pros and cons of being vegetarian
Habe bald Englisch-Schularbeit und wollte fragen ob sich jemand meinen Text auf grammatikalische und rechtschreibliche Fehler ansehen könnte.
More and more people are following the movement of being vegetarian. Nearly three percent of the Europeans are vegetarian. Why do so many many people decide to follow this trend? In the following text I want to declare the pros and cons of being vegetarian.
On the one hand vegetarians tend to have lower body mass indexes and cholesterol levels. This fact explains why vegetarians do not die as often as other people on heart attacks. My friend Frank would be the ideal example for this. He is now 19 years old and since 3 years vegetarian. He had problems with his heart, especially the blood pressure. The change from meat to vegetables and fruits helped him to loose weight and bring down his blood pressure.
Moreover, the abdicate of meat also helps us to save our environment. Eating meat causes a lot of carbon dioxide, which is the main reason for the global warming. For instance, eating one pound of meat emits the same amount of greenhouse gasses as driving an SUV 40 miles.
All in all if you have problems with your heart or simply want to counter against the global warming the decrase of your meat consume can help a lot. This does not mean that you have to abdicate of meat, but vegetables and fruits would not be amiss.
Danke im Voraus:)
Sieht auf den ersten Blick ganz gut aus. Wenn man genauer hinschaut, lassen sich neben einigen kleinen sprachlichen auch inhaltliche bzw. logische Fehler finden:
Das "on heart attacks" (das eigentlich of heart attacks heissen müsste) würd ich vielleicht direkt nach "die" stellen.
Mit Dauern (3 years) benutzt man for, nicht since. Dann würd ich auch "He has been a vegetarian for 3 years now" schreiben und nicht "he is a vegetarian". Die Zeitform im Satz danach würd ich auch noch ändern.
"Abdicate" heisst abdanken und wird eher bei Königen als bei Fleisch verwendet. Wenn du's trotzdem nehmen willst: es heisst to abdicate sth. Das Fleischessen selbst verursacht gar kein Co2, höchstens die Tierhaltung, Futterherstellung etc.
Du schreibst ja am Anfang auch, dass du pros und cons zeigen willst. Von Argumenten gegen vegetarische Ernährung hab ich nichts gelesen. Vielleicht muss du auch noch kurz erklären, was "vegetarian" überhaupt heisst.
folgendes ist mir beim ersten, flüchtigen Durchlesen aufgefallen:
An increasing number of /More and more people are following the movement of being a vegetarian. Nearly three percent of the Europeans are vegetarians. Why do so many many people decide to follow this trend? In the following text I would like to discuss the pros and cons of being a vegetarian.
On the one hand, vegetarians tend to have lower body mass indexes and cholesterol levels. This fact explains why vegetarians do not die of heart attacks as often as other people. My friend Frank would be the ideal example (for this). He is now 19 years old and he has been a vegetarian for 3 years. He had problems with his heart, especially with his blood pressure. The change from meat to vegetables and fruit = Obst helped him to loose weight and bring down his blood pressure.
Moreover, going without meat (----) helps us to save our environment. Eating meat produces a lot of carbon dioxide, which is the main reason for (---) global warming. Eating one pound of meat, for instance, emits the same amount of greenhouse gases as going 40 miles in an SUV.
All in all, if you have problems with your heart or simply want to counter (--------) global warming**, reducing your meat consumption** can help a lot. This does not mean that you have to go without any meat at all. However, it would not be a mistaike / it would also be a good idea and healthy to eat vegetables and **fruit (s.o.). **be a miss ist hier der falsche Ausdruck
abdicate = verzichten (auf den Thron/die Krone) abdanken
Ich hoffe, ich habe nichts übersehen.
Ein großes Dankeschön an AstridDerPu und Taddhaeus
Eure Meinung zu meinem Essay - Happiness
Ich habe ein Essay geschrieben und würde gerne eure Meinung dazu wissen. Auf fehlerhinweise würde ich mich auch freuen. What is “happiness”? Since of the start of the human being, people were trying to reach happiness! In the different episodes of history, there were different ways for being happy. In today's world, we have many ways to achieve our happiness which depends on the personal perspective of every individual. In general, we can say that happiness is the inner state of well-being and satisfaction.
Let's start with something people like to discuss about. Do we need a high living standard, money, expensive cars and big mansions to be happy? Many people say that money does not play any role on how happy someone is. Away from this question, we have to know first, what happiness really is. If happiness is the inner state of well-being and satisfaction, then it has to come from inside. Every individual has his own emotions, his way of thinking and spiritual values. That means that no one can really say what happiness is and what happiness is not. Back to our question, if happiness does not depends on how much money you have, rich people might also be happy because they have a lot of money. For some people money is more important then humans and they love their cars and big villas more then people with who they can share their live. Satisfaction with that what they are and what they have is it what they need to be happy.
In direct comparison to the first argument and to the first definition of happiness we can take people who have a family, wife, children, or just people who means a lot to the person. Do they have to be happy? Maybe! They can be the kind of people who thinks that he do not need a lot of things around him, but a lot of humans who love him and of course he also might be not happy like the example in the first part of this essay. He might be a “things-lover”. So happiness always comes from the inner state of people and accords to the personal perspective of an individual. In psychology it is able to influence this inner state by hypnosis. If hypnosis can look into the inner state of people and change it, happiness and unhappiness must be something that we decide. We decide, whatever condition we are in, if we are happy or not.
In conclusion happiness is like we saw by examples of two different people nothing that we an define or decide, if someone is happy or not. It is not the money we have or the family and the people around us. It is what we think we need and what we think we do not need. We can change it whenever we want from an unhappy life to a happy and beautiful life or conversely.
Könnte sich bitte jemand meinen Englisch Aufsatz durchlesen und mir sagen ob er in Ordnung ist?
Advantages and disadvantages about being famous
Being famous is something many people dream about. However most of them just see the advantages of a famous life and forget about all the disadvantages which entails a life like this as well.
First of all, I want to discuss the advantages of being famous. It is true to say that as a celebrity, you get more attention and are mostly better treated than an ordinary person. Second, another major advantage is that you have the opportunity to travel around the whole world and meet many amazing people. Moreover, I should not forget to mention that as a famous person you earn a lot of money and therefor you can afford all the luxury.
The fact that many people know you is on the one hand an advantage but on the other hand also a disadvantage because you have very little privacy and you are often chased by paparazzi. Another disadvatage is that celebrities always have to try to be perfect because if they are not, they will be judged by many people for that.
All in all, I can say that a famous life is definitely not an easy one to live.
Ist die analyse (englisch ) so okay? BEWERTUNG BITTE!
hey ich hab mal ne analyse einer rede von ronald reagen geschrieben, wäre echt toll wenn ihr mir ien feedback geben könntet :)!
The speech "lets renew the compact" by ronald reagon is about renewing the compact and following the american dream. R.R. has made this speech ot get electet as a president. To be succesful with that he used many stilistsic devices to show how important it is that he got electet from the US. R.R: gets die audience's attention by showing his feelings and emotions which have made his speech so succesfull. Reagen starts with the history of america and what matters of being an american. he appeals to feelings and emotions by talking on a personal level. "(...) for the sake of this, our beloved and blessed land? together, let us make this a new beginning." (L.29-30) The speaker makes sure he is thankful for being elected as he said at the beginning:"with a deep awarnes of the responsibility conferred by your trust, I accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States." (L.5-9) He shows the crowd they can trust him and he belongs to them. Reagen uses also parallelisms to effect that people connect the words easier and make the speech easier to understand.:"(...) their lives, theirs fortune and their scared honor to found this nation." The words seem well choosen and effect to stand out. He points up that live, fortune an dthier scarced honor belongs to each other to effect their nation. Another paralellism is:let us make a commitment to care for the needy; to teach our children the virtues handed sown to us by our families; to have the courage to defend those values and virtues and the willingness to sacrifice for them." (L.31-32) with every new part he starts, the importance of the main content increases. Reagon also presents himself as a religious man:" (...) which God has granted as our portion of his creation." (L.33-34) This is again a good example to show that he talks on personal level to the people so they believe and trust him. He gives impressions that he s not someone special who has the intention to play with the crowd. Reagen stresses again that he belongs to the nation so they all are one. He infects that the crowd feels patriotism and a feeling of being a nation."there are no words to explain the extraordinary strength and character of this breed of people we call american."R.R. talks again about what they(The nation)calls american. Reagon uses accumulations when he said:(...)bound together in that community of shared values of family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom." The importance of the words become every time more meaning to the compact and american dream. reagon uses(usw da kommt noch so einiges) All in all the speech was very succesful and he used the stilistic devices smart. Ronald got elected because he really could touch the peolle and seemed so down to earth that he got the whole sympathy for the whole nation.(das ende passt nciht mehr so richtig rein, das reicht aber erst mal :)
Hallo könnte wer mein englisch Referat kontrollieren?
What is factory farming ?. Factory Farming is a way of producing meat and other animal products quickly and cheaply. The animals are kept in small cages. They get special food, so they are growing faster. The main products of this industry are meat, milk and eggs for human consumption. Advantages: Cheaper prices With the use of factory farms, the prices of food became very cheap. The main reason for this is that the food can be processed very fast. Also, the food for the animals is very cheap, because they buy it in mass orders. Enough animal products for the market Factory farms use vitamins, minerals, and other substances that make animals grow faster and so they can produce much more food. Big farms also have modern tools which helps to produce meat, milk, eggs and other products very quickly and in an efficient way.
Disadvantages: Very bad living conditions In many factory farms the animals are kept in small cages, where they don’t have any space to walk around and do what they naturally do. The animals are usually kept indoor, so they don’t get any fresh air or sun. The cages are not cleaned as often as it is necessary, so the living conditions for the animals are very bad.
Bad for people’s health Factory farms are bad for people’s health in two ways. One of these is the pollution what they produce, which harm the health of the people who are living next to them. The other way is through the antibiotics that they give their animals to make them immune against illnesses. These can be transmitted to people from the meat and other animal products.
Small farming businesses haven’t a chance against factory farms Many factory farms are owned by corporations, who have the possibility to buy modern tools, equipment and larger spaces for the animals. They’re able to sell their products at a lower price. Smaller farms usually don’t have the resources to buy faster and bigger machines and therefore they can’t compete with their larger rivals.
Hilfe englische Facharbeit!
Hallo Leute also ich muss meine Facharbeit nächste Woche abgeben und habe meine Einleitung gemacht, aber ich weiß nicht ob die oke ist und ob ich Fehler habe.. Fände es echt seeehr nett wenn ich korrigieren würdet :D
This Facharbeit is about the book Brick Lane by Monica Ali The main topic is the role of Fate in Nazneen´s struggle for self-determination. I chose this topic, because i think Fate is a serious topic for some people and i wanted to deal closer with this. Especially the view of other cultures interested me. I want to understand why other people think the way they think. In our society there are different views of everything and Fate is a topic about what you can talk so long. I am going to specialize of the role of Fate for the eastern people,Nazneen and the other characters in the book. For this first i am going to analyse what general fate means. Then I will deal with the role of fate in the book. At the end i am going to do a comparison about the view of fate with Nazneen and me. This comparison is good because you can see the difference of the view from a girl who was born in Europe and a girl who comes to Europe with eigtheen. This aspects are important and I chose them because I think they are the main aspects to understand what fate means for Nazneen and because Fate has a significant role in this book I think you must understand the role of Fate to understand Nazneen.
Englisch Text korriegieren
Hallo kann jemand folgenden Text korrigieren? Dankeschön Dear Ben Russell, I read your article “Credit cards to ration individuals' carbon use“, which is published in newspaper The Independent in July19,2006. First of all I want to say that I think it's very good that there are people like you who think about the environment and of course about the problems which are exist. The suggestion is that every body has a credit-card with Carbon Dioxide points and if someone travels, use electricity, gas or petrol with carbon rations they have to pay. There is a special amount of this points and if you need more than your personal cap you have to buy credits on the open market. On the other side if there are people who cut the pollution of the carbon they produce, they could sell their surplus. Mr Miliband also suggests that banning products like light bulbs or electrical appliances which waste power while on standby, have to forbid. Everyone have to make automatic payments of offset pollution. I think this credit cards are not a good idea, because there would be a discrimination, because on the one hand rich people wouldn't cut their consume because they have the money to buy this credits. The most of them wouldn't take care about the environment. On the other hand the poor people have to take care about their carbon use. They haven't got the money to buy new credits. The result would be that the poor people take care and the richer people don't take care. Now you can say that it's maybe not a completely good result but now there are a few people who take care. Better than no one. But what is if the poorer people have to use the car everyday because they have to drive to work. They have to pay that they are working. This wouldn't make work more attractive. The poorer people are disadvantaged. Another cause why this credit cards are not a good idea is that you can't control it. There would be a lot of situations where are disagreements. For example if people drive together to work. Now who have to pay with carbon for that? The driver or the other ones? Another fact is that you can't handle everything with money. Everyone has to pay that the environment become better. But money doesn't help. You can't stop the global warming with money. My idea is that there have to be recompenses for those people who do something against the environment problems. There have to be individual things, which make environment protection very attractive and also necessary. It's very important that everybody knows about the problems and the results if we go on like this. All in all I think it's very good that there are people who think about a solution and things that can be do to stop the global warming. Nevertheless I think the credit-cards and money wouldn't be a good solution