miwa

Hi, everyone. Please evaluate my essay and help me. The expression never, never give up means to keep trying and never stop working for your goals. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. In my view, this word encourages to overcome the barriers that lie halfway to the end or to cheer up people as much as to talk people into going right on for it. I, therefore, do not completely agree with this statement. In Japan, around the 1970s, a series of comic strips that have much the same conception and plot were all the rage, where atheletic heros or heroins continue to train tirelessly day after day, aiming for their exalted goal like a win in tennis at the Winbledon. Their characters, in common, encountering difficulties and almost frustrated, start struggling violently to overcome them, and eventually they attain breakthrough with the spirit "never, never give up". In this way, whenever this word appears in a scene, the hero or heroine confront an obstable. Meanwhile, for what purpose we employ this phrase in real life? Math teachers may say to their pupils who have found trouble in figuring out a puzzling problem, "never, never give up". Alternatively, colleagues may approach, not knowing what was going wrong, their seemingly depressed counterpart and wisper, "never, never give up". In these acutual cases, while one prompts the other to keep on to the end, one undoubtedly mean to cheer up the other in a low mood. In summery, the word, "never, never give up" definitely is used to get people to go on for the end, but is also meant to encourage to get over an obstacle before people, or to cheer up frustrated people. Thus, I do not entirely support this statement.

"entity" is a countable noun.

Hi, everyone. Please evaluate my essay. Any kind is welcomed and much appreciated. #109. When people move to another country, some of them decide to follow the customs of the new country. Others prefer to keep their own customs. Compare these two choices. Which one do you prefer? Support your answer with specific details. I would like to live conformed to the customs of a new country because it benefit not only me but also everyone else. In case of sticking to the customs of my country in another country, I will be troubled or trouble the people. To illustrate, in Japan, my own country, there are publicbaths, where people must wash their body well before they get in the bathtub because of sharing a bathtub with others, and yet I hear from the manager of one that a Russian group of five got in the bathtub with soap bubbles remaining on all their body, and afterwards, they even drunk from a bottle of vodka, passing around them in trun! How much people around them had been annoyed? Thus holding the customs of my counrty anywhere in a foreign country can trouble the people. As is the later story, the manager sued them for this improper act, and forbade foreigners admission to it. Thus taking our customs as they are into a new country can even threaten to lead to the breach of a law and the depreciation of people from my country. I would, in effect, have to feel the necessity of modifing my way of living in the country. By contrust, in case of abiding by the customs of the country, I will get comfortable life. This attitude will offer me more opportunities to meet and mix with native people, and I can thereby get wider and deeper understanding of the people, culture, the very fabric of society. Conclusively, I will surely live in harmony with them and the society, which promises a more manageable life. Additionaly, this will also help me avoid the risk I have mentioned above. In summery, I would willingly comply with the customs of a new countryon behalf of both people in a new country and people in my country including me.

Hi, everyone. Please give me some comment. Thanks in advance. #134: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Children should be required to help with household tasks as soon as they are able to do so. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer Some menages regard study or play as what must take precedence over hosehold chores for children, while others impose the duty of being involved in housework on them from their early years. In my view, children should take on some household chores, as they have become equal to them, for the reasons below. A child is full of curiosity, receptive of new knowledge, and therefore readily absorbs everything around them. Thus, whatever kind it may be, the knowledge qualified and beneficial for them should be taught as much as possible within this period; the knowledge of housework is no exception, which carries basic knowledge richly children had better bear in mind. Let's look at the case of doing the cooking. It involves using a kitchen knife to cut vegetables and chop meat. A child who experienced with knives in the kitchen and at least once got their finger cut has taken more attention so as not to do so again, and will be good at dealing with cutlery of any kind as a result. Moreover, by undertaking a certain role in the family from their early years, children can gain confidence and identify themselves as an essential member of the family. There are children in the world who, like or not, take household chores. Most of them appear to get more firm conviction and confidence in their life. I see this as coming from their realization of their part in the family and fullfilment of duties, and confirmation of their necessity in the family. The involvement of housework thus gives children the feeling of being a important individual and make them self-confident. In summery, not just does participation in housework during childhood beneift a child in getting wiser. but also give them the feeling their being of great value. Therefore I support this statement.

"Rather" can be used to modify comparative degrees.

Hi, everyone. Please evaulate this essay. I will appriciate any comment in advance. It has been said, Not everything that is learned is contained in books Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your opinion which source is more important and why? Regrettably, reports have it that less American population has recently been engaged in reading books, and so have been Japanese. One of this causes seems that reading requires some time and effort; conversely we appear to accumulate knowledge in our real life relatively easily. In my view, because of their wider range and breadths of knowledge, knowledge in books are more valuable than that from experiences. We, indeed, owe very much to knowledge from experiences, but it is comparably readily gained, ( most of such knowledge are absorbed merely by seeing other's behavior accidentally, or asking close people such as parents, friends, or relatives ) and practiced in our everyday life unconsciously. As a case in point, there exists what is called "common knowledge", which we have acquired without any difficulty as we have come into contact with the world; we can select suitable clothes and behave ourselves to time and place. However, the usage of such knowledge can generally be used only applied to everyday life. On the other hand, knowledge treated in books ranges more widely from concrete to abstract, from general to special, or by foreigners or Japanese. From these unlimited choices to our purpose of use, we can select to learn more specific or profound knowledge, various views, or to be involved in fantastic imageries: hence the exaltation of our minds and acutual experiences. Moreover, we sometimes must need much concentration and labor to assimilate the meanings in a book. It is for the characteristics that I view knowledge from books as more important sources than from experiences. We can simply not gain such knowledge from our narrow surroundings of reality. Summing up, knowledge from experiences are easily got and used in day-to-day lives, whereas we can get deeper and wider knowledge from books sometimes involving mental labor, and the quality of books is the cause that I believe knowledge books carry is more valuable than that experiences offer.

Hi, everyone. 8.Cheap labor {scarcely was} in the cotton plantation {of the} American South, and {slavery} became {standard} practice. Answer is a) (was scarce) practice can be used as an uncountable noun. 11.{Rather} than {one relating} simple story from beginning {to end}, most epic poems {tend} to be episodic. Answer is b) (the one relating) In case modified by a clause or phrase or word, "one" needs "the".

Hi, boz. Below is my answer. 1)Who do you know better,_________________ ? a) her or his friend b) his friends or her c) his or her friend d) her or his Answer is b) 2)While they were away at the park, they let their neighbors use their patio set. a) While b) were away c) let d) use Nothing can seem wrong to me. 3)Because of the complexity of our modern machine, we need our workers _____________. a) to train specifiedly b) specified in training c) to have specified training d) training specified Anser is b) 4) Judging from fossil skeletons, the first mammals who lived in dinosaur-dominated forests must have been long-tailed, small and pointed-nosed. Anser is d) 5) The Empire State Building, though not as high, is elder than the World Trade Center in N.Y. Answer is b) (older) 6) Excess sodium in diet may lead to high blood pressure or hypertension, Answer is a)(excessive) a) a disease affecting one in four Americans b) one in four Americans are affected by this disease. Answer is a) (are¨is)

Hi,hsengoren. The answer is b), not d) Both "more" and "better" are of the comparative degree which cannot be used together, and since "better" is used here, we must use "than". Hence the answer is b).

Hi, all friends. Please give my essay some comments. I have been very sorry for not being given any advice.:( I earnestly want to improve my writing skill. Please help meeeeeeeeee!!!! Thaks all in advance. Some people prefer to eat at food stands or restaurants. Other people prefer to prepare and eat food at home. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. In my view, both have its advantages and disadvantages each, for instace, the former positively with conveninence, the latter generally with economy. Yet, of the two, for the reason below, I like eating out better than eating at home. The eating at home definitely some remarkable merits; firstly, it can cost us less especially for the large family. Secondly, it can make us take a more favorable balance in the nutrition of the meal. Thirdly, it gives us a feeling of safety in the ingredients, because it is composed only of materials we chose ourselves. However, the preparation of such a meal requires a long time for pondering on menu, gathering foodstuffs, and cooking, sometimes deprives me of spare time, and accordingly in order to save time, I have recently more and more tend to ready for a simplistic meal. Thus, having a meal at home can, indeed, endow us with these merits, but on the other hand, for me have turned out to be too cumbersome. In contrast, dishes served at restaurants or snack bars have a tendency to point out, almost a converse to the merits of ones at home; they are more likely to demand high expenditure, lack nutrients, cause anxiety about hygiene, an excess of fat, sugar, salt. Yet such costs and risks have lately become declined in my country, thanks to sharpp deflation and the realization of consumer needs of the competing food service industry for survive ; we can now have a healthful meal at a more reasonable price at those with the sanitary kitchen open to us. Moreover, restaurants with a fine view like that of dominating the sea make me diverted from the complexities of everyday life, thus the meal more delicious, a treat itself. In summery, though a meal at home can have some unmistakenable advantages, they are too hard for me to work out, while together with solving several problems, one at restaurants or food stands has an attraction that a meal at my own room never offers, a relaxing view. I, therefore, prefer dining out to eating at home.

Hi, Friends. Please give me some comments. I will much appriciate any kind of comment. Regrettably, reports have it that less American population has recently engaged in reading books, and so did Japanese. One of this causes seems that reading requires some time and effort, compared as we appear to accumulate knowledge in our real life unconsciously. In my view, because of their range and breadth of knowledge, knowledge in books are more valuable than from experiences. We, indeed, owe very much to knowledge from experiences, but it is relatively readily gained, ( most of such knowledge are absorbed merely by seeing other's behavior accidentally, or asking close people such as parents, friends, or relatives ) and practiced in our everyday life. As a case in point, there exists what is so called "common knowledge", which we have acquired without any difficulty as we have come into contact with the world; we can select suitable clothes and behave ourselves according to time and place. However, the usage of such knowledge is generally restricted only to everyday life. On the other hand, knowledge treated in books ranges more widely from concrete to abstract, from general to special, or by foreigner or Japanese. From these unlimited choices, we can select, according to the purpose of use, to learn more specific or profound knowledge, various views, or indulge in fantastic imageries: hence the exaltation of our minds and our acutual experiences. We can not only gain such knowledge in our narrow surroundings of reality, but we sometimes must take much concentration and labor to assimilate the meanings in a book. Yet it is for the characteristics that I view knowledge from books as more important sources than from experiences. Summing up, knowledge from experiences are easily got and used in day-to-day lives, whereas we can get deeper and wider knowledge from books involving our mental labor, and the quality of books is the cause that I believe the knowledge books carry is more invaluable than that experiences teach.

Hi, everyone.:o Please give me some comments. What would you want most in a friend-someone who is intelligent, someone who has a sense of humour or someone who is reliable? Which one of these choices is most important to you? Give specific reasons and examples to explain your choice. These qualities are all what I wish a friend of mine to have, an intelligent friend educating me, a humorous one encouraging me, a reliable one being counted on. Yet, of these traits, I find it essential that my friend have reliability. I have owed very much to friends of intelligence. They have so far helped me reach more witty ways of acquiring knowledge or learning skills. I, for instance, have been taught how to improve my English from one of my friends. Not only is his ability itself admireble, but the teaching mode was devised to easily understand, and my skill has become increased dramatically, as a result. Also, I have been helped almost as much from friends with a sense of humor. When I have been troubled and depressed, they have always said something like amusing me, thereby making me get over it. However, I regard reliability as the most important quality in my friends, because I believe true friendship evolves only from full trust in each other. In other words, I can only share with such friends something truly personal. Granting intelligence or a sense of humour to be definitely one of the desireble qualities, I am not inclined to bear my heart to an, if unreliable, friend at all because of my anxious about his or her exposure. Moreover, I have rarely ever met people of this quality. Therefore, I find this percious friendship must be preserved with great care. In conclusion, no doubt that intelligence and a sense of humour to be necessary, but yet for the reasons I have mentioned above, reliability is the most imperative than the other two to me.

Hi, everyone. please evaluate my essay. I earnestly hope my writing skill become improved. I will much appriciate your comments in advance. #149: Imagine that you have received some land to use as you wish. How would you use this land? Use specific details to explain your answer. Because I have long dreamed of the counrty life, here let me assume that I were given some land in the countryside, then, I would like to live in it, raising various vegetables and crops for self-sustenance. I have been living in the city, which I have found very competitive, stressful, and unhealthy. I therfore have gradually increased my interest toward rural life. In the city life, everything from moving, working, to even playing go on fast, restricted by time, and many people are intensely competing with their colleagues for higher position. I also have been long annoyed by the noise from vehicles because of living on the road, both which made me sick at one time. Only a perfect measure I can take as yet seems to leave the city. It would relieve my stress and improve health to live in a quiet environment of clean air without competitiveness. Moreover, foods we buy at the market every day become less secure in terms of ingredients, additives, or agricultural chemicals contained in them. In Japan, recently shiitake mushrooms imported form China have been found to sell with a great amount of agricultural chemical far beyond the standard set by the authorities. Regrettably, not only has this kind of report not been uncommon, but teach us that we have to take responsibility for the food we eat each. If I grew vegetables and crops such as spinatch, fungi, tomatoes, and rice, I could have them with confidence. Summing up, for escaping from my current circumstances, I would like to move to the land, and then cultivate vegetables and crops for making sure of safety in food I would be to eat.

Hi, everyone. I have troubled in composing this essay. I hope more people evaluate my essay. Some people spend their entire lives in one place. Others move a number of times throughout their lives, looking for a better job, house, community, or even climate. Which do you prefer: staying in one place or moving in search of another place? Use reasons and specific examples to support your opinion. Both attitudes have its advantages and disadvantages. Settlement in one place more likely offers stability, on the other hand, frequent moving bring excitement to us. Personally, I prefer a firm to unsettled life; therefore I would like to live in a fixed place. A new place can provide more opportunities to encounter something novel, which I have found exciting. I, for instance, like to talk to strangers because they have impressed me with their interesting ideas, some of which have found rooted in me, and eventually have partly altered my perspectives. Such invaluable experiences can come more in a fresh than a familiar place. However, so frequent changes in living place generally are followed by financial hardships; not only does moving itself cost a great deal, but steady incomes are hard to secure. In contrast, living through in the same place means that, in most cases, we can contact with limited numbers of people, see the almost invariable scenery, continue routine work. It will surely dull for most, and so have been I, too, living nearly in one region. However, I still prefer to remain in one place for the reason of the stability in finance and peace of mind it brings. While I have come to terms with such monotonous environments, I have established a more financially settled life as time has passed on, which I believe I have acquired thanks to staying in one place. By comparison, though moving place after place can give us priceless experiences more than remaining in one place, it can tend to be unstable. Because I lay more importance in my life on the steadiness, I like life in one place better than in many places.

Hi, everyone. This topic is too hard for me. I completed this essay with all difficulty. So, please give me comments kindly. You have received a gift of money. The money is enough to buy either a piece of jewelry you like or tickets to a concert you want to attend. Which would you buy? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer. Many women love jewerly, and so do I because it glitters in various ways, and I can feel very proud of wearing it. I prefer to buy a jewel if the money is earnd by myself. Yet in this case, I would buy tickets to a concert. First of all, receiving money as a present is an extraordinay opportunity for me because I am well over twenty and in the place of giving money or bear costs on everything to my younger people. Under such circumstances, I cannot help feeling a sense of duty for the mode of using money in the form of a gift; I must spend it in the way that I can show gratitude for the giver and share it with people such as my family or friends. Of the two suggested ways above, the latter would satisfy these ideas. The enough money to buy some tickets to a concert means that I can participate in it together with the giver and other people. By doing so, not only can I thank the giver implicitly, but also entertain the others attending, which create the feeling of acknowledgement in all, and therefore help make the concert more enjoyable and memorable. Moreover, I also will be filled with the self-compleancy of fulfilling my duty. I think it an intelligent way of dealing with such a present as an adult. To sum up, since I am obliged to use the money carefully taking account of others because of my age, I would choose to buy some tickets for a concert.