Category Archives: Tips & Help

Chinglish 2: ‘Understand’ & ‘Realise’

Mount Fuji, Japan.jpg

In the last post, I looked at (what I call) a ‘Chinglish Verb’. So, what’s a Chinglish Verb? It’s a verb in Chinese which has two verbs in English. Yes, English often makes it complicated by having two verbs for something which in Chinese is just one verb. This leads to ‘Chinglish’ mistakes.

Now, let’s look at:     understand    &    realise.

In Chinese, a single verb (sounding like ‘li-ow jie’) is used. In class, I often hear incorrect (‘Chinglish’) sentences such as:

1. I can never realise what they mean.

2. The teacher tried hard to make us realise.

3. I didn’t understand how upset she was.

Understand means ‘get it’ or ‘know’ or ‘perceive’, and often about thinking.

We need to better understand human nature

I don’t understand why you did that.

Realise means ‘to be aware of’, and is often about feeling.

She didn’t realise she was breaking a rule.

We realised we were in the wrong place.

Sometimes both verbs can be used – but often one of them is better, or more natural, than the other. One final word: the Americans spell ‘realise’ as ‘realize’.

So, look at the picture at the top. You probably realised this is Mount Fuji, Japan, but do you understand Japanese?

Got it?

Chinglish 1: make/let [Sth./Sb.] [Verb]

Pigeons feeding.jpg

In the last few posts, I’ve looked at some tricky pairs of words. I’ll continue to do this, but now I’ll look at the ones which are two verbs in English, but one verb in Chinese. Yes, English often makes it complicated by having two verbs for something which in Chinese is just one verb. This often leads to ‘Chinglish’ mistakes. Now, let’s look at:

make [st.] [verb] & … let [sth.] [verb].

In Chinese, a single verb (sounding like ‘rung’) is used. In class, I often hear incorrect (‘Chinglish’) sentences such as:

1. This can let countries become a mess.

2. The teacher makes us relax in class.

3. The girl let the man fall in love with her.

In the structure, let means ‘permit’ or ‘allow’, and is sort of nice. Make means ‘force’ or ‘compel’, and is often not so nice. English makes that difference.

So, look at the picture at the top. If you ran over to those birds, then you would make them fly away. But if you did nothing, then you let them eat in peace.

Got it?

Historic & Historical: Another Tricky Pair of Words

Pyramids.jpg

In the last three posts, I looked at tricky pairs of verbs: to irritate/aggravate, to lend/borrow, and to imply/infer. Now, I will do this again, but with some adjectives. Here’s a very tricky pair:

historic   &     historical.

There IS a difference, but (again) even native speakers of English might not know it. Which adjective – historic or historical – goes in the following gaps.

1. To know more about my dead grandfather, I need to do some _______ research.

2. If President Trump visits Taiwan, it will be a _______ visit.

3. The day the President arrives will be a _______ occasion.

4. Maybe I need to check the _______ records in the museum.

5. That castle is a _______ site.

6. My mother liked reading _______-romance novels.

7. If Taiwan beats China in table tennis, it will be a _______ victory.

8. Which _______ period interests you the most?

The answers are:

…. historic goes in 2, 3, 5, 7. This word means ‘is important in history; will be remembered’.

…. historical goes in 1, 4, 6, 8. This words just means ‘about history; related to history’.

So, look at the picture at the top. It shows a famous construction from the past, but is it a historic site, or a historical site? Well, following the above rules, you would probably say historic, but it is also a site related to history, meaning you could say historical. But historic is the best answer.

By the way, recently I was at a train station, and I saw a big sign for the tourists, which said, ‘Visit the historical Lai Family Residence‘, and I thought, ‘A ha, that’s not correct.’ Now you know why, right?

Dogs versus Cats: Imply & Infer

Dog team.jpg

In my last post, I wrote about the verbs to ‘lend’ and to ‘borrow’. These aren’t too hard (yet people still make mistakes with them). But here’s a harder couple of verbs: to ‘imply’ and ‘infer’. As with lend and borrow, these verbs have direction involved in them.

Let’s say that one of the dogs in the above picture is speaking aloud to a crowd of animals, which includes some big cats (e.g. lions). The dog up front says,

‘The average cat works for himself, whereas us dogs fully understand the importance of teamwork.’

One of the big cats in the audience might immediately think, ‘Hey, us lions cooperate when we hunt; we know all about teamwork.’ So,this cat says to this dog up front,

‘Are you implying that I, as a cat, can’t understand teamwork?’

The dog could answer,

‘I wasn’t implying anything. You were simply inferring the wrong message.’

Get it? The speaker implies (that is, suggests something without stating it outright). The listener infers (that is, imagines there is a hint or hidden meaning). As my example shows, it is possible for a listener (or reader) to infer something that was not implied by the speaker (or writer). Also, the noun ‘implication’ is quite common. So, that dog up front might have finished politely by saying,

‘Please don’t infer anything negative about this. There was no implication intended. I am well aware that you, Mr Big Cat, fully understand teamwork.’

Mr Big Cat feels a lot better now, right?

Lion.jpg

Friends, Romans, Countrymen, Lend Me Your Ears

Assassination of Julius Caesar.png

The title to this post is a famous line from Shakespeare’s play: Julius Caesar. The Roman leader, Julius Caesar, is murdered (as shown in the above picture), and afterwards Mark Antony tries to speak to the angry crowd, beginning with these famous words. But it reminds me of a problem I often hear in class regarding: to lend and to borrow something (usually money).

Students often mix these words up, making wrong sentences such as:

  • He lent the money from the bank.
  • I can borrow it to you, if you want.
  • Can I lend some money?

The trouble is that, in Chinese, you basically say the same for both: ‘jie chen’. In English, however, I

lend the money [to you].

And you

borrow the money [from me].

By the way, ‘loan’ is the noun from the verb, ‘to lend’. So, when you borrow money from the bank, you are getting a loan. Finally, you must ‘pay back’ or ‘return’ the money.

So, when Mark Antony asks the people to lend their ears to him, it means he wants to borrow their ears, which is just an interesting way of saying: ‘Everyone, listen to me!’ Got it?

‘Irritate’ versus ‘Aggravate’: there IS a Difference

Irritated cat.jpg

I was reading the online news today, when I came across the following sentence.

‘The fact that Floyd was in handcuffs aggravates the circumstances.’

This sentence made me think about the difference between: ‘irritate’ and ‘aggravate’. The second word is used correctly in the above sentence, but many native speakers of English often mix up these words, using them interchangeably. Look at the above picture of the cat. Does this animal look ‘irritated’ or ‘aggravated’? Answer: it looks irritated‘Irritate’ means to cause a bad reaction, to disturb, to annoy. ‘Aggravate’ means to make something worse. So, for example, you …

  • aggravate the situation, the problem, or the injury
  • irritate somebody by talking too loudly.

But here is a comment I read from ‘dictionary.com’.

If you use aggravate to mean ‘annoy’, no one will notice. That battle has been lost in all but the most formal writing. 

Yes, sadly, as I said before, many native speakers don’t seem to realise the difference between these words. However, you could show your knowledge, education, and intelligence by using them correctly, right?

A Useful Spelling Mnemonic: Separate the Rat!

rat-152162_1280.png

English spelling can be strange. Even if it is logical, there can be differences for no clear reason. I mean, if the plural of ‘mouse’ [see above picture] is ‘mice’, why isn’t the plural of ‘house’, ‘hice’? The plural is actually ‘houses’, but why? Answer: that’s just the way it is.

Speaking of mice (and their bigger relatives, rats) reminds me of another spelling difference which has always confused me. Consider the adjectives in the following two sentences.

He is a desperate criminal.

It’s a separate issue.

Do you notice the difference in the spelling? There a ‘e’ in the middle of the first adjective, and an ‘a’ in the second, but why? Answer: that’s just the way it is.

How do you remember the difference? Well, I always think, …. ‘sepArate the rAt.’ This is called a ‘mnemonic’ = a pattern of letters, words, or ideas to help people remember things.

But do you understand it? When you want to spell the word ‘separate’ (either as an adjective [a separate issue], or a verb [to separate things]), think ‘separate the rat’, and notice that ‘rat’ has an ‘a’ in the middle, and thus so does the word ‘separate’.

I hope this mnemonic helps.

Andrew 老師平日英文 (雅思) 課程即將開課

learn-64058_1920.jpg

Andrew老師資歷簡介:(證明文件http:// aisielts.com/about-om/about/ my-credentials/)

1. 澳洲墨爾本皇家理工學院教育學碩士

2. 擁有英國劍橋大學英語教學證書及文憑(1993)

3. 擁有英國劍橋大學英語教師訓練資格(2005), 臺灣唯一的教師訓練師

4. 1993年開始擔任英語教師,27年的雅思考試預備課程授課經驗,台灣最資深的雅思現任考官 (22年)

   任教過的國家有澳洲、委內瑞拉、泰國、韓國及臺灣

5. 曾任教於澳洲Monash大學語言中心與IELTS測驗研習中心

6. 出版6本雅思著作(Practical IELTS Strategies系列-說、讀、寫作一、寫作二、 模擬試題書Book1&2)

7.另外著有Promise Me, Promise Me和A Saharan Jaunt二本書

* Andrew老師在台灣曾經任教於輔仁大學、 長庚大學、長庚技術學院和私立奎山實驗高級中學。

1.平日雅思寫作和聽力課程 

上課時間 ~ 每週一三五晚上7–10:15 pm 

授課日期 ~ 8月31日至10月2日

課程時數 ~ 至少49個小時 ( 一堂課3hrs15mins共15堂課 )

學費 ~ 17500元 ( 每小時均價357元 + 兩本上課用書600元 )

 

2.平日雅思閱讀和口說課程

上課時間 ~ 每週二四晚上7–10:15 pm

授課日期 ~ 8月11日至9月10日 ( 可插班 )

課程時數 ~ 至少33個小時 ( 一堂課3hrs15mins共10堂課 )  

學費 ~ 11000元 ( 每小時均價333元 + 兩本上課用書600元 )

3.平日英文文法和字彙課程

上課時間 ~ 每週二四下午2–5:15 pm

授課日期 ~ 9月1日至10月1日

課程時數 ~ 至少33個小時 ( 一堂課3hrs15mins共10堂課 )  

學費 ~ 11000元 ( 每小時均價333元 ) + 講義費用100元

PS. 以上三個課程可以擇一報名也可以只選擇單一技巧報名,所有的課程都有團報優惠折扣,詳細課程訊息以及團報優惠規則請同學參考Andrew老師的網站aisielts.com

1. Next IELTS Courses starting this coming Monday (Term 6) // 2. New Online IELTS Correction Service

6. butterfly.jpg

Hello everyone.

The first question you may want to ask is … why is there a picture of a butterfly above? Well, no reason. It’s just a pretty picture for you! Why can’t I do that?

But notice how every detail of that butterfly fits together to make a beautiful object. You should appreciate the beauty of all that detail. In a way, that’s how an IELTS essay should be like: every word fitting together to make a piece of word with a clear message.

And that comment leads to …

Point One

… which is a reminder about the coming IELTS Course [and I’ll put it in Chinese to make it clearer].

 

思考看看自己有沒有意願參加接下來將於[Term 6] 7 月展開的一系列課程。快點加入吧! 

下一期課程有週間班

  • IELTS Writing & Listening Course [MWF]  (週一三五: 晚上7–10:15 pm) [開課 July 6th – August 7th].
  • IELTS Reading & Speaking Course [MWF]  (週二四: 晚上7–10:15 pm) [開課 July 7th – August 6th].

Sunday IELTS Skills Course  (Sun: 晚上9.30 am –5:15 pm) [開課 July 19th – October 4th].

So, that’s it. Oh, there’s one more thing.

天天提供免費試聽!

Yes, you can book to observe a class any time [and this is FREE]. This includes the first class of all the above courses. So, why don’t you come along just to watch the first class, then you can make the decision to join later, right. Remember, as we say in English, seeing is believing.

By the way:

  • we have very small classes,
  • we have a big room,
  • I disinfect the table tops every day,
  • I take everyone’s temperature before class,
  • Everyone must wash their hands before class.

… so don’t worry about Covid 19. So, see you in my class this coming Monday – your first step to IELTS success.

Click on www.aisielts.com for more details, or go to the Contacts page.

Now, here’s …

Point Two

which is about a new service: the IELTS Correction Service , where I bring all my skills conveniently to your computer through …

  1. online correction of IELTS Writings (Task One & Two),
  2. practice IELTS Speaking Tests (via skype), with feedback.

Instead of explaining it all here, why don’t you just click on the above link to find out the details.

When the mobs lets loose (& the statues crash down) ….

What do you think about the video above?

Statues are actually very easy to topple. Remember, they weren’t built to withstand lateral (= sideways) force. Statues stand upright, held down largely by their own weight. So, just climb up, put a rope around the top part, then all you need is a few people to pull on the rope, and the statue comes crashing down.

It’s happening all over America, and in other countries, too. Here’s a few questions for you.

  1. Do you think the people in this video are intelligent, or acting intelligently?
  2. Do you think they really care about ‘social justice’ or ‘black lives matter’?
  3. Did you understand their chants – that is, the words they were chanting?
  4. Do these chants reveal anything about them?
  5. Did you notice what they did afterward to the statue?
  6. Do you think there might be some people who do not want the statue pulled down (and what would happen if these people tried to say anything)?
  7. Why aren’t the police trying to stop this?
  8. How should society deal with statues which some people might not like?

Here are some answers (as I see it, of course).

[Question 1] These people are a mob, driven by mob instinct, and there is nothing intelligent in that. Mobs are, in fact, extremely dangerous. They are a huge unthinking group, in which no single individual takes responsibility for their own acts, and everyone is freed from the burden of thinking for themselves. This means that they can be led to do anything. Be very careful when facing a mob.

[2] The idea of ‘social justice’ and ‘black lives matter’ are good and true in the literal sense (= the dictionary meaning of the words); however, these concepts have transformed beyond this literal meaning. It has become a political cult, driven by destruction and hate (and not by intelligent thought).

[3] Here are the chants.

“We, we, we, are the revolution.”

“No cops, no KKK, no fascist USA.”

[4] These chants reveal a lot. Chanting an agreed set of words (= a ‘mantra’) helps the people who chant unite and bond as a cult/mob-members. The chants demand ‘revolution’, no police, and the desire to remake American society, which they call ‘fascist’. ‘Fascist’ (adj) means ….

putting nation and often race above the individual, headed by a dictator, who strictly controls society, and suppresses and kills anyone against them

So, does that describes America? Hmmm. I thought it was a democracy, with a constitution, laws, an election coming soon, and that there are state elections, local elections, and individual representation, and so on.

But the answer to Question 5 reveals a lot. The mob moved in on the broken statue, spitting on it, kicking it, and jumping on it. But, it’s just a lump of metal, you know? But that lump of metal has become the symbolic enemy. Cults need enemies, and these enemies needs to be not just destroyed, but also ritually humiliated. And that is what you see. Ritual humiliation of the symbolic enemy.

As for Question 6 & 7, there may be some who don’t want the statue pulled down, but remember what I said: mobs are extremely dangerous, so those who disagree won’t dare say anything, and for the same reason, the police have just given up. The mob is too large, and the cult (nurtured for years in universities and social media) is just too strong.

Finally, Question 8. If there is a statue which some do not like, they can organise into a group, inform local government of their views, state their aims, gather support from the media and other members of the public, and follow the rule of law.

Remember, bricks and broken glass eventually have to be picked up; graffiti has to be removed; windows and gutted buildings need to be rebuilt; goods and services need to be re-established. Society as a whole pays a price when mobs take over, and the instincts to riot and destroy are let loose. But that is a thinking response, and mobs don’t think.

Here are some of the words used in this post.

  • a statue
  • to topple
  • lateral
  • a chant
  • a burden
  • to be literal
  • a mantra
  • a cult
  • to be fascist
  • to suppress
  • a symbol // to be symbolic
  • a ritual // ritually
  • to nurture
  • graffiti
  • to be gutted

America’s First Amendment Right // Free speech

You hear a lot in America now about the ‘first amendment right’. People have this right in America. It’s written in legal documents. You hear people shout words such as,

“We are just exercising our first amendment right!”

“The government is violating our first amendment right!”

“You can’t stop us. This is our first amendment right!”

So, what is this ‘first amendment right’? Well, it goes something like this.

“[Government] shall make no law … [denying] the freedom of speech ….. or the right of the people peaceably to assemble … to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

There are many fancy words there, and I underlined two key terms. But what does all this mean in simpler terms? It basically means, as long as you are being peaceful, you have the right to march, protest, shout, and … well, make a nuisance of yourself in public to support your beliefs.

Hmmm. That’s very idealistic, and we do not live in an ideal world. For example, the American government enforced a ‘lockdown’ on society for three months, forcing everyone there to stay at home, and socially distance themselves. This obviously broke the first amendment right – but it was supposedly for the public good (despite the fact that it destroyed the jobs and income of tens of millions of Americans). Eventually some people protested, claiming the lockdown went against the first amendment right. These people were attacked, but now we have this enormous ‘Black Lives Matter’ (BLM) protests, which have totally ignored the lockdown, and have been encouraged by politicians and medical professions to do so, demonstrating an incredible hypocrisy, that sort of makes everyone look stupid. Well, it’s complicated, right?

But what about when the police move in on protestors? Doesn’t that break the first amendment right? The key is the term ‘peaceable/peaceful’. What is peaceful? The video above shows a peaceful protest, and the police simply faced off the protestors, and it all went fine. The protestors even respected the curfew. Wow, that was a nice protest.

But then you see the ‘peaceful protest turns ugly’ videos, or the ones where it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on. Is being ‘threatening’ considered being ‘peaceful’ or ‘non-peaceful’? It’s complicated.

Now let us consider those other words in the first amendment right: ‘freedom of speech’. Does America really have that right now? If anyone criticises the BLM movement or the protests in general, social-media players move into action, employers are contacted, and those who spoke freely are fired from their jobs, ostracised, and destroyed (as evil disgusting racists). There is no ‘freedom of speech’; there is only compelled speech. Yep, it’s complicated.

In the past, when we couldn’t explain something, we said it was caused by God. “How did we get here? Hmmm, God made us!” Today, in the current climate, when we can’t explain racial disparities in America, the BLM people say it is caused by white supremacy and racial oppression. “Why do so many blacks drop out of high school? Hmmm, it must be racism!”

The trouble is, if there is only one allowable explanation, there is no freedom of speech. More importantly, there is no freedom of action, and no one can make a real analysis, truly understand, or ever hope to solve, the original problems.

Yes, the ‘right to protest’ is in the first amendment, but so is ‘freedom of speech’ – and the second part is so important, and we are losing it right now.

It’s complicated, right?

Here are some of the words used in this post.

  • to violate
  • to assemble
  • to petition
  • a redress
  • a grievance
  • to be idealistic
  • hypocrisy
  • a curfew
  • to ostracise
  • to be compelled
  • a disparity
  • supremacy
  • oppression

6月20日英文課程免費試聽

“免費英文課試聽報名”

各位家長同學大家好,提供大家一堂免費 English Grammar and Vocabulary 課程的試聽😊

時間 ~ 6月20日週六下午2點到5點15分,中間會有10分鐘的下課時間。

師資 ~ Andrew Guilfoyle (Australian)

資歷簡介:(證明文件http:// aisielts.com/about-om/about/ my-credentials/)
1. 澳洲墨爾本皇家理工學院教育學碩士。
2. 擁有英國劍橋大學英語教學證書及文憑(1993)。
3. 擁有英國劍橋大學英語教師訓練資格(2005), 臺灣唯一的教師訓練師。
4. 1993年開始擔任英語教師,近27年的雅思考試預備課程授課經驗,任教過的國家有澳洲、委內瑞拉、泰國、韓國及臺灣。
5. 曾任教於澳洲Monash大學語言中心與IELTS測驗研習中心。
6. 出版6本雅思著作(Practical IELTS Strategies系列-說、讀、寫作一、寫作二、 模擬試題書Book1&2,雅思聽力書即將出版)。
7.另外著有Promise Me, Promise Me和A Saharan Jaunt二本書。

Andrew老師已經當了22年的考官 ( 台灣最資深的現任雅思考官,考官每兩年要重新受訓並通過考試,沒通過就會被淘汰 ),曾經任教於輔仁大學、 長庚大學和長庚技術學院,此外,老師曾經任教於韓國的某中學,也曾經在台北奎山實驗中學任教過。

對象 ~ 初中級英文程度。

報名方式 ~ 請email到我們的信箱 andrewsieltsstudio@gmail.com,請寫下你的年級 & 英文名字 ( 社會人士也可報名 ),限制人數8個人,謝謝😊!

地點 ~ 台北市大安區和平東路一段187之8號2樓華龍文理補習班 ( aisielts.com 請點入網站然後再點Location就可以看到教室的地址連結,謝謝!)

PS. 由於疫情的關係進教室之前老師會量額溫、教室課桌椅老師會消毒,每個學生進補習班之後要洗手哦!

What normal person does this? [Losing the plot.]

About 10 days ago, I began one of these posts with the comment, ‘Watching the above video, you might decide that America as a country has totally lost the plot.’

Hmmm. I think I need to use that comment again. Let’s analyse this video above. I want you to ask yourself the following 10 questions.

  1. Do you think this man (with the camera) really cares about racial equality?
  2. Do you think the woman does?
  3. What does the man care about?
  4. Does the man make clear his political views?
  5. Should the woman have bowed down?
  6. Is any apology meaningful if it is forced?
  7. What does the man actually want?
  8. Do you think his actions improve anything?
  9. How do you feel about these people involved?
  10. Is this video real, or was it staged?

The man with the camera appears to be white [we only see his hand, and only at the beginning]. It is interesting that in the comments section to this video (which I dowloaded from youtube), people unanimously reveal a total disgust at what they see, regarding it as actually anti-white racism of the worst sort. Some of these comments come from people claiming to be black, stating the obvious fact: that this is not what they want or expect white people to do.

Let me answer the questions as I see it.

[Question 10]: The video seems real enough to me, but [1] the man doesn’t care about anything except himself. [2] The woman is merely doing what is required to avoid a confrontation. [3] The man is showing narcissism, and only cares about signalling his virtue. [4] He admits he is an enemy to the current president, Donald Trump, indicating he has a strong political motive. [5] The woman should never have bowed, but … see [2]. [6] The apology is meaningless. [7] The man wants to exercise power over others, and can safely hide in the apparent virtue of what he is doing. [8] His actions do not improve anything; they only breed resentment and disgust. [9] I feel what almost everyone (of whatever skin colour) mentioned in the comments section to this video: a cringing distaste for both participants: to the man, for such a vulgar act of street intimation, and to the woman, for lowering herself in this way.

Ask yourself one last question: what normal person confronts a stranger on the street with a camera, and demands that this person bow and apologise for their skin colour/’white priviledge’? Think again about that ‘losing the plot’ opening to this post.

Here are some of the words used in this post.

  • to lose the plot
  • unanimous
  • disgust
  • virtue
  • narcissism
  • apparent
  • resentment
  • to be vulgar
  • to cringe
  • intimidation
  • to confront

Has America ‘lost the plot’?

Watching the above video, you might decide that America as a country has ‘lost the plot’. Supposedly this is a protest against police brutality and racial discrimination. But a close look at what is happening shows it has transformed into an orgy of mob violence, looting, and anarchy. [See the previous post for the meaning of those underlined words.]

So, are these actions from …

  • a few
  • some
  • half
  • or most

… of the people involved?

I can only say that, whatever the number/proportion is, those who perform such acts have completely lost sight of the original purpose – in fact, there is no purpose anymore (apart from robbery and personal gain). There are no demands, no defined outcomes, no constructive points, and nothing to look forward to. It is just criminal activity, and one reason it is happening is that, at the beginning, the leaders of the cities and states ordered the police not to interfere. When nothing happened after the first round of burning and looting, it was quickly realised that anybody could act with impunity. Then, these acts spread like a disease across America.

Those who do these acts are now part of an amorphous, anti-establishment, anti-capitalism revolt, where if you feel angry, aggrieved, disadvantaged, or unfairly treated by society, you can now take revenge by destruction and ritual humiliation on perceived enemies, all with impunity by virtue of the combined power of the mob.

But civil society and social progress is built upon peaceful dialogue. Yes, the status quo can be challenged, but it must be done peacefully, with respect to the rights of others, and with a view to improving society as a whole. When the rule of law breaks down, everything is lost, and the participants become as bad, or even worse, than those they are protesting, and the cost (as many have observed) to these communities will be enormous.

So, let us hope that those doing this are just a small proportion of those who are protesting. But the big question now is, what does America do about it? Order the police to stop it? The military? It’s a difficult question to answer.

Here are some of the words used in this post.

  • to lose the plot
  • brutality
  • brutal
  • an orgy
  • impunity
  • amorphous
  • status quo

What’s Going On in America? Time to think a bit.

When you see the above video, you might think ‘what’s going on in America?’ On the surface, it seems that the riots, destruction, and looting [See the previous post to understand these words], are all a protest against the horrible needless death of a innocent person at the hands of a callous and uncaring police officer. But some people, including myself, are beginning to question whether it is that simple. The facts are that the police officers involved will be charged, investigations are currently happening, and changes will be made in response to public pressure. So …… what’s going on?

Burning down your own neighbourhoods doesn’t help the people there, many of whom are black. Attacking police officers (some of whom could be black) who had nothing to do with original crime is unfair to those officers (most of whom are good people). Looting shops no longer links the protest to the original crime. Time to think more deeply abut this.

I certainly think there are many other factors involved. Here are some.

Factor One: Anti-police feeling.

Many people don’t like the police – some hate them. After all, the police stop them doing things. This is an opportunity to fight them. [And check Factor 7.]

Factor Two: Anti-society feelings.

Many people feel life is just unfair. The rich get richer; the poor get poorer, and nothing will ever change. This is an opportunity to express their frustration. [And check Factor 7.]

Factor Three: Anti-capitalism.

Related to the previous point, there are ‘socialists’, ‘communists’, and ‘anarchists‘ – that is, groups of people who have long believed society as it is today needs to be destroyed, and rebuilt in a different way. Now they see a good opportunity to do it. [And check Factor 7.]

Factor Four: Opportunism.

Hey, free stuff for everyone. Now you can smash a shop window, and just grap what you like. Great huh? [And check Factor 7.]

Factor Five: Frustration at the Covid-19 lockdown

For three months, most American cities have been ‘locked down’, with people told to stay at home. Many have seen their jobs, businesses, and livelihoods destroyed. Now, they have a ‘trigger‘ to release all that pent-up frustration. [And check Factor 7.]

Factor Six: Provocateurs.

Some people just like violence and destruction for the sake of violence and destruction. That’s why we have vandalism, hooliganism, and random acts of violence in society. So, these sorts of people go into the middle of a peaceful protests, and deliberately hurl a bottle (or a ‘molotov cocktail‘) at the police. The crowd cheer, the police respond with tear gas …. and that ‘provocateur‘ has managed to provoke everyone involved, changing a peaceful protest into a violence one. Yeahhhh!!!!

Factor Seven: Virtue Signalling

As I have indicated, this is always an underlying factor to almost everything. This is based on the human instinct of wanting to get people to regard you as more virtuous, or morally better than others. Anyone looting a shop can now shout, ‘I’m protesting decades of systematic racism and injustice against blacks in this country!’ But …… aren’t you just a vandal and thief, blatantly stealing other people’s property (and those other people could well be dark-skinned)? No, we are protesting decades of systematic …… etc. etc. 

If you disagree with them, or offer counter arguments, then you are ‘part of the problem’; you are racist, too. So… you agree with that police officer, do you? Uh-oh, back out, back out, no … but …..

Whatever the case, America has some tough problems to solve right now.

Here are some of the words I used. Look them up in a dictionary.

to be needless

to be callous

an anarchist

vandalism

hooliganism

to be random

to hurl

a molotov cocktail

provocateur

to be virtuous

By the way, check my website: www.aisielts.com.

Current News: Problems in America // An article to help your English

Let’s learn some English by looking at some current events – that is, events happening in the world right now.

Okay, look out the video above, which concerns the most important event happening right now. It’s a little hard to watch the beginning, when the police officer keeps holding down the man’s neck with his knee. My thoughts? The same as everyone else watching this. Why? Why? Why? 

  • Why hold him down? [He wasn’t being violent.]
  • Why do it for so long? [The man was no threat to anyone.]
  • Why put the knee to his neck? [The man was already handcuffed.]
  • Why just keep doing this? [There were three other officers to help.]
  • What were the police officers waiting for?
  • Why do this when you know you are being filmed?
  • Why do this when the bystanders themselves are warning the police officer that he is doing a dangerous thing, and that the man’s life was in danger?

Why? Why? Why?

Well, the video shows the results: nationwide riots across America. And arson and looting. And scenes of anarchy, all of which help no one. They probably hurt the poor and disadvantaged people the most. And the looters may simply be opportunistic types who have no real concern about what happened.

Yes, those ‘why’ questions may explain the violence, but the violence doesn’t help. These people are burning their own communities, looting the shops that serve them, and taking out their anger on ALL police officers. I’m sure almost all police officers would be equally appalled at what happened, and that many of them became police officers in order to help their communities. Now they are ALL blamed.

The police officers involved in this incident will obviously be charged, and almost certainly convicted, so we are left with that same ‘why’ question: why go violent?.

How about a peaceful march, at night, with candles, and a call for dialogue between police and the public? This world and this society we live in is certainly complicated.

Here is a list of the difficult words in this post and in the video.

to handcuff // handcuffs

a bystander

to riot // rioter

arson

to loot // a looter

anarchy

to be opportunistic

to be appalled

to be changed

to be convicted