Aide pour un essai en anglais

Bonjour,

Il s'agit d'un essai sur un thème éco en anglais. Est ce qu'un angliciste chevronné peut me dire si c'est correct et compréhensible.

I think that the free circulation of workers can be positive but there are disadvantages. Now, the beginning of the free circulation is the program “Erasmus” with students. But, students often go in the developed countries. Thanks to this initiative, students can learn more easily foreign languages. We can see the French movie “L’auberge espagnole “for example which is a testimony for Erasmus. However in the European Union, there is the free circulation of workers.
The question is the free circulation of workers worldwide.
In the first time, we can say it is a good choice. In the second time, we will see it is quite a bad idea for the present time.

? For the workers of developing countries, it is a good experience. They will have better conditions to practice their work than in their own nations. After, they can return in their country .These workers bring their knowhow in their own countries. We can see in India for example computer scientists who have a vocational training in developed countries, after they returned in India to work.
The problem can be that after their training, they are tempted to stay in the developed countries because of the good standard of life. These workers don’t want to return in a country where there is war or instability.
If the developed countries accept to give training to the workers of third world countries and encourage them to return home so that they can be useful to their own countries, it could be good for these poor countries. However, the developed countries accept to welcome these people because they need them.
Another advantage is the freedom of people. It is a chance for people who want to travel in the world for example. They know that they can work worldwide.
This system can allow students to continue to work in the country where they have studied.
If people discover others cultures, they can be more tolerant.
? If there is the free circulation of workers in the world, we will have a wealth inequality. A lot of workers want to go in developed countries and also stay there. This is a problem. The emerging countries will see its workers left. The inequality, which exists, will increase.
Now, without the free circulation of workers, some poor workers try to go in the developed countries in the illegality. This is a big problem for the developed countries. They don’t know how to solve it.
For the developed countries, they can’t welcome all workers of the third world. These countries must have solutions for their problems, for example, the unemployment.
In the European Union, the free circulation of workers is possible but very difficult to settle. With the widening of the European Union, we can see that the developed countries don’t want to welcome the workers of Poland for example. For the developed countries, this is a threat.
I think that the free circulation of workers in the world can’t be possible because the developed countries don’t want and can’t welcome all the workers. They must first settle their own problems before to make this.
For me, the developed countries must help the emerging countries. If one helps these countries, the workers can stay and work in their own countries.


je sais c'est un peu long, mais merci beaucoup par avance.

Hum.. j'arrive peu être un peu en retard, mais j'espère pouvoir t'aider quand même.
Je ne suis pas une "angliciste chevronnée" (mais ça viendra !), mais je suis à peu près bilingue à l'oral, et je me débrouille ma foi fort bien à l'écrit.

Au fait, en quelle classe es-tu, si je puis me permettre ?

Il y a entre autre un problème avec les connecteurs logiques. A certains moments, tu n'utilise pas les bons.
Petite illustration de mon propos : ton introduction.

I think that the free circulation of workers can be positive but there are disadvantages. Now, the beginning of the free circulation is the program “Erasmus” with students. But, students often go in the developed countries. Thanks to this initiative, students can learn more easily foreign languages. We can see the French movie “L’auberge espagnole “for example which is a testimony for Erasmus. However in
the European Union, there is the free circulation of workers.

L'exemple le plus choquant est le "however", car il marque une opposition (qui signifie "cependant"). Or, il n'y a pas d'opposition entre tes deux phrases. Un "moreover" (qui signifie "de plus") serait peut être plus adapté.
Je te fais une "correction" vite fait du plan, car il est franchement maladroit. Mais c'est le genre de truc qui vient avec l'expérience, ne t'inquiète pas.

That is why we will first analyse the assets/positive aspect of globalization [car c'est bien ça l'idée générale non ? La mondialisation ? Au pire, tu utilise "free circulation of workers] and then, we will focus on the limitations/negative aspect

Voilà, c'est à peu près à ça que ressemblent mes plans d'essays en histoire. Après, est-ce que ça correspond à ton exercice.. ?


De plus.. hum.. sans vouloir te vexer, ton niveau d'anglais n'est pas exellent, mais ça, j'y peux pas grand chose, et de toute façon… le niveau des LV1 est tout ce qu'il y a de plus minable. Je ne parle même pas des LV2. Ce n'est pas un reproche heiiin ? Simplement un constat.
L'idée générale reste néanmoins compréhensible. Et puis ça devrait s'améliorer, car tu as tout de même un vocabulaire de base.

Au passage, une petite remarque sans grande importance : évite les contractions (isn't, aren't) à l'écrit.

Voilà, j'espère que j'ai pu t'aider même si j'arrive un peu tard.

Imminielle

Bonjour ! Je suis anglaise. Imminielle a bien expliqué quelques problèmes dans le texte… je peux faire des corrections pour le rendre plus coulant.


I think that the free circulation of workers can be positive but there are also disadvantages. Now, the beginning of the free circulation is the program “Erasmus” with students. ButHowever, students often go in thetravel to developed countries. Thanks to this initiative, students can learn more easily foreign languages more easily. We can see the French movie "L’auberge espagnole" for example which is a testimony for Erasmus.The French movie, "L'auberge espagnole", is a testimony for the Erasmus program.However In the European Union, there is the free circulation of workers. The question is, should there bethe free circulation of workers worldwide.
In the first time, we can say it is a good choice. In the second time, we will see it is quite a bad idea for the present time.I will first examine why it is a good idea, and then its associated problems.

? For the workers of developing countries, it is a good experience. They will have better conditions to practice their work than in their own nations. After this experience, they can return into their country. These workers bring their know-how intotheir own countries. We can see in India, for example, computer scientists who have a vocational training in developed countries, after they returned inthen returning toIndia to work.
The problem can beis that after their training, they are tempted to stay in the developed countries because of the good standard of life. These workers don’t want to return in a country where there is war or instability.
If the developed countries acceptdecide to give training to the workers of third world countries and thenencourage them to return home so that they can be useful to their own countries, it could be good for these poor countries. However, the developed countries accept tooften decide to welcome these people because they need them.
Another advantage isrelates tothe freedom of people. It is a chance for people who want to travel in the world for example. They know that they can work worldwide.
This system can allow students to continue to work in the country where they have studied.
If people discover others cultures, they can be more tolerant.
? However, if there is the free circulation of workers in the world, we will also have a wealth inequality. A lot of workers want to go into developed countries and also stay there. This is a problem. The emerging countries will see its workers leftdepart. The inequality which exists at present will increase.
Now, without the free circulation of workers, some poor workers try to go intothe developed countries in the illegalityillegally.This is a big problem for the developed countries. They don’t do not know how to solve it.
For theThe developed countries, they can’t welcome all workers of the third world. These countries must have solutions for their ownproblems, for example, the unemployment.
In the European Union, the free circulation of workers is possible but very difficult to settle. With the wideningexpansion of the European Union, we can see that the developed countries don’t want to welcome the workers, of Poland, for example. For the developed countries, this is a threat. [ Que voulez-vous dire?
I think that the free circulation of workers in the world can’t bewould not be possible because the developed countries don’tdo not want and can’tcannotwelcome all the workers. They must first settle their own problems before to make this.
For meIn my opinion, the developed countries must help the emerging [or developing ] countries. If one helpsthey help these countries, the workers can stay and work in their own countries.

Très bien ! Êtes-vous au lycée ? Si vous avez des questions ou si vous voulez que j'explique quelques phrases, n'hésitez-pas à me les demander.

je-ne-regrette-rien a écrit :examine why it is a good idea, and then its associated problems.[/b]

Bonjour, j'ai lu votre correction (je fais aussi beaucoup de fautes à l'écrit en anglais et lire les erreurs fréquentes, et corrigées, m'aide beaucoup à les retenir…).

J'aimerais savoir pourquoi its?
Y-a t'il une règle grammaticale vis à vis de ce mot que je ne connais pas?

Celt Vampire a écrit :

je-ne-regrette-rien a écrit :examine why it is a good idea, and then its associated problems.[/b]

Bonjour, j'ai lu votre correction (je fais aussi beaucoup de fautes à l'écrit en anglais et lire les erreurs fréquentes, et corrigées, m'aide beaucoup à les retenir…).

J'aimerais savoir pourquoi its?
Y-a t'il une règle grammaticale vis à vis de ce mot que je ne connais pas?

A moins que je ne me trompe, le mot "its" est l'adjectif possessif du pronom "it", ça veut dire "son/sa/ses", dans ce cas-ci, "ses problèmes".
C'est l'équivalant de her à she, si tu vois ce que je veux dire.

merci =]

Fae a écrit :

Celt Vampire a écrit :

je-ne-regrette-rien a écrit :examine why it is a good idea, and then its associated problems.[/b]

Bonjour, j'ai lu votre correction (je fais aussi beaucoup de fautes à l'écrit en anglais et lire les erreurs fréquentes, et corrigées, m'aide beaucoup à les retenir…).

J'aimerais savoir pourquoi its?
Y-a t'il une règle grammaticale vis à vis de ce mot que je ne connais pas?

A moins que je ne me trompe, le mot "its" est l'adjectif possessif du pronom "it", ça veut dire "son/sa/ses", dans ce cas-ci, "ses problèmes".
C'est l'équivalant de her à she, si tu vois ce que je veux dire.

Oui, c'est ça. Beaucoup de monde, même les Anglais, écrirait 'it's' avec une apostrophe en ce cas, mais ça, c'est une contraction de 'it is' ou 'it has', donc ici, ce serait faux. 🙂