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.

Lernen, Schule, Grammatik
Singular they - warum so viel Widerstand von Deutschsprachigen?

Wenn es in Fragen um singular they geht oder singular they anderswo thematisiert wird, gibt es erstaunlich viele Beiträge, die die Existenz von singular they im Englischen abstreiten. Ja, teilweise geht es sogar so weit, dass einschlägige Quellen als "falsch" oder "ideologisch beeinflusst" bezeichnet werden.

Man liest dann "Argumente" und Aussagen wie

They ist Plural. He, she, it ist 3. Person Singular. In Deutsch "sie".
ich hatte ne 1 in Englisch
Ich spreche fließend Englisch und genau das wird mir von Muttersprachlern so gespiegelt.
Man liest es, meiner Meinung nach, nicht so häufig in "normalen" Medien. Also vor dem ganzen Genderwahn.
weil es grammatikalisch falsch ist

Dabei existiert singular they im Englischen schon seit Jahrhunderten, entwickelt sich seitdem stets weiter. So gibt es heute mindestens vier Anwendungsfälle, die zu unterscheiden sind (nach Conrod (2020)):

generic indefinite
Someone ran out of the classroom, but they forgot their backpack.
generic definite
The ideal student completes the homework, but not if they have an emergency.
specific definite ungendered
The math teacher is talented, but they hand back grades late.
specific definite gendered
James is great at laundry, but they never wash their dishes.

Woran liegt das? Warum sind gerade Personen, deren Erstsprache nicht Englisch ist, derart davon überzeugt, diesbezüglich den absoluten Durchblick zu haben?

Sprache, englische Grammatik, Gender, Grammatik, Pronomen

Meistgelesene Fragen zum Thema Grammatik