Mardi 1 avril 2014 2 01 /04 /Avr /2014 10:04

IF - CLAUSES

type

condition

I

condition possible to fulfill

II

condition in theory possible to fulfill

III

condition not possible to fulfill (too late)

Form

type

if clause

main clause

I

Simple Present

will-future (or Modal + infinitive)

II

Simple Past

would + infinitive *

III

Past Perfect

would + have + past participle *

Examples (if-clause at the beginning)

type

if clause

main clause

I

If I study,

I will pass the exam.

II

If I studied,

I would pass the exam.

III

If I had studied,

I would have passed the exam.

Examples (if-clause at the end)

type

main clause

if-clause

I

I will pass the exam

if I study.

II

I would pass the exam

if I studied.

III

I would have passed the exam

if I had studied.

Examples (affirmative and negative sentences)

type

 

Examples

   

long forms

short/contracted forms

I

+

If I study, I will pass the exam.

If I study, I'll pass the exam.

-

If I study, I will not fail the exam.
If I do not study, I will fail the exam.

If I study, I won't fail the exam.
If I don't study, I'll fail the exam.

II

+

If I studied, I would pass the exam.

If I studied, I'd pass the exam.

-

If I studied, I would not fail the exam.
If I did not study, I would fail the exam.

If I studied, I wouldn't fail the exam.
If I didn't study, I'd fail the exam.

III

+

If I had studied, I would have passed the exam.

If I'd studied, I'd have passed the exam.

-

If I had studied, I would not have failed the exam.
If I had not studied, I would have failed the exam.

If I'd studied, I wouldn't have failed the exam.
If I hadn't studied, I'd have failed the exam.

* We can substitute could or might for would (should, may or must are sometimes possible, too).

I would pass the exam.

I could pass the exam.

I might pass the exam.

I may pass the exam.

I should pass the exam.

I must pass the exam.

Par christinegerardin.over-blog.com - Publié dans : GRAMMAR
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Dimanche 30 mars 2014 7 30 /03 /Mars /2014 16:53
ADVERTISING IN MAGAZINES ALLOWS YOU TO DEEPLY CONNECT WITH CONSUMERS
 
 
 
REPORT SHOWS TOBACCO ADS TARGET TEENS
 
 
 
SOCIAL NETWORKING WORKFORCE DANGERS
 
THE AXIA PUBLIC RELATIONS FIRM:BENETTON CLOTHIG COMMERCIAL
 
EMPLOYERS SCRUTINIZING THE SOCIAL MEDIA OF JOB APPLICANTS
 
COULD YOUR FACEBOOK PROFILE WIN OR LOSE YOU THE JOB
 
 
THE FUTURE OF RETAIL: THE PLAYGROUND FOR THE MILENNIAL
 
THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL ADVERTISING ON CHILDREN
 
 
SAO PAULO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BAN
 
 
 
 
SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS IMPACT JOB SEEKERS

 
 
 
 
 
 
Par christinegerardin.over-blog.com - Publié dans : BTS
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Mardi 11 mars 2014 2 11 /03 /Mars /2014 09:42

Princess Diana: Editors admit guilt over death

5:50PM BST 21 Aug 2007

The editors of the three biggest selling tabloid newspapers at the time of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales have disclosed for the first time their own share of guilt over the accident that killed her.

The editors of The Sun, Daily Mirror and News of the World have conceded that they had helped create an atmosphere in which the paparazzi, who were chasing Diana when her car crashed in a Paris underpass, were out of control.

Phil Hall, who was editor of the News of the World, said it was a circle of culpability involving the readers who demanded more photographs, the photographers who chased her and the newspapers that published the pictures.

"A big Diana story could add 150,000 sales. So we were all responsible," he said.

Mr Hall, speaking on the ITV1 documentary Diana’s Last Summer, said: "I felt huge responsibility for what happened and I think everyone in the media did.

"If the paparazzi hadn’t been following her the car wouldn’t have been speeding and, you know, the accident may never have happened."

He said the princess had often tipped off his newspaper about photo opportunities and invited his executives to lunch at Kensington Palace. "She wanted to try to be on the front foot over her media coverage," he said.

After the death of the princess in Aug 1997, the tabloids said they would ban photographs taken by the paparazzi.

The Sunday Mirror bought the paparazzi pictures, published three weeks before the princess’s death, which first showed the seriousness of her liaison with Dodi Fayed and encouraged the Paris chase.

Stuart Higgins, who edited The Sun, told The Daily Telegraph: "The death of Princess Diana was the most tragic story during my period as editor. I have often questioned my role, the paper’s role and the media’s role generally in her death and the events leading up to it.

"The tabloids created a frenzy and appetite around Diana. But in the end I believe it was just a terrible accident, caused by a drunken driver and possibly because of the lack of the high level of police and security protection that she had enjoyed previously."

Patrick Jephson, her former private secretary, said: "They would chase the royal motorcade on motorcycles. They had pillion passengers carrying heavy television cameras. It all contributed to the sense of being inside a Wild West stagecoach while bandits were attacking it."

Piers Morgan, the then editor of the Daily Mirror, accepted that as editors they had not done enough to curb the wilder excesses of freelance photographers. He said: "Everyone working on national newspapers, in the first few days after she died, felt a collective sense that the paparazzi were out of control in relation to Diana. She was the biggest celebrity we have ever seen and it got completely out of hand."

Asked if it had changed, he said: "No one person attracts the attention she used to. I don’t think any single human being had more fascination to the public, was more intruded upon, or when it suited colluded more."

Mr Morgan said the princess had no choice but to try to dictate some of the media coverage. "I went to lunch with her at Kensington Palace. She pointed out of a window showing me 12 vans and motorbikes from foreign media organisations. That was her daily life. You realised although she did collude she did not have much choice."

He said her death was a "ghastly accident" but added: "We in the media were culpable in allowing the paparazzi to become ridiculously over the top."

Diana's Last Summer will be shown on Wednesday at 9pm on ITV1.

 

Par christinegerardin.over-blog.com - Publié dans : SECONDES
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Mardi 11 mars 2014 2 11 /03 /Mars /2014 09:22

Utilisation des verbes à double complément

 

Cas général

 

En anglais, comme en français, certains verbes se construisent avec deux compléments : le complément d’objet direct (= direct object), un complément d’objet indirect ou complément d’attribution (= indirect object).
Selon la manière dont sont placés ces compléments et l’élément que l’on veut mettre en valeur, il est possible de former une proposition avec ces verbes de deux manières différentes.

 

1ère forme : Lorsque le verbe est suivi du COD (répondant à la question « qui?/quoi? ») , le COI (répondant à la question « à qui?/à quoi? ») sera précédé de la préposition « to« . C’est la même forme qu’en français.
C’est le COI qui est mis en valeur.

 

Ex : Kelly gave her address to the policeman. = Kelly a donné son adresse au policier.
We bring a gift to your sister. = Nous apportons un cadeau à ta soeur.
2ème forme : Lorsque le verbe est suivi du COI, il ne sera pas introduit par une préposition et sera suivi directement par le COD sans préposition.
C’est le COD qui est mis en valeur.

 

Ex : Kelly gave the policeman her address. = Kelly a donné son adresse au policier.
We bring your sister a present. = Nous apportons un cadeau à ta soeur.

 

Pronom (COD)

 

Lorsque l’on a un pronom comme « it » ou « this/that » en tant que COD, on utilisera uniquement la première forme.

 

Ex : Kelly l’a donné à un policier. = Kelly gave it to the policeman. (mais pas « Kelly gave the policeman it. »)
Nous apportons cela à ta soeur.
= We bring this to your sister. (mais pas « We bring your sister this. »)

 

Pronoms personnels (COI)

 

Lorsque l’on a un pronom personnel en tant que COI, on utilisera la deuxième forme.

 

Kelly gave him her address. = Kelly lui a donné son adresse.
We bring her a present. = Nous lui apportons un cadeau.

 

COD et COI = pronoms

 

Cependant, lorsque les deux compléments sont des pronoms, on utilisera la première forme.

 

Ex : Kelly gave it to him. = Elle la lui a donné.
We bring this to her. = Nous lui avons apporté cela.

 

La forme passif

 

A la forme passive, le COI de la phrase active devient le sujet.

 

Ex : Somebody gave her address to the policeman. = Somebody gave the policeman her address. = The policeman was given her address .
Somebody bring a present to your sister. = Somebody bring your sister a present. = Your sister is brought a presen

 

 

 

Verbes avec deux compléments

 

 Ex : They're telling their readers the truth / They're telling the truth to their readers

BUT : They're telling them the truth

 

Certains verbes peuvent être suivis de deux compléments d'objet: l'un direct (COD) l'autre indirect (COI) . Il y a généralement deux constructions de phrase possibles.

 

Exemple:

Je dois envoyer une carte à ma soeur

 

1) I must send a card to my sister (construction analogue à celle de la phrase en français)

2) I must send my sister a card ( le COI précède le COD et dans ce cas il n'y a plus de préposition )

construction 1) Sujet - Verbe - COD - préposition - COI

construction 2) Sujet - verbe - COI - COD

 

Autre exemple:

 

Je vais donner un livre intéressant à mes enfants

1) I'll give an interesting book to my children

2) I'll give my children an interesting book

 

Verbes qui peuvent être employés avec deux compléments:

 

bring lend pass refuse take buy make play send tell give offer promise show wish leave owe read sing write...

Remarque:

 

La construction 1) avec préposition ne s'emploie guère lorsque le complément indirect est un pronom.

Elle m'a envoyé une lettre: on dira 'she sent me a letter' et non 'she sent a letter to me'.

 

Attention:

 

Certains verbes ne sont 'jamais' directement suivis d'un complément indirect.

explain: 'He explained the game to his friends ' et non 'he explained his friends the game'

explain something to somebody

 

hide: I hid the money from the burglars.

describe: describe somebody / something to somebody

 

say: I said 'no' to him

suggest: 'Can you suggest a good dictionary to me' et non 'Can you suggest me a good dictionary'

open: Open the door for me please.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Par christinegerardin.over-blog.com - Publié dans : GRAMMAR
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Lundi 3 février 2014 1 03 /02 /Fév /2014 11:12
IN THE 60s
IN THE 70s
IN THE 80s
IN THE 90s
IN 2000

IN 2011

Par christinegerardin.over-blog.com - Publié dans : BTS
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Créer un blog gratuit sur over-blog.com - Contact - C.G.U. - Rémunération en droits d'auteur - Signaler un abus - Articles les plus commentés