Expression écrite d'anglais

Hello!!

I need help can you help me please?

Est ce que vous pourriez me dire si ceci est bien; et si ça répond au sujet?

Thks

sujet: After the 2004 tidal lave in Asia, many children became orphans. In such a situation,do you think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world?

After the 2004 tidal lave in Asia, many children became orphans. In such a situation, I think it is the better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
Nevertheless, I think that the fact of leaving their country is not either a good solution.

Indeed, I think that to leave their country for a rich country where the adoptions are springs of problems; such as in France.
Can be a "luck" because they have no future in their country of origin.
Furthermore, the adopted children are wished; and thus they will miss nothing.
Contrary in Thailand where they miss means; where the poverty is a queen, and where they will miss maybe love and tenderness because they meet themselves orphans.
The fact of leaving, can be to facilitate their mourning; because this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
The country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.
And to finish, the adoption of these children their would allow ^de to find certain balance; and to solve many present problems of adoption in France.
What would allow to avoid making as the arc of zoé in the LIBAN.
More need "to steal" children.
The happiness of some would make the happiness of the others.


However, that stays their country of all their previous history.
The spring of their culture; of their roots.
By leaving it, they will lose in some sorts their culture.
They will feel as emptied of any essences; and in perpetual collection of their identity.
Furthermore, even if they have no more their relatives; that stays all the same their country; where is the memories of their parents.
«13

Réponses

  • marianne a écrit:
    sujet: After the 2004 tidal lave in Asia, many children became orphans. In such a situation,do you think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world?

    After the 2004 tidal lave in Asia, many children became orphans. In such a situation, I think it is the better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    Nevertheless, I think that the fact of leaving their country is not either a good solution.!!!
    Indeed, I think that to leave their country for a rich? country where the adoptions are springs of problems; such as in France.
    Can be a "luck" because they have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, the adopted children are wished; and thus they will miss nothing.
    Contrary in Thailand where they miss means; where the poverty is a queen, and where they will miss maybe love and tenderness because they meet themselves orphans.
    The fact of leaving, can be to facilitate their mourning; because this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    The country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.
    And to finish, the adoption of these children their would allow ^de to find certain balance; and to solve many present problems of adoption in France.
    What would allow to avoid making as the arc of zoé in the LIBAN.!!!!
    More need "to steal" children.
    The happiness of some would make the happiness of the others.


    However, that stays their country of all their previous history.
    The spring of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose in some sorts their culture.
    They will feel as emptied of any essences; and in perpetual collection of their identity.
    Furthermore, even if they have no more their relatives; that stays all the same their country; where is the memories of their parents.
    Le style est comme une liste de courses.
  • Voilà j'ai tenu compte de vos indications.
    Est ce mieux?
    Je ne comprend pas qu'est ce que vous voulez dire par : votre style est comme une liste?

    Merci beaucoup.

    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans. In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    Nevertheless, I think that the fact of leaving their country is not either THE solution!

    Indeed, I think that to leave their country for a developed country where adoptions are sources of problems; like in France.
    Could be a "chance" because they have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, adopted children are a desire; thus they will make everything for them.
    Contrary to Thailand where they have not means; where poverty is queen, and where they will miss maybe love and tenderness because they are orphans.
    The fact of leaving, to be able to facilitate their mourning; because them country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    The country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.
    To finish, the adoption of these children would allow them to find certain balance; and to solve many conflicts of adoption in France.
    This would allow them to avoid making like the arc of zoé in the LEBANON.
    No need "to steal" children.
    The happiness of some would make the happiness of the others.


    However, it is their country of all their previous history.
    The spring of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose their culture.
    They will feel as emptied of any essences; and they look for their identity.
    Furthermore, even if they have no their parents; that stays all the same their country; where is the souvenirs of their parents.
  • ineedhelp a écrit:
    Je ne comprend pas qu'est ce que vous voulez dire par : votre style est comme une liste?


    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans. In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    Nevertheless, I think that the fact of leaving their country is not either THE solution!

    Indeed, I think that to leave their country for a developed country where adoptions are sources of problems ; like in France.
    Could
    be a "chance" because they have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, adopted children are a desire; thus they will make everything for them.
    Contrary to Thailand where they have not means; where poverty is queen, and where they will miss maybe love and tenderness because they are orphans.
    The fact of leaving, to be able to facilitate their mourning; because them country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    The country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.
    To finish, the adoption of these children would allow them to find certain balance; and to solve many conflicts of adoption in France.
    This would allow them to avoid making like the arc of zoé in the LEBANON.
    No need "to steal" children.The happiness of some would make the happiness of the others.


    However, it is their country of all their previous history.
    The spring of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose their culture.
    They will feel as emptied of any essences; and they look for their identity.
    Furthermore, even if they have no their parents; that stays all the same their country; where is the souvenirs of their parents.
    Mieux? C'est moins pire :D
    Une liste de courses? Car (et ce n'est pas la première fois que l'on te fait la remarque en anglais et en allemand) l'enchaînement de tes phrases n'est pas toujours assuré, la conséquence de tes phrases n'est pas toujours évidente, quelques phrases n'ont pas de bon syntaxe.
    D'avoir deux psudos sur un fil de discussion pourrait être confusant pour tes interlocuteurs.
    Bonne continuation, marianne.
  • Merci

    et pour le style c'est mieux

    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans.
    In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    However, to leave is not the solution of everything.
    Indeed, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world because it is a “chance” because it is a luck for them.
    They have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, by leaving their country, they leave at the same opportunity poverty which is queen in Thaïlande ; misfortune.
    To leave their country to facilitate their mourning; because this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    The country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.
    The happiness of some would make the joy of the others.


    However, it is their country of all their previous history.
    The source of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose their culture.
    By losing their culture of origin; they will also lose their identity. What will provoke an identity crisis
    Furthermore, even if their relatives died ; Their country of origin is their country of origin.
    Where there are souvenirs of their parents.
  • ENGLISH a écrit:
    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans.
    In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    However, to leave is not the solution of everything.
    Indeed, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world because it is a “chance” for them.
    They have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, by leaving their country, they leave at the same opportunity poverty which is queen in Thaïlande ; misfortune.
    To leave their country to facilitate their mourning; because this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    The country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.
    The happiness of some would make the joy of the others.


    However, it is their country of all their previous history.
    The source of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose their culture.
    By losing their culture of origin; they will also lose their identity. What will provoke an identity crisis
    Furthermore, even if their relatives died ; Their country of origin is their country of origin.Where there are souvenirs of their parents.
    Maintenant ce n'est que les lignes souslignées qui se présentent en liste.
    Il y a une amélioration. :)
  • Je vous remercie encore pour votre aide.

    Maintenant c'est moins pire?! lol

    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans.
    In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    However, to leave is not the solution for everything.
    Indeed, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world because it is a “chance” for them.
    They have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, by leaving their country, they leave at the same timeliness poverty ; misfortune.
    Indeed, this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    Besides, to leave their country to facilitate their mourning.
    To conclude(end), we can say that the country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.


    However, it is their country of all their previous history.
    The source of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose their culture.
    By losing their culture of origin; they will also lose their identity.
    This will provoke an identity crisis
    Furthermore, even if their relatives died ; their country of origin is their country of origin.
    The place where there are souvenirs of their parents.
  • Les vides sont à remplir.
    Les paragraphes sont à mettre en forme.
  • ça va comme ceci?

    Merci beaucoup

    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans.
    In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    However, to leave is not the solution for everything.

    Indeed, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world because it is a “chance” for them.
    They have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, by leaving their country, they leave at the same timeliness poverty ; misfortune.
    Indeed, this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    Besides, to leave their country to facilitate their mourning.
    To conclude, we can say that the country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.

    However, it is their country of all their previous history.
    The source of their culture; of their roots.
    By leaving it, they will lose their culture.
    By losing their culture of origin; they will also lose their identity.
    This will provoke an identity crisis.
    Furthermore, even if their relatives died; their country of origin is their country of origin.
    The place where there are souvenirs of their parents.
  • Pourriez-vous m'aider pleaseeeeee

    I need help
  • Bonjour.
    Je crois que tu as bien fait pour la compréhensibilité de ton texte.
    Par mise en forme, je voulais dire qu'il ne fallait pas commnncer chaque phrase à la ligne.
    Parfois la fluidité pourrait bénéficier d'autres LINK WORDS.
    Attention à ton utilisation des point virgules (j'ai mis en gras depuis un moment, mais peut-être ça se voit mal.

    Bon courage.
  • A d'accord je comprend mieux.

    ça va mieux comme ceci?

    Merci beaucoup!!

    After the 2004 tidal wave in Asia, many children became orphans.
    In such a situation, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in differents parts of the world.
    However, to leave is not the solution for everything.

    Indeed, I think it is better for them to be taken charge of in different parts of the world because it is a “chance” for them.They have no future in their country of origin.
    Furthermore, by leaving their country, they leave at the same timeliness poverty and misfortune. Indeed, this country is the country of all their misfortunes.
    Besides, to leave their country to facilitate their mourning.
    To conclude, we can say that the country of their birth becomes suddenly the country of their death.

    Nevertheless, it is their country of all their previous history.The source of their culture; of their roots.By leaving it, they will lose their culture.By losing their culture of origin; they will also lose their identity.This will provoke an identity crisis.
    Moreover, even if their relatives died.Their country of origin is their country of origin.The place where there are souvenirs of their parents.
  • Je crois que maintenant c'est le travail de ton professeur à faire la correction. :)
    Bonne continuation.
  • Je vous remercie.

    Mais juste une dernière petite question:
    Au niveau grammaire et orthographe ça va?
  • Hello!
    j'ai deja corrigé pas mal de mes fautes; mais il m'en reste;pourriez-vous m'aider à les toruver et à les corriger?

    thks

    Bonjour;
    pourriez-vous m'aider à trouver et à corriger mes fautes...?

    Merci d'avance.



    1/Taylor is a woman who adopted TURTLE ;a cherokee child.
    Annawake is an attorney
    She works in an office that does a lot of work for the Cherokee Nation.
    TURTLE is a Cherokee
    She was adopted by TAYLOR.
    2/The scene takes place

    3/The nderlined word “I” refers to…

    *We have dumped to Taylor a Cherokee child who names TURTLE.
    But some years later, a lawyer named Annawake who does a lot of work for the Cherokee Nation; come to inform Taylor that with the eyes of the law.
    She is guilty of having “stolen” this child, because the tribe did not give its approval.
    Furthermore, the papers of adoptions are not good.
    Discussion between these two women about Turtle.
    Annawake explains the law to Taylor.

    4/ Annawake manages to win Taylor’s confidence by taking time to explain to her the laws nicely; and by taking time to explain her who she was.
    5/ Tle lines which account for Annawake’s actual presence are:…….
    • The effects do they have on Taylor are:
    • Taylor is irritated; she is afraid that we take her her child.
    • She is fed up
    • She is afraid thus she pays attention on what she says
    7/ The arguments catch character uses to defend their points of view are:…….

    12/Annawake has professional arguments. Whereas taylor has personal arguments.
    Annawake is fir Cherokee.
    She defends their rights.
    Indeed, she does a lot of work for the Cherokee nation.
    While taylor blames the tribe.
    Indeed, taylor blames the tribe for having mistreated TRUTLE; and to have abandoned her.

    14/At the first, taylor is on the defensive because she is afraid that we take her tortule.
    But after her does not pay any more attention on the lawyer
    Annawake she thinks of being in her good right
    She is determined to go up that she is right
    And to finish, she is confident because she knows that it exists for her a constitution too; and that there is only Cherokee who can be denfend.
  • naïana a écrit:
    1/Taylor is a woman who adopted TURTLE ;a cherokee child.
    Annawake is an attorney
    She works in an office that does a lot of work for the Cherokee Nation.
    TURTLE is a CherokeeShe was adopted by TAYLOR.
    2/The scene takes place

    3/The nderlined word “I” refers to…

    *We have dumped to Taylor a Cherokee child who names TURTLE.
    But some years later, a lawyer named Annawake who does a lot of work for the Cherokee Nation; come to inform Taylor that with the eyes of the law .She is guilty of having “stolen” this child, because the tribe did not give its approval.
    Furthermore, the papers of adoptions are not good.
    Discussion between these two women about Turtle.
    Annawake explains the law to Taylor.

    4/ Annawake manages to win Taylor’s confidence by taking time to explain to her the laws nicely; and by taking time to explain __________ her who she was.
    5/ Tle lines which account for Annawake’s actual presence are:…….
    • The effects do they have on Taylor are:
    • Taylor is irritated; she is afraid that we take her her child.
    • She is fed up
    • She is afraid thus she pays attention on what she says
    7/ The arguments catch character uses to defend their points of view are:…….

    12/Annawake has professional arguments. Whereas taylor has personal arguments.
    Annawake is fir Cherokee.
    She defends their rights.
    Indeed, she does a lot of work for the Cherokee nation.
    While taylor blames the tribe.
    Indeed, taylor blames the tribe for having mistreated TRUTLE; and to have abandoned her.

    14/At the first, taylor is on the defensive because she is afraid that we take her tortule.
    But after her does not pay any more attention on the lawyer
    Annawake she thinks of being in her good right
    She is determined to go up that she is right
    And to finish, she is confident because she knows that it exists for her a constitution too; and that there is only Cherokee who can be denfend.
Connectez-vous ou Inscrivez-vous pour répondre.