Look it up
NHẬP TỪ CẦN TRA VÀO Ô
Monday, May 19, 2014
If you are applying to university in an
English speaking country and English is not your first language, your
institution may require you to take a standardised test.
The similarities:
Both are English language tests aimed at pre-university students planning to make the step to higher education. Both evaluate how well you can combine your listening, reading, writing and speaking skills. You have to pay a fee to take both tests, for both it can vary depending on where exactly you take the test but expect to pay between $150 to $250.
The differences:
Although both tests ostensibly focus on the same thing, they do so in different ways, which is why so many students want to know which is better (and even more commonly, which is easier). One of the main differences is the speaking part of the test. For IELTS you are required to take this with an IELTS examiner face to face. For TOEFL the speaking test consists of six questions which you answer into a microphone. These are recorded and sent to an examiner to mark.
The scoring system is also different, with IELTS rating between 0 and 9, with halfway points in between. TOEFL gives a more numerical SAT-type grade, totalling your scores from all the areas. This gives an insight into another key difference. TOEFL is administered by the Educational Testing Service, a non-profit US based organisation, and conducts its test according to US English. IELTS is administered jointly by the British Council, the University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations and IDP Education Australia, and conducts its test in UK English. While the differences are not as great as some assume, accents and spelling variations can cause a problem for some students.
So which is better?
The answer really depends on you; what kind of learner you are and where you want to study. The question of which is easier is largely irrelevant as both tests will grade you accurately according to your level of English. TOEFL may tend to favour more abstract learners as many of the questions are multiple choice whereas IELTS may be more suited to concrete learners as it involves memory recall. The face to face speaking section of the IELTS may be daunting to some candidates who would be more comfortable speaking into a microphone.
Finally, it may be necessary to check that your chosen institution accepts the test. Although both are accepted at more than 6,000 institutions and organizations worldwide, so there is a fairly good chance you will be able to use either, it is always necessary to check beforehand.
IELTS, International English Language Testing System
IELTS is an English Language Proficiency test that is required to be taken by non-native students for study in countries where the medium of instruction is English.IELTS is accepted by universities in UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. It has become a mandatory test for study in Australia.
You cannot be granted an Australian student visa without an IELTS score, TOEFL is not accepted.
All other study destinations either require you to take the TOEFL or IELTS. IELTS is however not accepted by most universities in USA. In many Canadian Universities either of IELTS/TOEFL would work.
IELTS is accepted by most Australian, British, Canadian and New Zealand academic institutions. American academic institutions are increasingly accepting IELTS for admissions purposes.
- IELTS assesses your English language ability. A good score (usually 6.0 and above) is an entry requirement for many colleges and universities worldwide.
- You can repeat the test as often as you like, but only at intervals of at least 90 days between test dates.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Saturday, May 17, 2014
By Brad Reed
May 16, 2014 9:45 PM
Living in the desert no longer has to mean being parched for drinking water. MIT
has posted a video this month that shows how some researchers from its
School of Engineering are working with researchers at the Pontificial
University of Chile in Santiago to design a system for collecting fresh
drinking water from fog that regularly rolls through Chile’s otherwise
arid coastal region.
The researchers created a series of suspended mesh
structures that they’ve strategically placed on top of hills and angle
toward locations where fog typically blows in from the ocean. As the fog
comes through, the webbing in the structures captures small droplets of
water and filters them down into a collection silo. While the
scientists have mastered the basics of capturing water from fog with
this kind of mesh structure, they’re now experimenting with changing the
“variations in the mesh spacing as well as the size and the wettability
of the fibers in the mesh” to maximize its efficiency.
MIT estimates that there is
around 10 billion cubic meters of potential fog water produced every
year along the Chilean coast and it says its goal is to harvest at least
4% of it, which could provide drinking water for the entire region.
AP | by CHRIS BRUMMITT
HANOI, Vietnam (AP) — Vietnam's prime minister ordered an end Saturday to all "illegal protests" in the country after a week of violent demonstrations against China's deployment of an oil rig in a disputed section of the South China Sea.
Last weekend, Vietnam's government took the unusual step of allowing anti-China street protests — a move widely seen as way for the authoritarian state to show its displeasure with Beijing for positioning the oil rig on May 1 in strategic waters claimed by both countries.
In a text message to millions of people on Saturday, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said the Ministry of Public Security and provincial governments had been ordered to "conduct concerted and determined measures not to allow illegal protests that cause security and social order disturbances."
All protests are technically illegal in Vietnam.
The message appears to represent a shift in government policy regarding the anti-China protests. On Thursday, Dung sent a text message calling for heightened patriotism.
Nationalist and dissident groups, which are also demanding basic democratic reforms that challenge Vietnam's Communist Party, have called for large protests on Sunday in front of the Chinese Embassy in Hanoi and in Ho Chi Minh City in southern Vietnam.
The public mood in Vietnam is currently anti-Beijing, and breaking up the rallies might reinforce dissident claims that the government is kowtowing to China. In the past, authorities have allowed small anti-China protests to take place for a limited period, and harassed journalists covering them.
The public unrest this past week was the most serious to hit Vietnam in years. Dozens of factories close to Ho Chi Minh City were trashed following peaceful anti-China protests by workers. In central Vietnam, a 1,000-strong mob stormed a steel mill, killing one Chinese worker and wounding hundreds more. Hundreds of Chinese and Taiwanese people have fled the country by land and air.
There has been no reported violence or major demonstrations since Thursday.
Earlier this month, Vietnam's government sent a flotilla to confront Chinese vessels protecting the oil rig, setting off a tense standoff. The government also has whipped up patriotic fervor via state media, undoubtedly swelling the numbers of protesters, while also trying to rally international support for its cause. The streets protests last weekend were the largest in years in Vietnam.
The government has condemned the violence, which it said was carried out by "extremists."
In a phone conversation Saturday with his Vietnamese counterpart, Chinese Public Security Minister Guo Shengkun urged Vietnam to protect Chinese companies and nationals, according to a statement posted on the ministry's website. Guo also demanded that Vietnam severely punish those involved in the violence.
In 2011, Chinese vessels cut a supply cable to a Vietnamese oil exploration vessel in the South China Sea, angering Vietnam's government. Vietnam allowed protests for a while before gradually cracking down on them after they became a forum for anti-government activists.
___
Associated Press writer Didi Tang in Beijing contributed to this report.
Foxconn’s six manufacturing sites in Vietnam won’t be assembling iPhones and iPads this weekend — or anything else, for that matter.
The Taiwan-based electronics supplier, which manufactures gadgets for Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, and others, is suspending operations in Vietnam for at least three days due to violent anti-China protests, reports the Financial Times.
China’s contentious oil drilling near the Paracel Islands spurred the protests in Vietnam. China controls the chain of islands in the South China Sea, but Vietnam and Taiwan have also claimed them as their own.
The protestors have targeted hundreds of business, many without ties to China. Taiwanese, South Korean, Japanese, and Malaysian plants have sustained damage, and at least two people have been killed — though the actual total is likely much higher.
“Employees at our manufacturing sites in Vietnam will take three days of leave from May 17 for safety reasons,” Foxconn said in a statement Friday.
Foxconn expanded into Vietnam in 2007. It currently has six manufacturing units in the country that normally make computers, smartphones, and components.
By HAU DINH
ABOARD VIETNAMESE COAST GUARD
SHIP 4033 (AP) — Each day the Vietnamese ships tried to get close to the
rig. And each day they were driven back by the much larger Chinese
ships.
But before they
sped away, laboring engines spewing black smoke, the Vietnamese
delivered a message: "Attention! Attention! We are warning you about
your provocative act," blasted out a recording from a loudspeaker in
Vietnamese, Chinese and English. "We demand you respect Vietnam's
sovereignty. Please immediately halt your activities and leave
Vietnamese waters."
Occasionally
colliding with or firing water cannons at each other, Vietnamese and
Chinese ships have been shadow boxing in a sun-dazzled patch of the
South China Sea since May 1, when Beijing parked a hulking, $1 billion
deep sea oil rig, drawing a furious response from Vietnam.
Vietnam,
ten times smaller than its northern neighbor and dependent on it
economically, needs all the help it can get in the dispute. Its leaders
believe international opinion is on their side. This week they invited
foreign journalists to get a closer look at the standoff, the most
serious escalation between the countries in years over their overlapping
claims.
Vietnam is determined
to defend what it regards as its sovereign territory against China,
which insists that most of the South China Sea — including the Paracel
Islands it took from U.S.-backed South Vietnam in 1974 — belongs to it.
But Hanoi lacks options in dealing with Beijing, as China uses it
burgeoning economic and military might to press its claims in the seas.
Vietnam
has accused Chinese vessels of deliberately and dangerously ramming its
ships. TV footage recorded last week from a Vietnamese ship showed a
Chinese vessel smashing into the stern of the Vietnamese ship then
backing up and ramming it again, damaging its side. The Chinese Ministry
of Foreign Affairs on Friday released three photographs purportedly
showing a Vietnamese vessel ramming a Chinese maritime ship. The media
onboard this week did not witness any ramming.
"It is not that we want to
be in confrontation with the Chinese, but it's our duty to carry out
daily patrols in Vietnamese territory," said Col. Le Trung Thanh, the
skipper of the Vietnamese coast guard ship 4033. "We want to get close
to the rig to persuade them that their actions are illegal and they must
leave Vietnam's water unconditionally."
That
seems unlikely, however many patrol boats Hanoi sends to the area, or
pleads its case to the world. For China, a withdrawal would signal
weakness.
Beijing has said it
plans to keep the rig until August. While most analysts think neither
side has any interest in an armed conflict, the longer the confrontation
lasts, the greater the risk of an unplanned incident that could lead to
a shooting match.
In
1974, China ousted the South Vietnam navy from the Paracel Islands,
close to where the rig is currently deployed, killing 75 South
Vietnamese sailors. The two countries fought a brief but bloody border
war in 1979. In 1988, 64 Vietnamese sailors were killed in another
skirmish in the nearby Spratly Islands, where territorial spats between
China and the Philippines have recently heated up.
Beijing
has accused Hanoi of not doing enough to stop the violence. On Friday,
it criticized Vietnam for organizing the media trip.
"It
is clear that the aim of the Vietnamese side is to escalate the
situation and create tension, or in other words, to generate media hype
and put up a show in front of the international audience," said Ouyang
Yujing, the director general of the Chinese Foreign Ministry's
Department of Ocean and Boundary Affairs.
Vietnam's
Communist Party has been trying to leverage its links with the party in
China to quietly resolve their differences, mindful of the economic
importance of good relations. Just last month, one of the coast guard
ships stationed close to the rig took part in joint fishery patrols with
Chinese vessels in the Gulf of Tonkin, said Vietnam's coast guard Col.
Dinh Quoc Ruan.
Unlike in the Paracels, the two countries settled their maritime border in the Gulf of Tonkin in 2000.
Crew members boarded each other's boats to share fruit with each other and take photos, Ruan said.
"I'm
not surprised when the Chinese switched from being friends to being
opposed so quickly," he said. "Being friends with China is not so easy."
___
Associated Press writers Chris Brummitt in Hanoi, Vietnam, and Jack Chang in Beijing contributed to this report.
May
16 (Reuters) - The spilling of blood and burning of factories by
anti-Chinese rioters sweeping across Vietnam reinforces Beijing's
message to other countries claiming territory in the South China Sea:
resistance is costly and ultimately futile.
But a region in which anti-Chinese sentiment grows and where sovereignty disputes disrupt trade and economic growth will burn Beijing as well. Over the long term, a commitment to peaceful dispute resolution in accordance with international law, including some concessions on historic claims, would serve China better than its current path.
China made the provocative first move in this latest incident by deploying a massive oil rig to the contested Paracel Islands. There was no doubt that Vietnam would respond, and China prepared by sending an armada of 80 ships - including seven naval vessels along with the rig. The two countries' maritime forces are now locked in a standoff with aggressive and dangerous maneuvers, water canons and collisions at sea.
Deploying the oil rig allows Beijing to show that Vietnam is in a lose-lose situation when faced with Chinese aggression. If Hanoi ignores the Chinese move, it allows "new facts on the water" that will bolster China's legal claims down the road. If it resists, its coast guard and navy will be dragged into a long and costly contest against a stronger force. And if the dispute continues to spark violent protests at home by angry Vietnamese nationalists, investment and international confidence gets disrupted for Vietnam - not China.
China does not want open conflict with its neighbors, but when it comes to territorial disputes, the Chinese government has decided it can play hardball with little risk. It can push just enough to advance its own claims, but avoid serious conflict or war by deescalating before things get out of hand.
Beyond the oil rig, Chinese actions in this vein include new construction on contested reefs and shoals occupied by China; patrols and ceremonies on islands claimed by other nations like Malaysia; unilateral fishing bans imposed on other nations while China tolerates illegal fishing and harvesting of coral by Chinese fishermen; and many more. At the same time, China continues to participate in negotiations on a Code of Conduct among the countries it bullies, intended to prevent conflict and prohibit exactly this kind of behavior.
For Chinese leaders committed to defending what they view to be Chinese territory, this aggressive path makes sense for two reasons. First, it teaches the smaller maritime nations of Southeast Asia that they're better off accommodating Chinese claims than resisting them. In essence, China is saying "we can do this the easy way or the hard way."
Second, China knows that its most important claims - like the nine-dash line covering most of the South China Sea - are not well-founded under contemporary international law. By taking aggressive steps now, Beijing can establish a track record of presence and activity that will position China better if it ever needs to clarify claims in accordance with international law, as called for by the United States and other nations.
But this strategy is bold, not wise. Beijing's actions carry significant risk, and mask a tension between China's short and long-term goals. Sailors or airmen in tense standoffs could miscalculate and spark an incident that demands military escalation. Countries like Vietnam could also decide to take a stand and choose to fight rather than give in to Chinese pressure. Yet that decision would be calamitous: the last time China and Vietnam went to war, in 1979, about 60,000 people were killed. China would not benefit from such conflict in Asia, especially if it took the blame for derailing Asia's long run of peace and progress.
Even if it avoids war, China can overplay this hand to such a degree that Southeast Asian nations defy history and join together to resist domination by a resurgent Middle Kingdom. The 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are far from forming an alliance and have no tradition of such banding together, but ASEAN has grown stronger and is welcoming a greater U.S. role in the region, in part because of China's assertiveness.
For now, Beijing's refrain seems to be from the Rolling Stones: "don't play with me 'cause you're playing with fire." Chinese leaders think the fire will only burn their rivals. They are wrong.
(Vikram J. Singh is Vice President for National Security and International Policy at the Center for American Progress. The opinions expressed are his own.)
By Vikram J. Singh
But a region in which anti-Chinese sentiment grows and where sovereignty disputes disrupt trade and economic growth will burn Beijing as well. Over the long term, a commitment to peaceful dispute resolution in accordance with international law, including some concessions on historic claims, would serve China better than its current path.
China made the provocative first move in this latest incident by deploying a massive oil rig to the contested Paracel Islands. There was no doubt that Vietnam would respond, and China prepared by sending an armada of 80 ships - including seven naval vessels along with the rig. The two countries' maritime forces are now locked in a standoff with aggressive and dangerous maneuvers, water canons and collisions at sea.
Deploying the oil rig allows Beijing to show that Vietnam is in a lose-lose situation when faced with Chinese aggression. If Hanoi ignores the Chinese move, it allows "new facts on the water" that will bolster China's legal claims down the road. If it resists, its coast guard and navy will be dragged into a long and costly contest against a stronger force. And if the dispute continues to spark violent protests at home by angry Vietnamese nationalists, investment and international confidence gets disrupted for Vietnam - not China.
China does not want open conflict with its neighbors, but when it comes to territorial disputes, the Chinese government has decided it can play hardball with little risk. It can push just enough to advance its own claims, but avoid serious conflict or war by deescalating before things get out of hand.
Beyond the oil rig, Chinese actions in this vein include new construction on contested reefs and shoals occupied by China; patrols and ceremonies on islands claimed by other nations like Malaysia; unilateral fishing bans imposed on other nations while China tolerates illegal fishing and harvesting of coral by Chinese fishermen; and many more. At the same time, China continues to participate in negotiations on a Code of Conduct among the countries it bullies, intended to prevent conflict and prohibit exactly this kind of behavior.
For Chinese leaders committed to defending what they view to be Chinese territory, this aggressive path makes sense for two reasons. First, it teaches the smaller maritime nations of Southeast Asia that they're better off accommodating Chinese claims than resisting them. In essence, China is saying "we can do this the easy way or the hard way."
Second, China knows that its most important claims - like the nine-dash line covering most of the South China Sea - are not well-founded under contemporary international law. By taking aggressive steps now, Beijing can establish a track record of presence and activity that will position China better if it ever needs to clarify claims in accordance with international law, as called for by the United States and other nations.
But this strategy is bold, not wise. Beijing's actions carry significant risk, and mask a tension between China's short and long-term goals. Sailors or airmen in tense standoffs could miscalculate and spark an incident that demands military escalation. Countries like Vietnam could also decide to take a stand and choose to fight rather than give in to Chinese pressure. Yet that decision would be calamitous: the last time China and Vietnam went to war, in 1979, about 60,000 people were killed. China would not benefit from such conflict in Asia, especially if it took the blame for derailing Asia's long run of peace and progress.
Even if it avoids war, China can overplay this hand to such a degree that Southeast Asian nations defy history and join together to resist domination by a resurgent Middle Kingdom. The 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are far from forming an alliance and have no tradition of such banding together, but ASEAN has grown stronger and is welcoming a greater U.S. role in the region, in part because of China's assertiveness.
For now, Beijing's refrain seems to be from the Rolling Stones: "don't play with me 'cause you're playing with fire." Chinese leaders think the fire will only burn their rivals. They are wrong.
(Vikram J. Singh is Vice President for National Security and International Policy at the Center for American Progress. The opinions expressed are his own.)
By Vikram J. Singh
Friday, May 16, 2014
By Lauren Tuck
A group of 25 autistic students and 21 school staffers got a generous surprise during a recent lunch outing when they discovered that their bill had been paid for by an anonymous stranger.
According to MyCentralJersey.com, five classes from Matthew Jago Elementary School in Sewaren, New Jersey, were on a May 6 field trip to Tex-Mex restaurant Jose Tejas in the nearby town of Iselin to belatedly celebrate Cinco de Mayo. At the end of the meal, instead of presenting the group of special education teachers, speech therapists, and teaching assistants with the $485 check, the manager informed them it had been taken care of.
The Good Samaritan, who is reportedly a frequent patron of the restaurant, chose to remain nameless, but she did relay to a restaurant employee that she has a grandchild with special needs and wanted to show her appreciation for the hard-working professionals. “We all were just taken aback,” one of the teachers, Jeannette Gruskowski, told MyCentralJersey.com. “Nobody’s ever done such a generous, anonymous thing like that.”
The woman who paid the tab had left by the time the students and teachers had finished their meal, but because the grateful group didn’t get to say thank you in person, they’re trying to make sure their donor eventually gets the message.
The autistic children — some of whom are verbal and some of whom use pictures, sign language, or tablets to communicate — have written a thank-you letter to the kindhearted grandma. They’re planning on getting Jose Tejas's management to hang it in the restaurant so whether she hears about it through word of mouth or on the news or sees it in person, the benefactor will know how appreciative the teachers and kids truly are.
Outings are especially beneficial for these students, Gruskowski explained, because they help the children apply the skills they’ve learned in the classroom in a more social setting. Because this excursion, which the students brought their own money to pay for, didn’t cost them anything, they’ll have an opportunity to take another one.
“Every day, it’s always trying to figure out what we can do to teach them according to their way of learning. It’s so rewarding when you see them getting a skill you’ve been teaching them — it’s worth it,” Gruskowski said. “It’s worth all the struggles and challenges.”
Photograph by AFP via Getty Images
Commuters
drive past as riot police stand guard outside a burning factory
building in the Vietnamese southern province of Binh Duong on May 14
By Bruce Einhorn - May 15, 2014
The latest round in the territorial dispute between China and Vietnam has had its first casualties. Anti-Chinese demonstrations have swept Vietnam since the two countries’ ships attacked one another in the South China Sea last week, and yesterday Vietnamese protesters targeted a steel mill in the central province of Ha Tinh, leaving at least one Chinese person dead and 90 injured. The mob went after the factory even though its owner, the Formosa Plastics Group (1301:TT), is not even from mainland China. It’s Taiwanese. But no matter: Hailing from a Chinese-speaking place and employing Chinese workers are crimes enough.
The Vietnamese government has only itself to blame for this disaster. After a Chinese state-owned company started drilling for oil in waters that Vietnam claims as its exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea, the leaders in Hanoi couldn’t figure out a way to respond, according to Jonathan London, a City University of Hong Kong professor and Vietnam expert. One easy option was to encourage a nationalistic fervor among Vietnamese. “The Vietnamese ‘street’ is extremely upset by these most recent developments,” he said Friday. “Vietnamese cyberspace is on fire.”
Sure enough, nationalist fervor quickly got out of hand. “The riots appear to be the result of carelessly planned small-scale protests initiated by state-run or state-invested foreign ventures which then quickly exploded,” London writes on his blog today. Making things worse, the leadership in Hanoi hasn’t been able to agree on a strategy. With the leadership paralyzed about what to do, “the absence of a clear, coherent voice from Hanoi is doing great harm,” he argues. “Instead of communicating with the world with the confidence it should, Hanoi is on the brink of a public-relations meltdown that would make even Malaysian aviation officials blush.”
China is trying to take the moral high ground, saying Vietnam’s government is at fault for the escalation of tensions. China has accused its neighbor of creating a media circus by arranging for reporters to cover the confrontation at sea between Vietnamese and Chinese ships. “This was all done for show in an attempt to present a false picture and deceive the public,” said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying, who called on the government in Hanoi “to immediately take effective steps to stop and punish these crimes, and to ensure the safety of Chinese citizens and institutions in Vietnam.”
Besides, the official Xinhua news agency reported, Vietnam has no reason to be upset in the first place. The oil rig is drilling just 17 nautical miles from Zhongjian Island, part of the Paracel Island chain that China claims for itself. The drilling activites are “completely within the country’s territorial waters,” Xinhua reported on Sunday.
No matter which side wins control of the disputed area, Vietnam seems certain to be the economic loser from this fight. Even factories untouched by the protesters have closed temporarily. For instance, most of the Vietnamese suppliers to Li & Fung (494:HK), the huge Hong Kong company that is the world’s biggest supplier of clothes and toys, are closed. Its chief executive, Bruce Rockowitz, said today after a shareholder meeting in Hong Kong that the shutdown in production could last a week. Yue Yuen Industrial (551:HK), the Hong Kong supplier of athletic shoes to Nike (NKE) and Adidas (ADS:GR), has shut its factories in Vietnam, which last year accounted for one-third of Yue Yuen’s total production.
Moreover, even if the situation suddenly calms down, the anti-Chinese pogroms could hurt the Vietnamese economy for years to come. The country is supposed to be an inexpensive alternative to China, where wages are on the rise and low-cost manufacturers are struggling. For owners of factories in such Chinese cities as Shenzhen and Dongguan, it’s time to move. And many of them are ethnic Chinese, not just from the mainland but also from Hong Kong and Taiwan.
So attacking Chinese people already in Vietnam is not only nasty and xenophobic; it’s also stupid. These are just the people Vietnam needs to be attracting, not frightening away. The people making decisions about where to put their money are human, after all, and not surprisingly, they don’t feel too comfortable in countries where mobs go on the rampage against them.
The Chinese know this very well, as China is paying the price for ethnic violence of its own from 2012. Angry about Japanese claims to disputed islands in the East China Sea, Chinese mobs attacked Japanese factories, Japanese cars, even Japanese restaurants. The riots increased Japanese executives’ concern about their safety in the country and accelerated a shift in investment away from China and toward Southeast Asia.
Japanese direct investment in China plunged 32 percent last year, to $9.1 billion, according to the Japan External Trade Organization (Jetro). Meanwhile, Japanese investment in the Asean 5 (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam) more than doubled, jumping from $9 billion in 2012 to $19.85 billion last year.
While China is too big for Japanese companies to ignore, Southeast Asia has become more attractive, with 75 percent of 3,471 companies surveyed by Jetro saying they’re considering an expansion in Asean countries, up from 56 percent in 2011. The percentage considering an expansion in China dropped to 57 percent, down from 68 percent two years earlier.
Vietnam’s protesters have already shown they can’t distinguish between Taiwanese and mainland Chinese. Given the country’s reliance on Japan, the Vietnamese government better make sure the country’s superpatriots at least know the difference between Chinese and Japanese.
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
If you've ever taken ginger ale for an upset tummy, you understand the health benefits of ginger. Going back more than 2,000 years in China, the herb has been used to treat nausea, upset stomach and help with digestion and diarrhea.
What's ginger good for?
As it turns out, plenty. A 2009 study found ginger supplements when taken alongside anti-vomiting medicine reduced chemotherapy-induced nausea in patients by 40 percent.
"Therapeutically, it's also used for poor circulation and lower back pain. On an emotional level, it can act as a catalyst if you are procrastinating and lack the drive to take action," says Laurie Steelsmith, a licensed naturopathic doctor and author of "Natural Choices for Women's Health."
Studies have shown it can also ease muscle pain, eliminate inflammation, help with painful menstruation and migraines, and may even slow or kill ovarian and colon cancer cells. Here are some other health benefits of ginger:
Nausea and motion sickness: Ginger is well known for its ability to ease nausea, and it's helpful for motion and sea sickness. Women suffering from morning sickness were given beverages with ginger during the first trimester of pregnancy, and when compared with women given a placebo, ginger alleviated the nausea in a large majority of the cases.
Diabetes complications: Studies show ginger may reduce urine protein levels, decrease water intake and urine output, and reverse proteinuria, which is kidney damage caused by too much protein in the urine. Ginger may also protect nerves in diabetics and lower blood fat levels. "Ginger can help increase circulation, thin blood, and lower both blood pressure and cholesterol," says author Steelsmith.
Arthritis: A placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover study published in the journal Osteoarthritis Cartilage found patients with painful arthritis in the knee who were given ginger vs. a placebo experienced significantly less pain and loss of movement compared to those taking the placebo.
Cold and flu: Chinese medicine practitioners commonly prescribe ginger to treat symptoms of colds and flu. The root acts as an antihistamine and decongestant, two cold-easing effects that can help with symptoms.
A dose of ginger
Ginger is susceptible to heat and oxygen, so handle carefully when using this herb and store in a cool, dry place or the crisper bin of the refrigerator for two to three weeks.
To make a tea, shave the skin from a piece of fresh ginger, cut off a 2-inch chunk and slice it into 2 cups of water to simmer covered for 20 minutes. Remove the slices and pour into a mug and add honey and a squeeze of lemon. Eat the slices after drinking the tea. Drink up to three cups of tea per day, before meals.
Ginger capsules or powder are also available. Take at least 2,000 milligrams three times or more per day with or without food.
Do not take ginger with blood thinners without first consulting your health care provider. Ginger may also lower blood sugar and interact with blood pressure altering medications, so speak with your physician prior to using ginger if you take any medications.
Saturday, May 3, 2014
In English, one way to make negative statements is with a negative adjective: no or neither.
|
|
| less common | more common | |
| There are no boys in the room. | There aren’t (are not) any boys in the room. | |
| I’ve been seeing no new clients. | I haven’t (have not) been seeing any new clients | |
| He can do no deliveries tonight. | He can’t (cannot) do any deliveries tonight. |
The adjective no is often used in a short phrase without a verb to indicate that something is not allowed.
No parking
No exit
No smoking
The adjective neither indicates a negative comparison between two nouns and means "not one or the other." Note that neither is placed at the beginning of the sentence, and that the noun that follows neither is always singular.
| Neither idea is good. | = | There are two ideas. Both ideas are bad. |
| Neither apartment was available. | Both apartments were unavailable. | |
| Neither candidate made a speech. | There were two candidates and they were both silent. |
A syllable is a unit of sound. It can be a vowel, a diphthong, or one or more vowels combined with one or more consonants.
| a |
| be |
| six |
| look |
| bought |
In most English dictionaries, words that are more than one syllable are divided by a dot or space between the syllables.
Click on the example words to hear the difference between words with one, two, three, and four syllables.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| through | ex·it | po·ta·to | in·cred·i·ble |
Syllable Stress
English words that are polysyllabic (have more than one syllable) always have one syllable that is stressed. In most English dictionaries, the stressed syllable is indicated by a stress mark, a symbol that resembles an apostrophe. The stress mark follows the syllable that is stressed.
For example, in the word incredible, the second syllable (-cred-) is stressed. Here are some examples.
| 2 | 3 | 4 |
| ex′it | op′po·site | Feb′ru·ar·y |
| hu′mid | ex·am′ine | in·cred′i·ble |
| ma·chine′ | em·ploy·ee′ | psy·cho′lo·gy |
In English, most two-syllable nouns are stressed on the first syllable.
| A′pril | car′rot | hon′or | fa′ther |
| Mon′day | le′mon | e′vil | Mar′y |
Putting stress on the correct syllable is especially important for words that are both nouns and verbs. Usually, if the stress is placed on the first syllable it is a noun. If the stress is placed on the second syllable it is a verb.
| noun | verb |
| con′test | con·test′ |
| de′fect | de·fect′ |
| in′sert | in·sert′ |
| ob′ject | ob·ject′ |
| pre′sent | pre·sent′ |
| pro′test | pro·test′ |
| re′call | re·call′ |
| re′cord | re·cord′ |
The English words affect and effect are often confused by native speakers – don’t let their mistakes affect your English.
Affect
Affect is a verb with several different meanings.
1. To have an influence on, contribute to a change in
What you do affects all of us.2. To touch, move; to act on the emotions of
This decision will affect the outcome of the elections.
Inflation is affected by natural disasters.
I was profoundly affected by this movie.3. To simulate
His actions were not affected by her pleas.
He likes to affect a British accent.In psychology, affect is a noun which refers to a "feeling" or "emotion":
She always affected her eccentricity.
Your son’s lack of affect explains why you find it difficult to gauge his moods.
Effect
Effect is most commonly used as a noun, and has three meanings:
1. Result, something brought about by someone or something
What was the effect of her decision?2. Something that gives the impression/sense of something else
Side effects include nausea and fatigue.
I don’t think it will have any effect on the outcome.
The law will go into effect tomorrow.
You can clearly see the cause and effect.
The special effects were amazing.3. Effects can refer to belongings.
Mirrors will give the effect of a larger space.
He said that just for effect.
Did you bring any personal effects?As a verb, to effect means "to bring about, lead to a result"
The only way to effect change is to participate.
What is the best way to effect these improvements?
This should effect a whole new way of thinking about it.
The Bottom Line
The confusion between affect and effect comes out of the fact that affecting something leads to an effect. The two questions "How were you affected?" and "What was the effect on you?" mean almost exactly the same thing.
When you want to use one of these words as a noun, the one you want is probably effect. When you want a verb, most of the time you want affect. Effect is used as a verb only when it has a direct object and only when you mean "to bring about, lead to."
The difference between to affect and to effect can be seen clearly here:
To affect the results – To influence, have an impact on the results
To effect the results – To bring about, lead to the (desired) results
We use the present perfect tense to talk about things where there is a connection between the past and the present.
- He’s written 16 books.
As well as the present perfect simple, we can use the present perfect continuous tense to talk about events with a connection to the present.
1 Look at these 2 sentences:
- I’ve been decorating the house this summer. The focus is on the action – decorating – and the action is unfinished.
- I’ve painted the living room blue. The focus is on the finished result. The activity is finished but we can see the result now.
2 Look at these two sentences.
- I’ve read that book you lent me. I finished it yesterday.
- I’ve been reading that book you lent me. I’ve got another 50 pages to read.
3 Look at these two sentences.
- She’s been writing emails for 3 hours.
- She’s written 10 messages.
4 Look at these two sentences.
- I’ve worked here for thirty years.
- I usually work in London but I’ve been working in Birmingham for the last 3 weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)