|
 |
Please, someone, correct my mistakes | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Questions About Your Target Languages |  | |
| masha_light Diglot Groupie Russian Federation Joined 5011 days ago 54 posts - 82 votes  Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 1 of 5 21 September 2010 at 8:20pm | IP Logged |
|
Here is the text which I've translated from Russian into English but I still have some doubts about it's correctness - in grammar and in the word's choice.
Please, someone help me to edit it... Don't pay attention to the subject of the article it's just a random topic with political vocabulary, nothing personal, only language. Thank you. The text: Recently the elections in Russia took place and it is a recurring theme for mass media both in our state and abroad. The case (the matter?) is is the interests of Mr Putin collided head-on with the interests of the west in (on/at?) coming (impending?) elections. The governing party of Mr Putin - United Russia - showed it's best side and won a landslide victory getting the maximum quantity of seats in the Parliament (of the parliamentory seats?). So UR is guaranteed to be returned for the third consequative term of office. It is necessary to note that in our state the system of proportional representation in (?) the government functions. In all, ten parties took part in the elections. In defiance (spite?) of the west's prognosis (forecasts?) two more parties managed to surmount the hurdles and to (?) get a sufficient quantity (reserve?) of votes to have magnificent influence over (on/upon?) the government. We want to hope that the parliament in its present strucrure (staff?) won't (doesn't) lose the folks' trust too soon. The day before the elections which took place on the second of December the mutual (reciprocal?) accusation of the neglect of the standards of democracy between Russia ant the west didn't stop (cease/end?). So the west analitics spoke about Russia's slide to arbitrary rule and that Mr Putin has restored the nation's self-respect and power of the state only thanks to soaring gas and oil prices. Such behavior of the west critics is rather typical, to intervene into (?) any states business became their habit a long time ago (long ago?). A (the?) week before the elections Mr Putin accused the opponents of United Russia of colluding with the west, the purpose of which is to weaken and divide the state in order to capture (seize?) and loot (plunder/pillage?) its energetic resources. In opinion of today president of Russia to oppose this party is akin to an act of treason. Retorting (objecting?) the west's accusation Mr Putin's supporters pleaded on (to?) the magnificent flaws of democracy which had taken place in European states and in the USA. When the poll was finished on the whole territory of the Russian Federation our government particularly emphasized that neither gerrymandering nor vote-rigging nor electoral fraud nor ballot boxes switch were registered. So far as the west representatives missed the opportunity to observe the poll on the polling stations there was nothing for them but to concentrate their attention on unimportant unprinciple (?) points of the elections. In particular the journalists icessantly discuss the fact that there was a great number of electors who abstained from voting and that (?) the turnout wasn't high. However it may be the elections were acknowledged (admitted?) to be legitimate and ***. *** - don't know how to translate, состоявшимися I'll be very gratefull if someone also explains me the difference between the words chosen by me and between the ones in brackets. Thanks. 1 person has voted this message useful | |
| Paskwc Pentaglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5473 days ago 450 posts - 624 votes Speaks: Hindi, Urdu*, Arabic (Levantine), French, English Studies: Persian, Spanish | Message 2 of 5 21 September 2010 at 8:56pm | IP Logged |
|
Recently the elections in Russia took place and it is a recurring theme for mass media
both in our state and abroad. The matter is the interests of Mr Putin collided head-on with the interests of the West in (the elections can’t be coming if they’ve already happened). The governing party of Mr Putin - United Russia - showed its best side and won a landslide victory getting the maximum quantity (wouldn’t the maximum quantity be all the seats?) of parliamentary seats. So UR is guaranteed to be returned for the third consecutive term of office. It is necessary to note that in our state, a system of proportional representation functions in the government. In all, ten parties took part in the elections. In contrast of the West's prognosis two more parties managed to surmount the hurdles and to receive a sufficient number of votes to have significant influence over the government. We want to hope that the parliament in its present condition doesn't lose the folks' trust too soon. The day before the elections which took place on the second of December mutual accusations of the neglect of democratic standards continued between Russia and the West. So the Western analysts spoke about Russia's slide to arbitrary rule and that Mr. Putin has restored the nation's self-respect and power of the state only thanks to soaring gas and oil prices. Such behaviour of Western critics is rather typical, to intervene in any states business became their habit long ago. The week before the elections Mr. Putin accused the opponents of United Russia of colluding with the West, with the intent to weaken and divide the state in order to control and exploit its energy resources. In today’s opinion for the president of Russia to oppose this party is akin to an act of treason. Responding to the West's accusations, Mr. Putin's supporters referenced the considerable shortcomings of democracy as it exists in various European states and the USA. When the polls closed across the whole of the Russian Federation our government particularly emphasized that neither gerrymandering, nor vote-rigging, nor electoral, fraud, nor ballot boxes switch were registered. So far, as Western representatives missed the opportunity to observe the election at the polling stations, there was nothing for them but to concentrate their attention on insignificant points of the elections. In particular the journalists incessantly discuss the fact that there was a great number of electors who abstained from voting and that the turnout wasn't high. However it may be the elections were recognized to be legitimate and ***. Case/matter/issue = can all mean the same thing in/on/at = use in coming/impending = they mean the same thing, but impending is awkward seats in Parl./ parl. seats = same meaning, better to use fewer words quantity/reserve/number = I prefer to use number, it is simpler structure/staff = I don't know what you meant here wont/doesn't = you are expressing a desire, use doesn't cease/end = end is more simple a/the = 'the week'is better because there is only one week in question capture/seize/control = capture and seize are very strong words; will the West literally walk in and occupy Russia? loot/plunder/pillage/exploit = same here, all very strong words retorting/objecting/responding = responding works best pleaded = I'm not sure what you meant here Altogether, pretty good. Edited by Paskwc on 22 September 2010 at 4:55am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |
| masha_light Diglot Groupie Russian Federation Joined 5011 days ago 54 posts - 82 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 3 of 5 21 September 2010 at 9:32pm | IP Logged |
|
"structure/staff = I don't know what you meant here"
In Russian version of the text"structure" would be close to "condition". "staff" - I doubted this word veeery much just found it in a dictionary.. :) "capture/seize/control = capture and seize are very strong words; will the West literally walk in and occupy Russia? loot/plunder/pillage/exploit = same here, all very strong words" Sometimes I can't feel the shade of meaning, that's the matter... :( "pleaded = I'm not sure what you meant here " I've misunderstood the meaning in a dictionary I consider. "supporters referenced" is just the one I meant Thank you very much, you've gave me such a great help! 1 person has voted this message useful | |
| zekecoma Senior Member United StatesRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5140 days ago 561 posts - 655 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German, Spanish | Message 4 of 5 25 September 2010 at 1:01pm | IP Logged |
|
I have to agree, you English is quite good, just need to work on understanding the
synonyms, that tend to give stronger meanings than the others. Take this for example. "I broke the vase" (basically you are in shock, that you broke the vase)" and "I destroyed the vase!" (basically can mean two thing, 1) You're admitting it, 2) You did it out of anger). Sorry if the is confusing. You can usually tell when a word has a strong meaning by the complexity of the word like these words "stuck up", "conceited", "superficial" which are all strong. Edited by zekecoma on 25 September 2010 at 1:02pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |
| masha_light Diglot Groupie Russian Federation Joined 5011 days ago 54 posts - 82 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 5 of 5 25 September 2010 at 8:42pm | IP Logged |
|
zekecoma, thank you, I'll make a note of your advice. =)
1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
