutes qu'elle doit se trouver dans une forêt. Bizarre, non ? Ou bien je me trompe ?)
En fait, j'ai voulu dire " On s'attend plutôt à retrouver une personne comme celle-ci entourée d'arbres, en contact avec la nature"
Mais je n'arrive pas à faire la traduction littérale de ma pensée. J'ai donc remplacé la phrase par "Whereas, an Indian lives in a forest or somewhere else."
Qu'est-ce que tu en penses ?
Bonne journée
Réponse: Correction !! de jean31, postée le 05-04-2007 à 12:30:43 (S | E)
Coucou,
=>En faiT, j'ai voulu dire " On s'attendRAIT plutôt à trouver une personne comme celle-ci entourée d'arbres, en contact avec la nature"
Mais je n'arrive pas à faire la traduction litTérale de ma pensée. J'ai donc remplacé la phrase par "Whereas, an Indian lives in a forest or somewhere else."
Qu'est-ce que tu en penses ? => Pas grand chose, à vrai dire ! (just kidding!
)Bonne journée
=> La traduction littérale de ta phrase française pourrait se rendre par quelque chose comme : You would expect to find such a person close to nature, in a wooded environment.
Bonne journée à toi itou.
Réponse: Correction !! de chichou44, postée le 05-04-2007 à 18:16:19 (S | E)
Ok !!
Merci ! c'est sympa !
See you !!
-------------------
Modifié par chichou44 le 07-04-2007 11:33
Réponse: Correction !! de jean31, postée le 05-04-2007 à 18:27:56 (S | E)
Avec plaisir.
INDISPENSABLES : 