Thursday, 30 August 2018

India wants to stop foreigners paying women to have babies

New legislation would lock foreigners out of the country's thriving but mostly unregulated fertility clinics, and limit surrogacy to Indian couples who have been married for more than five years and are unable to have children.

Even in these cases, a family member must serve as the surrogate.

Foreign minister Sushma Swaraj told reporters Wednesday that the proposed law would stop foreigners and gay couples hiring Indian surrogates.

She said there were too many instances of people abusing surrogacy, including couples who had abandoned unwanted children or babies born with disabilities.

India is a top destination for foreign medical tourists seeking surrogates -- often at very cheap prices. According to Swaraj, there are more than 2,000 fertility clinics currently operating in the country.


Critics say Indian women hired as surrogates are frequently abused, and they describe disreputable clinics as "rent-a-womb" operations. Last year, lawyer Jayashree Wad asked India's Supreme Court to ban commercial surrogacy, saying the practice amounts "to exploitation of women for commercial gains."


"In the process of surrogate motherhood, a commercial element is introduced and Indian women are exploited and substantial benefit is derived by doctors, hospitals and institutions involved in it," Wad told the court.

According to the medical journal The Lancet, having a child through surrogacy in India costs roughly $25,000, while the same service can cost up to 10 times as much in the United States.


Indian women hired as surrogate mothers are typically paid $5,000 to $7,000, while their counterparts in the U.S. command up to $25,000. Still, The Lancet notes that this is an "enormous sum" for poor Indian women who might make $300 in a typical year.


Advocates, meanwhile, said the government's decision to ban certain groups from fertility services, rather than implement better regulations, marked a "black day."
"This was a great industry. It has benefited thousands of couples," said Dr. Rita Bakshi, founder of International Fertility Centre and the director of a pro-surrogacy NGO. "If people can come to India for cataract or heart surgery, then what's wrong with this?"

The draft law has been approved by India's cabinet, and is expected to be debated in parliament later this year.

Taken from HERE.

More on this topic from CNN HERE.

And a video clip of a news item from 2013:


If this video does not play, you can find it HERE



Negotiating with Russians and Americans

Russians


  • It is said that Russians are great “sitters” during negotiations. Traditionally, Russians regard compromise as a sign of weakness. Some even see compromise as morally incorrect. Russians would rather out-sit the other negotiator—and gain more concessions from the other side.
  • Be certain that all members of your negotiating team know and agree on exactly what you want out of the deal. Write this down (perhaps adding a few “nice to haves” that can be given away later) and bring it with you. Do not show the Russians anything other than unity among your team.
  • Be factual and include all levels of technical detail.
  • “Final offers” are never final during initial negotiations. Be prepared to wait; the offer may be made more attractive if you can hold out.
  • Until you have a signed a formal agreement, do not get overconfident about the deal at hand. And never expect that you can renegotiate later for a better deal. This contract is as advantageous as you will ever get.
  • The Russians may request that some funds be paid to them directly in cash, or to an account in a foreign bank. This may be because of their historic concern over the oppressive Russian tax system and the rarity of being paid in cash. Be prepared to propose various options.
  • One Russian tactic is to allow (after long negotiations) the foreign partner to own 51 per cent of a joint venture. However, contracts usually require unanimity among the partners for major decisions anyway, so 51 per cent is not a controlling interest.
  • Include a clause requiring the joint venture partners to submit to arbitration in a neutral country if they can’t come to an agreement. Sweden is the most popular choice for third country arbitration.
  • Russian regulations represent the biggest liability to a successful joint venture. These regulations are in constant flux (reforms are being made all the time), so don’t count on your Russian partner to have a full grasp of the legal issues involved. Get your own expert in Russian law. Don’t be surprised when something you did yesterday is disallowed tomorrow; some laws are nebulous, and their interpretation is subject to change.
  • Appearances can be deceiving. Russian firms may look prosperous and full of potential. Select a partner based upon full knowledge of the assets it owns or controls.
  • Since it is not customary for Russians to disclose their home phone, or other personal telephone numbers, no official residential phone books are issued at all. However, various directories are produced, and many of them are accessible free on the Internet.
  • In many countries—such as Japan—people tend to respond to a question by saying “yes.” In the USSR the tendency used to be just the opposite; managers and bureaucrats said “no” at every opportunity. However, Russian executives now often say yes to proposals—even if they lack the authority to do so. They make promises to buy time, and expand the contacts they want with foreigners.
  • Historically, there were many reasons why Russians said no to business proposals. One was that innovation was traditionally discouraged. Also, Russians were afraid that if they gave the go-ahead and a project failed, they would be held responsible. Another reason had to do with the position of an individual in a rigid, hierarchical bureaucracy. You rarely met a Russian bureaucrat who had the power to push a project forward without the agreement of others. But one individual could cancel a project, all by himself or herself. Often, the ability to say no was the only real power many bureaucrats possessed; not surprisingly, they used it frequently.
  • Peace, international relations, the changes in Russia, and difficult economic situations are all common topics of conversation. People will ask what you think of Russia and what life is like in your home country.

Americans


  • Business is done at lightning speed in comparison to many cultures. U.S. salespeople may bring final contracts to their first meeting with prospective clients. In large firms, contracts under $10,000 can often be approved by one middle manager in one meeting.
  • Send all relevant information electronically to prospects prior to your visit, and be prepared to process invoices through their paperless online systems.
  • Appointments are made by e-mail, conferences are broadcast live over the Web, information and presentations are archived on corporate intranets so employees can access them worldwide at their leisure. Speakers and presenters should remember that their recorded words may ring over speakers, through the Web, for years to come.
  • Executives should keep up to date with new electronic gadgets and means of communications in the United States. Hot zones (wireless access) are proliferating; you can access e-mail and surf the net from a multitude of locations—including your aeroplane seat. The gadgets will only get faster and smaller, so stay current.
  • The use of handhelds, cell phones, and associated devices are common in business meetings. Taking calls while others are in the room can be highly irritating to international visitors—but be aware that it is common practice.
  • In response to an increase in the vehicular accident rate, some states (for example, New York and New Jersey) have made it illegal to talk on a hand-held cell phone while driving.
  • While knowing the right people and having many contacts in an industry is valuable, it is not seen as being as important for a salesperson as a good history of sales. Sales staff are evaluated and compensated on their “track records” rather than the potential for exploiting their contacts.
  • The “bottom line” (financial issues), new technology, and short-term rewards are the normal focus in negotiations.
  • U.S. executives begin talking about business after a very brief exchange of small talk, whether in the office, at a restaurant, or even at home.
  • Whether a colleague is a man or a woman should be ignored, except when it comes to personal questions. Women should not be asked if they are married. If a woman mentions that she is married, you should simply ask a few polite questions about her husband or children.
  • Remember that the United States is the most litigious society in the world. There are lawyers who specialize in every industry and segment of society, from corporate tax attorneys to “ambulance chasers” (personal injury lawyers).
  • The standard U.S. conversation starter is “What do you do?”—meaning “What kind of work do you do, and for whom?” This is not considered at all rude or boring. Actually, to many U.S. citizens, you are what you do.
  • Compliments are exchanged very often. They are often used as conversation starters. If you wish to chat with someone, you can compliment something that person has (e.g., clothing) or has done (a work or sports-related achievement).
  • Until you know a person well, avoid discussing religion, money, politics, or other controversial subjects (e.g., abortion, race, or sex discrimination).
  • Some common topics of conversation are a person’s job, travel, foods (and dieting), exercise, sports, music, movies, and books.
  • Before smoking, ask if anyone minds, or wait to see if others smoke. Smoking is generally prohibited in public places: in aeroplanes, office buildings, in stadiums, and even in bars. Large restaurants in some states usually have a section where smoking is permitted. Many hotels designate rooms as smoking and nonsmoking.
  • While business people always have business cards, they are not exchanged unless you want to contact the person later. Be sure to include your e-mail address, Web site, etc., on your card.
  • Your card will probably be put into a purse, wallet, or back pocket. People may write on your card as well. This is not meant to show disrespect.
Taken from the same source as the previous national profiles I've posted here.

Four Songs No.3

If you fancy it, listen to the three songs in this pack and offer a review of your favourite one (or as many as you want). Do some research and find a bit of biographical information about the band or the artist to make your review journalistic rather than just a personal response. Here is the third pack of three...

Caecille Norby - Life On Mars


It's a god-awful small affair 
To the girl with the mousy hair 
But her mummy is yelling "No" 
And her daddy has told her to go 

But her friend is nowhere to be seen 
Now she walks through her sunken dream 
To the seat with the clearest view 
And she's hooked to the silver screen 

But the film is a saddening bore 
For she's lived it ten times or more 
She could spit in the eyes of fools 
As they ask her to focus on 

Sailors fighting in the dance hall 
Oh man! Look at those cavemen go 
It's the freakiest show 
Take a look at the Lawman 
Beating up the wrong guy 
Oh man! Wonder if he'll ever know 
He's in the best selling show 
Is there life on Mars? 

It's on America's tortured brow 
That Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow 
Now the workers have struck for fame 
'Cause Lennon's on sale again 
See the mice in their million hordes 
From Ibiza to the Norfolk Broads 
Rule Britannia is out of bounds 
To my mother, my dog, and clowns 
But the film is a saddening bore 
'Cause I wrote it ten times or more 
It's about to be writ again 
As I ask you to focus on 

Sailors fighting in the dance hall 
Oh man! Look at those cavemen go 
It's the freakiest show 
Take a look at the Lawman 
Beating up the wrong guy 
Oh man! Wonder if he'll ever know 
He's in the best selling show 
Is there life on Mars?

=x=

Colin Hay - My Brilliant Feat



Did someone call my name?
Like a distant drum is beating
Or is it just another dream of long ago?
I dance again, I am spinning
In the light, I am living
And I can feel the power rushing through my veins
Once upon a time I could do no wrong
For the candle flickers, the flame is never gone

To my brilliant feat
They all pay heed
I hear the crowds roar oh so loudly

Is it a game of chance
Or merely circumstances
A jack to a king and back
Then you have to pay to play
The world it won't wait for you
It's got its own things to do
The sun's gotta rise and drive another night away
And as I listen to the silence
I can hear thunder in the distance

To my brilliant feat
I make grown men weep
And still my eyes grow oh so cloudy

Another performance...


He explains at the beginning that it's about George Best (see HERE)

=x=

Patti Smith - Summer Cannibals




I was down in Georgia
Nothing was as real
As the street beneath mu feet
Descending into air
The cauldron was a'bubbling
The flesh was lean
And the women moved forward
Like piranhas in a stream
They spread themselves before me
An offering so sweet
And they beckoned[x2]
Come on darling eat

[Chorus :]
Eat the summer cannibals
Eat eat eat
You eat the summer cannibals
Eat eat eat

They circled around me
Natives in a ring
And I saw their souls a'withering
Like snakes in chains
And they wrapped themselves around me
Ummm what a treat
And they rattled their tales
Hissing come on let's eat

[Chorus]

I felt a rising in my throat
The girls a'saying grace
And the air the vicious air
Pressed against my face
And it all got too damn much for me
Just got too damn rough
And I pushed away my plate
And said boys I've had enough
And I laid upon the table
Just another piece of meat
And I opened up my veins to them
And said come on eat

[Chorus]

[Outro:]
I was down in Georgia
Nothing was as real
As the street beneath mu feet
Descending into hell
So eat eat eat
Eat eat eat

=x=

Dresden Dolls - Backstabber
(this video is a little bit rude - watch it at your own risk - I do not endorse it officially)



the record goes from blue to gold 
so thank you for all your help 
I know you want to jump around 
but try to contain yourself 
you always struck me as the type to take it lightly 
but now you’re gonna have to shut your mouth or fight me… 

backstabber, backstabber…. 

you’re all alone you’re all over  
the popular magazines will never care what do you care 
you’re down with the Japanese 
but you’ve got no right to sit there saying I abuse it 
when you only sleep with girls who say they like your music 

backstabber backstabber backstabber backstabber
backstabber backstabber backstabber backstabber 

backstabber! hope grabber! 
greedy little fit haver! 
god, I feel for you, fool….. 
s**t lover! off brusher! 
jaded bitter joy crusher! 
failure has made you so cruel…. 

rotten to the core  
rotten to the core 

rotten like a crackwhore 
backing out out the backdoor 
show us what you’re good for 
stick it to the noise board 
come on join the bloodsport 
show us some support, still 
working at the drugstore 
is it because you’re A F****ING 
backstabber! hope grabber! 
greedy little fit haver! 
god, I feel for you, fool….. 
s**t lover! off brusher! 
jaded bitter joy crusher! 
failure has made you so cruel…. 
  
so don’t tell me what to write 
and don’t tell me that I’m wrong…… 
and don’t tell me not to reference my songs within my songs 

so here we go the open road 
is covered with taco stands 
and you can stop we’ll drop you off 
and write to you when we land 

BACKSTABBER!


Put on your music journalist hat. 

Pen and Computer

You can write only with your brain, but whether to process your thoughts with a computer or pen and paper is your first practical choice as a writer. I suppose it is still possible to ignore the computer and write just with pencil and paper. A surprising number of writers, including Martin Amis, A. S. Byatt, Ted Hughes, John Irving, Joyce Carol Oates, Susan Sontag, John Updike, and Edmund White prefer longhand for serious writing. But the advantages of the computer are so great that it seems almost irresponsible to pass them up. A computer greatly accelerates editing procedures, allowing you to take a piece through far more drafts than you could otherwise. On-screen correction is so easy that people of all ages find the process relaxing, even pleasurable. Computers give a sense of freedom from lasting error that no one who has experienced it will want to give up. I shall never forget the excitement I felt, twenty-five years ago, when I discovered that words had ceased to be indelible. So in this book, I shall take for granted that you will probably use a computer for some, if not all, the processes of writing.


Many people use a computer throughout and never feel the need to print out a hard copy. Mathematicians, in particular, produce papers and even books entirely onscreen. In principle, it is possible to write and publish electronically, without ever lifting a pen or pencil. For some, however, especially those engaged in literary work, this may not always be the way to get the most out of the computer.

Computers of the present generation have certain limitations, arising from the screen display, which for some people tend to complicate the process of writing long pieces. Even with the best flat-screen monitor, you can’t comfortably read long texts. And you can’t actively browse with any clear sense of where you are in the text.

Good writing depends on extensive reading, not only previous reading of other works but also frequent scans of your own piece, the one you’re working on. Yet if it runs to any considerable length, uninterrupted reading on-screen is difficult. A monitor’s field of view is necessarily local, limited to about 150 words—much less than a printed page. This is fine for drafting a postcard; but not for extensive reading or browsing. To scroll through successive screenfuls is hardly an adequate substitute: it is too fragmentary and remote from ordinary reading. In active browsing, you need to be able to skim or read a page or two here, check the index there, and jump back or forward at will, always aware of structure and proportion, always aware of each passage’s relation to the text as a whole.

Working by the screenful can have the unfortunate consequence of smoothing your writing prematurely. For onscreen correction is so easy that the grammar and word choices gel too soon, without enough consideration being given to the overall sequence or the underlying structure. Decisions about the piece as a whole may tend to be passed over so that the end result is polished enough, but boring: flat, shapeless, even garrulous.


Some have gone so far as to argue that the fluency and facility of composing on-screen are positively bad for writing since they make you forget the reader’s experience of your piece. The beautiful screen is supposed to delude us into a false consciousness, flattering us with the illusion that technical procedures (correction of typos, format changes, boilerplate insertions, rearrangement of phrases, and the like) can do it all by magic. You cast wonderful

spells, but find they are somehow not enough. But the evidence for all this (cited by Edward Mendelson in a 1990 Academic Computing article) is no longer thought compelling. In any case, the remedy is a very simple one: any limitation you feel in the computer’s display can be overcome by printing out a hard copy. I shall assume, in fact, that you will work from printouts whenever you find it more convenient to do so.

Composing on-screen, revising as you go, is obviously fine for short letters, emails, and routine reports. But many people find that anything longer than 250 words or so—and certainly any competitive or ambitious piece that needs much thought—is better printed out for reading and drafting. For many writers, drafting is not a detour but the best way forward.


An additional reason for alternating screen and paper applies only to some writers, who find their thinking in front of a screen slower. After a time the computer has for them a dulling, even stupefying effect. Others report quite the reverse, finding that the computer’s pleasurability encourages thinking on-screen, as Michael Heim claims in Electric Language (1987). People differ; but it does no harm to take a break from the screen every half hour or so, for your circulation’s sake.

Some writers find it helps to jot down the earliest draft on paper, where they can vary the size of words for emphasis, use abbreviations, and resort to private symbols. Even illegible scribbles can be turned to account: paper writers can postpone resolution of ambiguities, defer grammatical structuring, delay lexical choices, allow their minds to explore vague surrounding associations, and perhaps encounter serendipities. For them, the computer closes off too many syntactic options, and calls for definitions of ideas that are still inchoate. Other writers, however, more at ease on the keyboard, value the rapid rearrangement and deletion that can be done on-screen. Inserts can go in as they come to mind, without the need for memos or post-its. In drafting, the choice between pen and keyboard may be partly a matter of age and partly of training and temperament.


At any rate, when you have reached the stage of a rough outline, you may want to print it out for ease of reading. Working with the draft on paper, you can read it more easily, and see whether each passage is proportioned and positioned where it should be. But don’t forget to have the latest draft on-screen, ready for you to slot in corrections, references, and new ideas.

Except for a complete beginner, computer spellchecks can waste time. They have a way of giving the correct spelling of the wrong word. Better to have a good dictionary on disk (or on your desk), and consult it for yourself. When you work on the final draft, though, a spellcheck sometimes finds inconsistencies. A grammar check, too, if it is a very good one, can be instructive. But again it is better still to learn some grammar. If you could have a program to write the whole piece for you without effort on your part, would you buy it? If the answer is yes, read no further.


Taken from “How to Write” by Alastair Fowler (Oxford University Press 2006)

Scams

Do you have any experience or knowledge of scams carried out on Indonesians? Tell us about them.



A tourist's point of view...


(I do not necessarily endorse all her attitudes and opinions.)

Thought Exercise ~ Future Poverty


Let's travel forward to a time not so far off: 30 years from now. Imagine you are a journalist who specializes in writing about culture, social issues and related government policies. Indonesia has become the sixth biggest economy in the world; its middle class and business elites are a match for those of other developed countries. What would you be writing about poverty and Indonesia's approach to it in 2048? (You need to imagine and speculate about the future in order to answer this question. Don't just talk about poverty in 2018.)

The library with no rules

Manila's Reading Club 2000 is a library like no other: it lets anyone borrow and then bring back or keep any of its thousands of books

Books, believes Hernando Guanlao, need to live. And they're only alive if they are being read. Thought and effort, time and money went into making them; they will never repay it lying idle in a cabinet or on a shelf. Books need to be set free. So walk by his home on Balagtas Street in Makati, downtown Manila, and it seems books are pretty much all you'll see. Thousands of them, on shelves and in crates outside on the pavement, piled high in the garage and on the stairs, each one free to anyone who wants it.

Hernando Guanlao, librarian, Manila

"People can borrow, take home, bring back or keep," says Guanlao, 60, a former tax accountant, ice-cream salesman and government employee known by all as Nanie. "Or they can share and pass on to another. But basically, they should just take, take!" Guanlao reckons books "have lives, and have to lead them. They have work to do. And the act of giving a book …it makes you complete. It makes your life meaningful and abundant."

Thankfully for Guanlao's faith in human nature, people also give – often people he has never previously met, or doesn't even see: they leave boxes of books outside his door. "What's taken gets replaced many times over," he says. "I don't keep an inventory. But there are a lot of books. They want to be read, so they come here."

The Reading Club 2000, as it is called, began 12 years ago as a tribute to Guanlao's late parents, both civil servants. "They gave me my love of reading," he says. "I wanted to honour them and to do some kind of community service. So I put my old books – and my brothers' and sisters', maybe 100 in all – outside, to see if anyone was interested."

It took a while for people to work out that this was, as Guanlao puts it, a library "open 24/7, and with no rules", but the scheme, offering everything from battered crime paperbacks to fashion magazines, technical manuals, arcane histories and school textbooks, is booming.

It is helped by the fact that despite a 1994 act pledging "reading centres throughout the country", the Philippines, with a population of 92 million, has fewer than 700 public libraries, and buying books is a luxury many cannot afford.

Fortunately, the Reading Club is spreading. Guanlao takes boxes of books into Manila's neighbourhoods himself, on a specially adapted book bike. He has also helped friends set up similar schemes at 10 other sites around the country, and inspired student book drives.

Aurora Verayo, from a town several hours drive from Manila, says she came to see Guanlao to donate books, but he persuaded her to open her own centre. "I'm going a step further and offering reading sessions for children," she says. "This is the start of a movement." Mark, a 16-year-old accountancy student at the Philippine Christian University in Manila, is organising a book drive with friends. "We've collected 90 books so far, and we expect many more," he says. "We're taking them to the barrios next month. Books open minds. A book can take you anywhere."

Taken from HERE.

The Comma


The comma is a much misused and often over used piece of punctuation. The complexity of its usage stems primarily from the fact that there are several different situations in which the comma is the correct piece of punctuation to use. The trick is to identify those situations so as not to use the comma in places where it really should not be.

The following are some of the situations in which a comma should be used:

1. To separate the elements in a list of three or more items.

  • The potion included gobstoppers, chewing gum, bran flakes and coleslaw.

There appears to be some debate about whether or not to include a comma to separate the last two items in the series. Personally I was taught to omit the comma before the final 'and' unless there is a danger that the last two items in the series will merge and become indistinguishable without the comma.

  • His favourite puddings were ice apple pie, rhubarb crumble, and jelly and ice cream.

In this sentence it is acceptable to use a comma after the word crumble in order to indicate that the jelly and ice cream is considered as a single item in the series. This is called the Oxford comma. There are occasions where it is definitely needed in order to avoid unnecessary confusion. In the sentence below, the inclusion of the Oxford comma would have avoided some confusion.

  • I dedicate this work to my parents, Marie Smith and God.


2. Before certain conjunctions.

A comma should be used before these conjunctions: and, but, for, nor, yet, or, so to separate two independent clauses. They are called co-ordinating conjunctions.

  • She was a fantastic cook, but would never be as good as her mother in law.
  • He hated his neighbours, so he never invited them round.

A common mistake is to put the comma after the conjunction.

It is not usually necessary or indeed correct to use a comma with the conjunction 'because'.

  • We all had to move to higher ground because the floodwaters were rising quickly.
  • She really didn't feel hungry because she had already eaten a hearty lunch.

However, there are occasions when a 'because clause' needs to be set off with a comma in order to avoid any confusion of meaning.


  • I knew she would not be hungry, because my sister works in a restaurant and had seen her eating a huge meal earlier in the day.

In this example the reason for the person in question not being hungry is nothing to do with the sister's working in a restaurant as might be indicated if the comma were omitted.


3. To separate introductory elements in a sentence.

Use a comma to separate introductory elements in a sentence from the main part of that sentence.

  • Given the appalling weather conditions, Michael was lucky to survive the storm.
  • As the night drew to a close, the clubbers wandered home.
  • Having mastered the use of the colon, it is important to make it work for you in your writing.

If the introductory element of the sentence is very short, it is permissible to omit the comma. If the introductory phrase is more than about three words, the comma is recommended.

  • Shortly we will be leaving for the port.
  • After his nap Sam felt a lot better.
  • After a deliciously long nap in his hammock, Sam felt a lot better.

If a brief introductory phrase, however short, is likely to merge with the rest of the sentence and confuse the reader, the comma is required.

  • Inside the house was a total mess.
  • Inside, the house was a total mess.
  • Until the summer lectures will take place in the main building
  • Until the summer, lectures will take place in the main building.

The comma is also required if the introductory phrase, however short, appears to modify the meaning of the sentence.

  • Sadly, the whole building was beginning to crumble.
  • On the other hand, the new extension looked fantastic.


4. To separate parenthetical elements in a sentence.

A comma is used to set off parenthetical elements in a sentence. The parenthetical element (also known as an aside) is part of the sentence that can be removed without changing the essential meaning of the sentence.
  • Sarah, the most intelligent pupil in the class, was always late for school.
  • The pyramids, one of the wonders of the ancient world, lie just outside Cairo.
If you are using a comma to do this, it is important that the aside is opened and closed with a comma. A common mistake is to omit the second comma.

If the parenthetical element in the sentence is closely identified with the subject the comma may not be necessary.

  • His wife Jill was a high flyer in the city.
  • Jill, his wife, was a high flyer in the city.

5. To separate direct speech or quoted elements from the rest of the sentence.

Commas are used to separate direct speech or quoted elements from the rest of a sentence. Use a comma to separate the quoted material from the rest of the sentence.

  • "That house there," he whispered, "is where I grew up."
  • "Give me the money," he snarled, "unless you want to meet your maker."

Note that a comma is not always needed in direct speech if another punctuation mark serves to separate the quoted element from the rest of the sentence. Look at the following example:

  • "Give me the money!" he snarled.

Take care to avoid the comma splice. Look at the following example:

  • "That cake looks delicious," she said. "Where can I get the recipe?"
  • "That cake looks delicious," she said, "Where can I get the recipe?"

The two quoted elements are separate sentences and as such need to be separated by a full stop. A comma alone is not enough.


6. Commas are used to separate elements in a sentence that express contrast.

He was first attracted by her money, not her stunning looks.

  • She is intelligent, not pretty.
  • He thought the building was enormous, but ugly.


7. Commas are used for typographical reasons to separate dates and years, towns and counties etc.

  • His home was in Streatham, East London.
  • My father was born on March 13, 1949.


8. Commas are used to separate several adjectives.

  • The old, ramshackle, dilapidated house had a charm of its own.
  • That rather dull-looking, badly-dressed, clumsy man is actually a university professor.

As a general rule, if you can put the word 'and' or 'or' between the adjectives, then the comma is appropriate. If you cannot, the comma should be omitted.

  • The little old house was in a beautiful wood.

The comma has specific uses and, like all punctuation marks, can make your writing more precise and persuasive. Many tutors and academics complain that the comma is over used or inappropriately used. Take good care that you do not simply sprinkle your work with commas without good reason. Many people think that a pause in reading is reason enough to insert a comma. I would advise against this and only use a comma if there is a more concrete reason for doing so.

Taken from HERE.

TRY TO APPLY THESE RULES TO EVERY BLOG COMMENT FROM NOW ON.

"Divided by a Common Language"

[Taken from a website that has disappeared!]

The Vocabulary Trap

Of course, when I arrived and saw the woman at the end of the platform wearing a red sweater, I understood my mistake. Playwright George Bernard Shaw claimed that "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." For most of us, the differences between American and British English are amusing but of no real consequence, except to make us hesitate when we go traveling (or is it travelling?). That may not always be the case, since sometimes individuals fall into the "vocabulary trap."

My neighbor is an Australian, married to an American. Every time her husband wrote "jelly" on the grocery list, she came home from the supermarket with a small box of fruit-flavored gelatin powder. She couldn't understand why he wrote "jelly" on the list when they already had six similar boxes in the cabinet. He couldn't understand why there were still no jars of jelly in the cabinet, since he was sure that he had put "jelly" on the list. See, vocabulary differences can lead to marital conflict.

There are other cases where the difference can have serious consequences. Consider this example: in American English, one billion = 1,000,000,000, or one thousand million. In British English, one billion = 1,000,000,000,000, or one million million. What the Americans call a billion, the British call a milliard. Imagine an American investor speaking to a British CEO: "I think we can manage a $1.5 billion investment in your company." The British CEO is going to be very surprised when the check has 3 fewer zeroes than expected!

=x=

Some resources for you on this topic...



This video uses a robot voice, right? What do you think?

=x=



=x=



Transcript of the podcast:

There is an old saying that America and Britain are “two nations divided by a common language.”

No one knows exactly who said this, but it reflects the way many Brits feel about American English. My British friend still tells me, “You don’t speak English. You speak American.”

But are American and British English really so different?

Vocabulary

The most noticeable difference between American and British English is vocabulary. There are hundreds of everyday words that are different. For example, Brits call the front of a car the bonnet, while Americans call it the hood.

Americans go on vacation, while Brits go on holidays, or hols.

New Yorkers live in apartments; Londoners live in flats.

There are far more examples than we can talk about here. Fortunately, most Americans and Brits can usually guess the meaning through the context of a sentence.

Collective nouns

There are a few grammatical differences between the two varieties of English. Let’s start with collective nouns. We use collective nouns to refer to a group of individuals.

In American English, collective nouns are singular. For example, staff refers to a group of employees; band refers to a group of musicians; team refers to a group of athletes. Americans would say, “The band is good.”

But in British English, collective nouns can be singular or plural. You might hear someone from Britain say, “The team are playing tonight” or “The team is playing tonight.”

Auxiliary verbs

Another grammar difference between American and British English relates to auxiliary verbs. Auxiliary verbs, also known as helping verbs, are verbs that help form a grammatical function. They “help” the main verb by adding information about time, modality and voice.

Let’s look at the auxiliary verb shall. Brits sometimes use shall to express the future.

For example, “I shall go home now.” Americans know what shall means, but rarely use it in conversation. It seems very formal. Americans would probably use “I will go home now.”

In question form, a Brit might say, “Shall we go now?” while an American would probably say, “Should we go now?”

When Americans want to express a lack of obligation, they use the helping verb do with negative not followed by need. “You do not need to come to work today.” Brits drop the helping verb and contract not. “You needn’t come to work today.”

Past tense verbs

You will also find some small differences with past forms of irregular verbs.

The past tense of learn in American English is learned. British English has the option of learned or learnt. The same rule applies to dreamed and dreamt, burned and burnt, leaned and leant.

Americans tend to use the –ed ending; Brits tend to use the -t ending.

In the past participle form, Americans tend to use the –en ending for some irregular verbs. For example, an American might say, “I have never gotten caught” whereas a Brit would say, “I have never got caught.” Americans use both got and gotten in the past participle. Brits only use got.

Don’t worry too much about these small differences in the past forms of irregular verbs. People in both countries can easily understand both ways, although Brits tend to think of the American way as incorrect.

Tag questions

A tag question is a grammatical form that turns a statement into a question. For example, “The whole situation is unfortunate, isn’t it?” or, “You don’t like him, do you?”

The tag includes a pronoun and its matching form of the verb be, have or do. Tag questions encourage people to respond and agree with the speaker. Americans use tag questions, too, but less often than Brits. You can learn more about tag questions on a previous episode of Everyday Grammar.

Spelling

There are hundreds of minor spelling differences between British and American English. You can thank American lexicographer Noah Webster for this. You might recognize Webster’s name from the dictionary that carries his name.

Noah Webster, an author, politician, and teacher, started an effort to reform English spelling in the late 1700s.

He was frustrated by the inconsistencies in English spelling. Webster wanted to spell words the way they sounded. Spelling reform was also a way for America to show its independence from England.

You can see Webster’s legacy in the American spelling of words like color (from colour), honor (from honour), and labor (from labour). Webster dropped the letter u from these words to make the spelling match the pronunciation.

Other Webster ideas failed, like a proposal to spell women as wimmen. Since Webster’s death in 1843, attempts to change spelling rules in American English have gone nowhere.

Not so different after all

British and American English have far more similarities than differences. We think the difference between American and British English is often exaggerated. If you can understand one style, you should be able to understand the other style.

With the exception of some regional dialects, most Brits and Americans can understand each other without too much difficulty. They watch each other’s TV shows, sing each other’s songs, and read each other’s books.

They even make fun of each other’s accents.

I’m Jill Robbins.

And I’m John Russell.

And I'm Claudia Milne.

Now it’s your turn. What style of English are you learning? Why did you choose it? Write to us in the comments section or on our Facebook page.

=x=

=x=


=x=

Download PDF:
(for those with a deeper interest in this linguistic topic)



=x=