sentence with phrase的八卦，Yahoo名人娛樂都在討論

- Những lưu ý trong Task 1 để viết bài đạt điểm cao hơn nha:

1.Đừng copy câu hỏi chép xuống đoạn mở bài, nên paraphrase.
Ví dụ:
The diagram below shows the life cycle of a salmon, from egg to adult fish.
= The diagram illustrates the stages in the life of the salmon, from birth to maturity.

2. Phân đoạn 1 cách rõ ràng, có 4 đoạn
Đoạn 1: Paraphrase đề bài
Đoạn 2: Overview
Đoạn 3: Phân tích 1
Đoạn 3: Phân tích 2

3. You won't get a high score if you don't write a good overview.
Đoạn overview 1 - 2 câu
Simon advice: Always try to write two sentences.
Don't put any numbers in your overview. Save specific numbers for the 'details' paragraphs.

Start your overview with a simple phrase that clearly shows the examiner that this is your summary paragraph e.g. It is clear that... , It is noticeable that... , Overall we can see that…

If there are two different charts, write one overview sentence about each chart.

Don't look for individual 'highest' or 'lowest' figures such as a 'peak' on a line graph. Instead, describe the highest and lowest items overall

Look for overall trends, and ignore individual figures that don't fit the trend. For example, if a graph shows a rising trend overall, you can ignore a specific year when the figures decreased - save that year for your 'details' paragraphs.

4. Hạn chế miêu tả 2 số liệu riêng biệt, mà nên có sự so sánh giữa 2 số liệu.
Cách 1: qua từ ngữ miêu tả 2 số liệu khác nhau như thế nào
Cách 2: Dùng linking words để tăng tính kết nối như by contrast, while, however...

5. Không nhất thiết phải miêu tả tất cả những con số hiện trong biểu đồ. Nên miêu tả những đặc điểm nổi bật, so sánh, tương phản…

6. Don't spend longer than 20 minutes on task 1. Stop yourself after 20 minutes; remember that task 2 is worth more marks. About 15 - 17 mins

撐

張秀賢傘運九子案罪成之陳情書
（隨後附上英文版本 Please scroll down for the English version.）

法官閣下：

「也許很多老練的人會說我們只有理想，不求實際，但假若學生也變得世故，又有誰可以單純的為著理想，努力為社會帶來改變？」

「我們相信，堅持真普選，建設公平政制，是這時代賦予我們的責任。我們避無可避，亦退無可退。面對時代的挑戰，我們選擇毅然面對。」

在此刻，又回想起2014年九月，我在中大開學禮時向中大同學所說的開學辭。在庭上出席審訊的四星期，看到控方和其他辯方代表所播放的片段，又令人憶起五年前的種種。

參與緣起
當年三月，內閣「澄」獲得3431票，即近八成信任票當選第四十四屆中大學生會幹事會。當年參選，我們向中大同學提出政綱：只接受沒有篩選和只有合理門檻的選舉設計。我們也承諾，假如最終政改方案不符合基本標準，任內會全力推動、宣揚、積極參與和協助籌辦佔中運動。後來種種，其實都是實踐競選學生會時候，對中大同學的莊嚴承諾。

雨傘運動以「罷課不罷學」作為前奏，我們不上課，但一直學習民主理論；那星期以重奪公民廣場作結，學生縱身躍進公民廣場，換來卻是警察圍堵與多條罪名。當晚，抗爭者除了渴望爭取民主，更多人卻是高呼「保護學生」，只因為學生單純為理想而行，冀盼爭取更好的將來。

其實，香港人在爭取民主的路上跟學生一樣，在跌跌碰碰中學習，卻又單純不為自身利益。傘運初期，參與者買物資，自行分類垃圾，甚至設立自修室供學生溫習。大家總是守望相助，不計回報，畫面都在腦海揮之不去，令人感動。

分歧迷失
79天的雨傘運動，估計超過一百萬港人參與，成為歷來最大規模的民主抗爭。我們堅持和平、非暴力原則，堅守行動底線爭取民主政制。可是，香港政府無視民意，北京政府堅持 不義的「八三一方案」，最終使整場運動無功而還。

雖然在運動當中，我們看到許多觸動人心的片段，但抗爭曠日持久，矛盾積累就使分歧變成參與者之間的一道道裂縫。到佔領後期，或許我們都感到迷失、不安，不知運動未來如何是好。因為分歧，所以互相猜疑；因為誤解，所以互不信任；因為敵視，所以衝突漸生。昨天的因，今天的果，部分佔領者不滿我們的決策，出現「拆大台」等事件，溝通問題為日後更大的政治路線紛爭埋下伏線，延續至今。

雨傘運動落幕，民主普選尚未實現，我們卻為了政治路線的分野而互相仇視，甚至成為出言傷害，使人與人之間的傷口更難癒合。候選人和議員被DQ、旺角案，大家面對政權打壓，參選、投票、行動無用，無力感蓋過一切。幾乎所有人都感到迷失，不知道可以做甚麼才可以改變當下。

回歸初心

人非聖人，不可能所有人都心無仇恨。此刻說要放下過往分歧，不再爭吵，同樣並沒可能。我只希望當初走在同一條路上的人，不要越走越遠；未來的日子也許難捱，但讓我們記得最初無私奉獻的美好，努力修補彼此關係，理解各自想法與難處；唯有用寬容、溝通取代排斥、仇恨，回歸初心，我們才能走得更遠。

我還記得當天開學辭的這句：「我們所享受的，正正是前人選擇抗爭的成果；香港未來命運，在乎我們的選擇。」

當日的學生，今日都已長大成人，有人可能變得世故；然而，我知道大家仍舊記得初衷：共同決定自己的未來。即使我在五年前已知道，今天將會身處法庭的被告欄，為了這小城的未來，我還是會堅持最初的信念。跟戰友一起參與雨傘運動，我與有榮焉；縱使面對罪成刑責，我也會不亢不卑。

面對判決，大家可以傷心，可以難過。可是悲痛過後，大家仍要努力自強，化成推動力守護初心，帶著社會繼續前行。

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－

Your Honour,

“Perhaps pragmatists will say that we only talk about ideals and never rationalise on them. But if students were all worldly and tactful, who would be left to wholeheartedly pursue ideals and strive to bring changes to our society?”

“We believe we have to deal with the problems our historical moment proposes – the burden of our time. The burden that our time confers upon us is to insist on the implementation of genuine universal suffrage and to build a fair and just political system. It is impossible for us to escape or retreat from such attendant responsibility. We choose to face up to these challenges of our time.”

At this moment, I yet again recall the inauguration speech I gave to my fellow students at the Chinese University of Hong Kong Inauguration Ceremony back in September 2014. During the 4-week trial in Court, the recordings played by both the Prosecution and the Defence also sent me down the memory lane of everything that has happened 5 years ago.

The Beginning
In March 2014, our Cabinet “Claritas” received a total of 3431 votes, which was equivalent to almost 80% of the total number of votes of confidence, and was officially elected as the 44th Executive Committee of the Student Union of the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

When we were campaigning for the election, we published our political platform for our fellow students: we would only accept a form of universal suffrage that had a reasonable threshold and not one that precluded any screening of candidates. We also promised that, if the final constitutional reform proposal did not meet these basic standards, we would during our term of office exert all efforts to promote, propagate, actively participate and facilitate the organisation of the Occupy Central Movement. The subsequent events all took place in fulfillment of these solemn promises we had made to our fellow CUHK students during our Student Union election campaign.

“Boycott Classes, Not Education” was the precursor of the Umbrella Movement. Although we did not attend classes, we learned and educated ourselves on democratic theories. That week ended with the recapture of the Civic Square. Students leaped faithfully into the Civic Square, but what they had exchanged in return were a siege by policemen and numerous criminal charges. That night, protestors not only desired to fight for democracy, many more times they were calling upon authorities to “protect the students”, because students were simply acting upon their idealistic pursuits, hoping to secure a better future for all.

All Hong Kong citizens and students are actually just birds of the same feather on this tortuous road to democracy – we have to learn from our bumps and battle scars, yet our motives are pure and selfless. At the early stages of the Umbrella Movement, participants generously distribute resources, tidily sort their rubbish and even set up self-study areas for students to revise. They were always reaching out and helping those around them without expecting anything in return – these touching scenes have persisted in my mind ever since.

Divided and Lost
It was estimated that over one million people in Hong Kong participated in the 79-day Umbrella Movement, making it the largest scale democratic protest in this city’s history. We insisted to uphold the peaceful and non-violent principle, standing firm on the bottom line of our action in our quest for democracy. Nevertheless, the Hong Kong Government completely disregarded the clear calls of the public, while the Beijing Government hung onto the unjust “831 Proposal”, eventually leading to the ineffectuality of the Movement.

Although I have witnessed countless heart-warming moments throughout the Movement, as our protest became protracted, conflicts accumulated and turned participants’ differences into splits. Towards the end of the Occupy Movement, some of us perhaps felt lost, uneasy and uncertain about the Movement’s fate. As there were divided views, there were doubts. As there were misunderstandings, there were mistrusts. As there was hostility, confrontations gradually emerged. The fruits of today are the seeds of yesterday – since some participants were discontented with our decisions, incidents such as “tearing down the big stage” occurred. Communication problems paved the way for more serious disagreements regarding our city’s political road map, which persisted until this day.

The curtains of the Umbrella Movement have been long drawn. We have yet to attain genuine universal suffrage. Yet, we harbour animosity towards each other due to divergence in political stances; we even vocally attack each other, making the wounds among us even more difficult to heal. In the face of recent events such as the disqualification of Legislative Council members and candidates, the Mong Kok Case and different kinds of political oppression, our sense of helplessness took over. Actions aiming to bring about systematic changes, including participation in elections, voting and engagement in the political discourse, were reduced to futile efforts. Pretty much everyone feels lost and unsure of what he could do to effect meaningful changes in this day and age.

Tracing Back to the Original Intention
Human beings are no saints. It is impossible that we do not feel any antipathy towards others. It is just as impossible to tell people to let go of their differences and to not fight each other anymore. My only wish is that people who started on the same path will not grow any further apart. The days to come may be very difficult, but let us not forget about the beauty of our selfless sacrifice at the start. We should work hard on repairing relationships with each other and understanding each other’s thoughts and difficulties. We can only go further if we replace rejection and antipathy with tolerance and communication. We can only go further if we hold true to our original intention.

I still remember this phrase from my inauguration speech: “what we get to enjoy today are the outcomes from our forebears’ choice to protest; the future of Hong Kong depends on our very own choice.”

The students then are now all grown up. Some of them might have become more seasoned and tactful. Nonetheless, I know that we all remember our original intention: together we choose our own destiny. I knew as early as five years ago that I would eventually find myself at the defendant’s dock today, but for our small yet precious city’s future, I remain true to my originally intention. I am incredibly honoured and privilege to be able to participate in the Umbrella Movement with my fellow comrades. In spite of criminal sanctions, I will remain neither condescending nor servile.

With the impending sentence, I know many of you would feel sorrowful and miserable. But when it is all over, I hope that you will all remain resilient, harness your feelings and transmute that energy into a positive force that safeguards our originally intention. I count on you to continue leading our society forward.

Taipei Times 英文臺北時報今刊出讀者投書致賴揆：
官方一直示範菜英文，還想列英文為第二官語？

舉例之一：交通部觀光局行之五年的「借問站」計劃英文宣傳名稱「Taiwan Ask Me」是「菜英文」。無誤！

繼之前的菜英文「Taiwan Touch Your Heart」之後，不意外。

最後這一段切中要害：

// Finally, Premier Lai, how can Taiwan effectively pursue the valuable and challenging goal of making English an official language of this country if the ROC government’s own ministries are not even able to correctly compose a simple advertisement in English? //

猜測作者 Xue Meng-ren 很可能是薛孟仁（Dr. Bruce G. Shapiro），逢甲大學外國語文學系副教授。

謝謝薛教授用專業的聲音告誡政府勿失策。

以下全文轉錄投書內容，連結見留言。

-----------------------------------------------------------

An open letter to Premier William Lai

By Xue Meng-ren

Wed, Oct 24, 2018

Dear Premier William Lai (賴清德):

You have admirably and lately led Taiwan in an ongoing discussion about whether to make English a second “official” language. Many articles have appeared defending both sides of this argument.

As it stands, Taiwan uses the traditional style of Mandarin Chinese for all official government, legal and business documents. However, the Taiwanese government frequently uses English in a non-official capacity to facilitate outreach initiatives and better communication with non-Chinese-speaking residents and tourists.

“Taiwan Ask Me” is one such governmental initiative, which the Ministry of Transportation and Communications initiated five years ago.

As a Cabinet-level governmental body charged with communications, the ministry’s standard of English should be a model of English usage for the rest of the nation, particularly the tourism industry, which the ministry also officially administers.

Unfortunately, the ministry has demonstrated that its use of English is both inept and even — albeit inadvertently — insulting.

On the Republic of China’s National Day, on page 5 of the Taipei Times, the ministry’s Tourism Bureau published an announcement about the fifth anniversary of the “Taiwan Ask Me” initiative. This announcement features not only elementary grammatical errors, but also incorrect English usage that renders it meaningless and embarrassing.

To begin, in English, the phrase “Taiwan Ask Me” is nonsense, that is, it has no meaning. It must at least have some defining punctuation, such as, “Taiwan? Ask Me” or “Taiwan, Ask Me.”

The service is supposed to be for tourists in need of answers to questions about traveling around Taiwan, but the phrase “Taiwan Ask Me” absurdly means that Taiwan should ask someone, “me,” something about itself.

And, who does this “me” refer to? Certainly, the initiative does not limit itself to employing a single individual, but rather a team of individuals. Therefore, the phrase should be “Taiwan, Ask Us” not “me.”

This type of error, along with the rest of the advertisement, not only demonstrates poor English usage, but more importantly, it suggests a lack of awareness about what service to others actually means.

It suggests that the initiative “Taiwan Ask Me” is merely paying lip service to a valuable concept of a democratic government that it does not truly value or even understand. This poorly written advertisement reveals that it is more interested in celebrating its own anniversary than it is in providing the service for which it is lauding itself.

The announcement states that the ministry “launched the ‘Taiwan Ask Me’ friendly travel information service” five years ago, and now has 450 Information Stations “that prove warm and friendly services.”

Obviously, the Information Services must provide not “prove” their services. “Prove” is the incorrect English word, unless the intention is for the ministry to pat itself on the back by saying that over the past five years the service has “proved its services are warm and friendly,” but then the grammar is still incorrect.

Furthermore, the use of both “warm” and “friendly” is repetitive, since the words are synonymous in this context. Using repetitive words in this way is a feature of the elementary English usage quite common in Taiwan, but governmental English has no excuse for being elementary.

In addition to offering “domestic and foreign tourists the warmest greetings,” through the Taiwan Ask Me Information Stations, “the service further incorporates rich travel elements.” The phrase “rich travel elements” is verbal nonsense. It correctly connects words that have no discernible meaning. The article does not define or elaborate upon them.

In the following run-on sentence, the article connects these “rich travel elements” with “five unique features,” the first of which is “local gourmets.” Why would a tourist want to meet a gourmet? And what kind of a gourmet?

The ministry probably means “local food” or perhaps “local delicacies,” whereas a “gourmet” is a food connoisseur, that is, a lover of good food. “Gourmets” is an example of another English error common in Taiwan, which is to use the incorrect English word to say something related to that word.

Using Google Translate often helps Taiwanese students make these ridiculous English errors. Unfortunately, government ministers are no longer students. Thus, one expects them to have a better grasp of English, certainly as it pertains to their own special purpose or field of employment.

Together, the “five unique features” mentioned in the article are supposed to “form [a] synergistic local economy of tourism,” whatever that is. Thus, the advertisement uses yet another nonsensical phrase, the meaning of which even the necessary grammatical insertion of “a” does not clarify.

The tourist economy in Taiwan is definitely important, and it is possibly important to connect different aspects of the tourist economy into a unified plan for development. However, linking the so-called five unique features does not create an economic synergy.

Taiwan Ask Me is a free information service. It does not make money or use money to link things together to form economic relationships. Even a government minister should recognize that specious phrases reveal fake values.

For the fifth anniversary event, “Eunice LIN,” (which should be “Eunice Lin,”) “is invited to be the tour guide, and experience the friendliness of ‘Taiwan Ask Me.” This sentence means that Ms Lin is going act as a tourist guide and experience for herself the friendly services of the Information Stations. More absurd nonsense, for why would she be both the tourist guide and the tourist?

Furthermore, the ministry should take responsibility for inviting Ms Lin. Instead of writing “Eunice LIN, a popular TV personality, is invited,” the correct sentence would be: “The MOTC has invited Eunice Lin, a popular TV personality, to be a tour guide.”

Finally, Ms Lin may be a local celebrity, but she is a Taiwanese film and television actor, not a TV personality. The latter is someone who appears on TV as herself, perhaps as the host of a variety show, but not someone who appears as characters in films or a TV series. (“Actor” refers to either male or female, the distinction “actress” being no longer necessary.)

The next sentence in the article is so riddled with grammatical errors, it would take several more paragraphs to explain them all. Suffice it to say that much of what the sentence tries to say means the opposite of what it must intend, which is the major problem with the article in question, especially its conclusion.

The advertisement closes with an egregious insult to all foreign residents and tourists.

Setting aside the grammatical errors and confusing phrasing, the advertisement announces the “Hi Taiwan! Give Me 5 Point Collection Campaign,” which started on Oct. 1.

However, this campaign is only for “all citizens of Taiwan [who] are invited to visit Information Stations and get a taste of the warm and friendly services of ‘Taiwan Ask Me.’”

Apparently, foreign tourists are not allowed to “experience in-depth local travels” and only “citizens will also get an opportunity to win lovely prizes!”

Who in the world is this advertisement for? It would seem to be for foreign tourists and residents since it is in English and appears in the only English print newspaper published in Taiwan. And what citizen of Taiwan needs to read an English advertisement? Surely, any citizen of Taiwan can read all about “Taiwan Ask Me” in Chinese. And yet, this advertisement about a tourism service concludes by disinviting the foreign residents and tourists who are not only most likely to read the advertisement, but also most likely to benefit from the Taiwan Ask Me initiative.

With this appalling advertisement, the ministry makes a mockery of not only the government’s attempts to use English effectively but also its own ministerial responsibility over communication and tourism in Taiwan.

If the Taiwanese government does have the personnel to compose articles in correct English that do not insult English readers and tourists and perhaps visiting foreign dignitaries, then it should hire copy editors with the skills to do it for them. It is certainly worth the expense when compared to the embarrassing cost of losing face, which means so much to Taiwanese society.

Finally, Premier Lai, how can Taiwan effectively pursue the valuable and challenging goal of making English an official language of this country if the ROC government’s own ministries are not even able to correctly compose a simple advertisement in English?

What a conundrum, and where does one begin to solve it?

Respectfully yours,

Xue Meng-ren

Taichung