Erörterung/Comment english zap zp gut?!

Schreibe am Donnerstag meine Englisch zap jnd würde gerne wissen ob das eine gute Erörterung ist. Bitte bewertet es inhaltlich und sprachlich. Und was ist verbessern könnte. Ist echt wichtig. Wäre euch echt dankbar Thema : Rauchverbot ja oder nein

Nowadays many people think that smoking should be forbidden. Is that right ? There are many reasons for and against.

The first point is that it is like toxic for people when they smoke. Moreover a lot of guys smoke outside where many other people are. It could be that they smoke passive and it is quite worser than smokes active. But then we can forbid it only on places where are many people.

The reason is that if we banned smoking all companys become poor and million lose their jobs.

But the mainly point is that the state earn fewer money, because they get less tax and they need money for different causes. That is why they must raise the land tax. At worst ih can be that the economic system crash.

After looking both sides I must say that it could be very dangerous to banned smoking. The only thing that we could do is not to allowed it when children are near the smoker to safe them.

2 Antworten

HimikoLee

28.04.2015, 22:34

Worser ist falsch ->worst

Must->need oder have to say...

The worst thing ever is that the economic system could crash.

Million->Millions of People

There are lots of reasons why we should forbid against or for smokers.

Sorry,dass ich die Reihenfolge nicht beachtet habe

Mfg

AstridDerPu

Von gutefrage auf Grund seines Wissens auf einem Fachgebiet ausgezeichneter Nutzer

Englisch, comment

28.04.2015, 22:38

Nowadays Komma many people think that smoking should be forbidden. Is that right ? There are many reasons for and against (Hier fehlt etwas.).

The first point is that it is like toxic for people when they smoke. Moreover Komma a lot of guys smoke outside where many other people are. It could be that they smoke passive and it is quite worser than smokes active. But then we can forbid it only on places where are many people.

The reason is that if we banned smoking Komma all companys become (Zeit) poor and million (Hier fehIt etwas.) their jobs.

But the mainly point is that the state earn(Gramma) fewer money kein Komma because they get less tax and they need money for different causes. That is why they must raise the land tax. At worst ih can be that the economic system crash.

After looking Hier fehlt etwas. both sides Komma I must say that it could be very dangerous to banned smoking. The only thing (---) we could do

is not to allowed it when children are near the smoker to safe them.

Das Fettgedruckte muss korrigiert werden. Ich hoffe, ich habe nichts übersehen.

Für das Vokabular und die Rechtschreibung empfehle ich ein gutes (online) Wörterbuch, z.B. pons.com,

für die Grammatik ego4u.de und englisch-hilfen.de.

AstridDerPu

Ich bin mir halt nicht sicher, ob mein comment in Fach Englisch mir gelungen ist, daher wäre ein Feedback nett :)

Many people argue whether or not the British monarchy should be abolished.

In the following, I present arguments for and against a monarchy so that you can form your own pinion.

On the one hand, the British monarchy should be abolished because a monarch only rules but has no real political power or function. this means that a queen or king is unnecessary and unimportant to the state.

Also, the UK is not a democracy, as is claimed, because in a democracy people can elect the head of state, but since the royal family is still alive, they will continue to be the head of state.

This is very unfair and unequal to the rest of the population.

Also, people can never be 100% sure if the next monarch is good for the state and does not have bad intentions.

This could make people very worried.

Another important aspect is that the royal family spends a lot of money on the palace when they could use the money for more important things.

On the other hand, the British monarchy should not be abolished, because a monarch is very important even if he or she has no real political power.

His or her importance is reflected in national stability.

Since a monarch embodies the British history, values and tradition, this leads to stronger national identification, which brings people closer together so that there is national stability.

In addition, members of the royal family are very important to charities, because since the royal family has a good image and is important, charities can be heard better, so they continue with their charities.

Some people may think that a monarch spends a lot of money, but that doesn't mean a president doesn't.

there are many presidents with many

There are also many presidents with many offices, even more than the British monarch.

The fact that the royal family has always been at the head of the state means that people trust it because they know its good intentions.

This means that the monarchy is in safe hands, so to speak.

Another important point is that the royal family has shown that it can modernize and adapt to the times.

This is very important because many people claim that they are unmodern and have different thoughts than today.

But the Queen, for example, has allowed her son Charles to marry a divorced woman, whereas in the past this was a very dangerous issue.

that means she was able to “modernise”.

Weighing the pros and cons of the British monarchy, one can say that it should not be abolished because the British monarchy has been very successful, mainly because it has adapted to the times and modernized.

...zur Frage

Würde ich eine eins für mein comment bekommen?

Hey, würde mich gerne freuen wenn ihr mir eventuell Verbesserungsvorschläge gibt :) Vor allem bin ich mir bei meiner conclusion nicht sicher

Danke!

Should the British monarchy be abolished?

Lots of people argue about whether the British monarchy should be abolished or not since the Queen recently died.

Therefore, I will list arguments for and against the monarch so that you can form your own opinion.

On one hand, a monarch is seen as a representative of the country.

That is, he or she embodies traditional national values, unity and history.

This leads to stronger national identification and brings people closer together.

That is why many people say that a monarchy brings stability.

In addition, members of the royal family have important roles at the head of all kinds of charities, and because of their image and popularity, they help charities continue their good work.

Another positive aspect is that the British monarchy has shown that it is able to reform and adapt to modern times. An example of this would be that Prince Charles was allowed to marry a divorced women.

It can also be said that the queen or king is perhaps the most expensive monarch in Europe, but that does not mean that a president would be cheaper.

On the other hand, the monarch has no real political power, which means that his or her functions are mainly formal and could easily be taken away by other political bodies or an elected president.

Although many members of the Royal Family head charities they do not really engage in political work for those charities but rather serve as a kind of figurehead.

But it is precisely a monarchy that harms democracy, because the people cannot elect the head of state.

Also, a monarch has no consequences to face when making mistakes and since Britain is a hereditary monarchy, nobody knows whether the next monarch will have good or bad intentions.

Therefore, it can be said that the royal family is a symbol of an unjust and unequal society.

Weighing the pros and cons one come to the conclusion that the monarchy has many positive sides, for example, it brings stability or embodies history, but the negative sides mask this.

because since the country is a democracy, the monarchy should be abolished so that people can choose for themselves who should be the next monarch so that there is equality.

...zur Frage

Hallo Community! könnt ihr meinen Comment durchlesen und mir Rückmeldung geben?

Ich versuche mich gerade an meinen Englischhausaufgaben - einen Comment über das Thema "criminal responsibility at the age of 10".

Dies ist mein Comment:

Write a comment - Criminal responsibility at the age of 10?

Nowadays many people think that the criminal responsibility should be set to the age of 10 in Germany. Is that right?

On one hand are children at the age of 10 too young for prison. They don’t know the consequences of what they are doing. Or did you know at this age which punishment you get for e.g. for shoplifting? But on the other hand it’s unfair that younger people have no criminal responsibility. I am convinced that we must set an example. The problem is that a lot of children are criminal because they know they can’t get punished. So I think they have to learn to bear responsibility earlier because they shouldn’t get into trouble. The next point I want to mention is if they know what is allowed to do and which punishment they will get for which kind of crime, they will be scared off. So the risk that they will get criminal in the future could be minimised. But what is also to do? In my point of view punishment by oneself can’t help alone. The children have to be taught this in school and by their parents.

I come to the conclusion that this law would help but we have to do more than just changing a law. Also I think that the age of criminal responsibility should be set to the age of 12 because in my opinion the age of 10 is too young.

Ich würde mich sehr über Tipps und auch jegliche Kritik freuen! LG moriarty123

...zur Frage

Ist diese/r Comment/Argumentation ok? (Englisch Hilfe!)

Hallo ! Ich schreiben nächste Woche eine Englisch Arbeit zum Thema Genetically Modified Food. Ich wollte mich drauf vorbereiten und habe deshalb schon einen kurzen Comment geschrieben. Könnt ihr mir helfen und nachschauen ob das so ok ist. Danke im Voraus!

In the following text I am going to write about the topic: “GM food” GM food is produced from plants or animals whose genes have been changed by scientists. A loophole in the law allowed supermarkets to sell genetically modified food. Should it be banned? And should mankind manipulate the gene?

In my opinion the GM food should be banned. The problem is that many people didn't know that the most food in supermarkets are genetically modified. I believe if they knew what they eat, then many people wouldn´t buy the GM food. The food is unpopular among consumers.

On the one hand, the GM food is much cheaper than nature food. On the other hand the food is unhealthy. The GM animals die much earlier than normal animals and they suffer too. There is no doubt about it that the GM food is unhealthy.

In addition, the mankind didn’t know which consequences at manipulate of gene there can be. Maybe it can trigger allergies or a disease. If this happens, we might not have effective antibiotic drugs to fight back.

Hence I believe that the GM Food is not only harmful for us but also for the animals. That is why I think that GM food should be banned. Mankind shouldn’t change anything what worked of thousands years.

...zur Frage

könnt ihr mein Comment in english bewerten?

wir sollten ein comment über dieses vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fiu9GSOmt8E schreiben aber ich bin mir nicht wirklich sicher was ich noch dazu schreiben soll

Comment:

Plastics

In the video Plastics: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) John Oliver explains how plastics are harming the planet, why recycling isn’t the solution, and why fixing the problem will be up to not just consumers, but corporations and policymakers.

Only less than nine percent of plastic that is being made gets recycled. That isn’t the because people don’t recycle its just that most things we think are recyclable aren’t That means the plastic ends up as landfill, gets burned or ends up in the ocean. Even worse is that companies that sell these plastics are making adds that push this idea that we (The Consumers) are to blame.

I agree with everything John Oliver has said. I think that the root of the problem are really the corporations because for them maximizing profit is everything. They know what they are doing is harming many people but still they procced to do it. In any case, I think the solution is to strictly ban single-use plastic packaging and introduce EPR laws to every country, but this sadly seems unrealistic. Even if we had the ban we still have to deal with the already existing plastic waste

...zur Frage

Denkt ihr das ist gut? Könnte ich dafür 1 kriegen??

A considerable number of individuals are engaged in discussions regarding the statement from Tim:"That smoking should be completely vanished from earth." I feel compelled to express my perspective and agree with his point of view.

Conversely, it is equaly imperative to acknoweldge the opposing point of view. Firstly, smoking cigarretes is reducing stress, therefore many people feel better after smoking. For example you had a really bad fight, you just go to smoke and then you will be feeling better. Secondly, you can have a pause of work, just ask for a smoker pause and you will feel much better.

On the other hand, commencing with my first connection, smoking costs tons of money. Sixteen cigarrates can cost around 10 Dollar, some people spend their whole money for them. Its draining rabidly their money, which can cause many problems. So if smoking would get banned, those people would have much more money, for a better life.

Furthermore, you are hurting you family too. Technical term is passive smokers, those are you family. They breath the toxins and chemical too, they can get worse symptoms than you because they are not often in contact with those. So remember to not to smoke near your family.

Thirdly, your lungs are overstrained. The nicotin is destroying you Lungs and can cause lung cancer. Smoking will kill you and you will leave behind your family. Additionaly, the chance of destryoing other organs with the toxiness is times two.

However in seeking resolution, its important to find a compromise. A solution for this dilemma could be a better education system, to teach the people more about the dangerous part of ciggaretes. Secondly, a law against bying more than 10 cigarretes in a week. I still agree with Tims statement. Ultimately, it will could be benefical for a mutual outcome.

...zur Frage

Kann jemand bitte mein comment anschauen und sagen welche Fehler ich gemacht habe, da ich am Dienstag ein comment in einer Klausur schreiben muss?

Nowadays social networks are used by people all over the world. They use them to stay in contact with their friends or family, get information about what’s happening in other parts of the world or just to bore something away. But there are also some negative facts, for example are social media also used for bullying. In the following I’m going to comment whether teenagers can agree or can’t agree if social media are good for them, also including the article „ Forty-five percent of teens are online ‚almost constantly’ – and they don’t know if it’s good for them“ written by Abby Ohlheiser published in the Washington Post on 31 may, 2018.

First off all, social media are the best option for humans to express new possibilities for their future. They can find new attractions and places in the world, which they would never have heard of.

Second, social networks are often used to find out the answer to questions, when not knowing the answer. Most of the people just take out their mobile phones, type it in and then they can read the answer.

Third, social media are used to stay in contact with your friends, even if they move or travel.On the other side there are also negative points, for example that there aren’t just websites with goog thoughts, like websites where violence or sexual content is shown. Furthermore it has to be mentioned that there are people, mostly men, who get on these websites and don’t do legitimate things.On top of that, there are teenagers, who use social network platforms to bully their classmates. For this they use networks where you can write anonymously.

Weighing the pros and cons, I come to the decision, that social media isn’t a big problem for teenagers, if there are rules, which have to be followed and controlled by humans and / or machines.On top I think that social media should even be more popular, so that parents also know about it, so that they can teach their children about the problems.

...zur Frage

Englisch Written Discussion Verbesserungsvorschläge

Boot Camps in Germany !!!

Some people mean that the boot camps in the USA a good idea , but should be boot camps introduced in germany ?

Many people and parents says that boot camps are very good , because boot camps helps troublemakers to learn discipline. And when they learn discipline the crime rate will be go down. Second, the lessons in the school will be more quiet and than the students can better learn and have than better marks. As well the children will be trained they physical fitness and they learn to live healthy. When they used to the circumstances in boot camps, they will live in that way , when leaving the camp.

However, other people and parents are against boot camps, because they think that the children soon forget about boot camp and get in trouble again. Another argument against is the cost ! If boot camps are built in germany, the state would have many costs. The last argument is that many people say that children didnt learn discipline but should have been broken. People say that the boot camps are to hard for children and that the teachers in the camps are too strict.

After looking at both sides I think that boot camps shouldnt be built in germany. The advantages are very good, but the disadvantages are predominant.

Verbesserungsvorschläge für diesen Text wären hilfreich :)

...zur Frage

Erörterung Schuluniform Englisch

Hallo ich präsentiere euch jetzt meine Erörterung, ich wollte euch fragen ob ihr es dann beurteilen könnt ob der Inhalt gut ist und ob ich viele Grammatikalische Fehler habe oder sprachliche Fehler und dann am ende mir eine Note nennt zwischen 1-6 wäre klasse von euch

Should schooluniform be introduced in every school?

In the following text I will list several arguments for and against schooluniform. The thesis to this topic is that schooluniform has lots of disadvantages.The first argument to this antithesis is that it is unhygiencally because you cant wash they not every day. An example you have not so many uniforms at home and you cant not wash them because they would not be dry for the next day. The second argument is that the free development of the pupils is limited. For example they would not be trust what they would dress because they think than it is emberrassing . The last argument to this antithesis is that schooluniform can also lead to competetion and conflicts between different schools. For example a pupil they visited a another school and went from pupils from different school past and they check it that he are from a different school because the schooluniform discern from another school uniformsand then can also lead to a competetion and conflicts.

Of the other hand they are a lot of advantages for schooluniforms. The first argument to this thesis is that they cant readable ther finacial situation. For example if there was none schooluniform than would can be readable ther financial situation because they would not be achieve bran name clothes. A antoher argument is that it would be saves time in the morning . An example the pupil didnt know what he would be dress and than can it to came that he came late to school . The last argument they are for me very strong is that nobody became bulling by clothes.. An example a poor pupil cant not achieve brand name clothes or his clothes are very old and have a lot of holes and therefore they cant be bullied for clothes.

After listing all the arguments for and against schooluniform think I not every school not to lead schooluniform in schools because for me it is important that you can deside what you will dress.The reason ist that then became th self confidence stronger.

Das ist meine Erörterung gerne Verbesserungsvorschläge z.B wenn ich was nicht gut formuliert habe mich verbessern damit ich das beim nächsten mal besser mache :)

...zur Frage

Bild beschreiben: Strand

Ich muss in Englisch ein Bild beschreiben (150 wörter). Bch hab es schon geschrieben, bin mir aber mit der Grammatik und mit der Rechtschreibung nicht sicher. Vielleicht könnt ihr es ja durch lesen und es verbesseren.

In the picture I can see many people at the beach. The sun is shining. And the sky is blue, the beach look golden. All the people are wearing summer clothes or bikinis. Some of them are in the sea and the other are lying on they towers,which on the beach. Some are having a sunburn. They towers are having a lot of colors. At the backround I see many trees, it look like a forest. I think the people in the sea are having a lot of fun. At the front of the trees is a white wall and in front of there is a volleyball net. Many of the children are having an air mattress in different patterns. Probably it is in the summer vacation. Maybe it is in August and maybe in a other country, it can be in turkey etc.

Das Bild: http://bilder.t-online.de/b/64/79/36/92/id_64793692/tid_da/der-strand-am-helenesee.jpg

...zur Frage

English argumentative wirting

Ich gehe zurzeit in die 9. Klasse eines Gymnasiums und ich habe eine 5 in Englisch. Daher würde ich mich sehr freuen wenn ihr mir bitte folgenden Text korrigieren würdet. Könntet ihr mir bitte folgenden Text korrigieren:

Today nearly every kid under 13 years has an own smartphone. But is that good for the kids? Some people say smartphones are good for kids and their developing. There are some people saying the kids should learn the technic of smartphones in young age for example to learn for their future job or for school. The childrens could learn in this age how impotant and useful the internet is for example they could learn for school by games and websites like togolino.de. Other people think the childrens in this age could learn for school in smartphones for example with apps. However tere are other people, thinking the comletly opposite. This people have the suspicion that the children could visit websites where they are still under age for example a child could go to a website for pornographic or violency things. The kids should not become an own smartphone because kids in this age should play outside with real friends and not with virtual friends in games for example a kid which is going outside to play is more social than a kid which is sitting all the day at home. When parents pay so much money for a smartphone the kid could lose it for example in sandpit. After looking at both sides I think there are mor disadvantages than advantages for having a smartphone under 13 years. That`s why children in this age should not have an own smartphone. In my opinion parents who buy a smartphone for a child are stupid and irresponsible because they damage the life of their own child.

...zur Frage

Comment correction?

Hallo, und zwar musste ich ein comment schreiben in der Schule, welchen wir morgen vorzeigen müssen und ich wollte fragen ob einer vlt nochmal kurz denn comment überfliegen kann ob alles so passt.

A Few days ago there was a discussion if mobil phones and other electronic devices should be allowed at school. The pros are that even in school children can be shown how to behave on the internet. Another good argument for using mobil phones at school is that it's possible to quickly find information and work with it. The last and for me best argument is that through digital media, topics are dealt with holistically. Different points of view are taken into account and a solution is sought with different formats. The cons are that teacher can't check what the students gonna do on the smartphones and if they really being used for lessons or assignment. Another bad thing would be that if the permanent use at school is allowed, the risk of mobile phone addiction increases enormously. The for me worse thing would be that if Students didn't own a smartphone they would have a big disadvantage. My personal view is that the mobile phones should be allowed but not all the time only when the teacher allowed it, because mobil phones can be a good addition to the school.

...zur Frage

Comment über Video games, bitte Kontrolle!

Hallo Leute, das Niveau ist 10. Klasse Gym. Ist für eine Schulaufgabe.

Die Frage: Write a comment in 150 words. Should video games be forbidden?

Hier mein comment:

It has often been said that video games have bad influence on people who play them. For example, it has often been argued, that Kids in school are less concentrated if they are playing computer games. In the following I would like to point out, should video games be forbidden?

In my opinion video games shouldn´t be forbidden. This is simply, because video games are not the source of these problems. It´s true, that if you let your child play video games the whole day, it has huge negative effects on it, for example lacks in social connections. But this is the fault of the parents. Kids shouldnt be allowed to play the whole day, this completely seperates them from the reality, but it´s ok if they play here and then.

Another reason why video games should be allowed, because it´s fun playing them. If you play a video game, you can do things that you won´t ever be able to do in real, for example flying around without nothing but your body. Every game is a different adventure, that you can share with friends. Every different person can find something that he likes, no one comes short, even business-man can find games that fit for them.

So to sum up, video games are a nice experience. The key is not overdoing it. Or you will end up living in a virtual world.

///Ende

Wie findet ihr es? Bitte alles verbessern was geht :). Danke.

...zur Frage

Könnte jemand über meinen Essay drüber schauen?

         Every school should demand school uniform

In some countries all over the world school children have to wear uniforms the color scheme and style varies from school to school. In other countries pupils can wear to school what ever clothes they choose. In those countries it could be difficult to introduce school uniforms, because they are not traditionally used to wearing one. In the following essay I want to discuss the advantages to introduce school uniforms world wide.

In my opinion school uniforms ind schools are positive but negative too because not every student have the same style and they cant decide which school uniforms they wanted to wear.

School uniforms are on the one side good because a lot of children are victims of bullying because some of theme haven’t enough money to buy expensive and nice clothes. In this case the school uniform is very practically and maybe a good problem-solving.

On the other side pupils cant find our style and have to wear clothes that they don’t wanted. School uniforms can be nice but not every day ,It quickly becomes boring .However, there are people around the world for which it is too expensive ,always to buy a school uniform. Children grow fast and because of that they have to buy an again and again. We must take into account that the school uniform is maybe expensive but the clothes that the kids need for school is not cheaper and they have to be buy again and again, too.

On the other hand if the pupils wear school uniforms there is not a difference between rich and poor.

I have come to the conclusion that school uniforms are not everywhere positive and children should be able to develop their own style. Cause the bully is not reduced by a school uniform.

...zur Frage

Was möchtest Du wissen?

Deine Frage stellen