English Words, Phrases and Expressions

I learn not a small measure of knowledge from reading this New York Times articles alone, titled "Obama, in His New Role, Calls for Stimulus Package". The article is a report from US President-elect Barack Obama's news conference.

1. "...approached the lectern. (I would have written "approached the rostrum" because I just came to know of the word "lectern" today)

2. "He smiled as he looked out at a large retinue assembled from around the world." (retinue -- a group of people who travel with someone important, eg a huge retinue of servants)

3. "... seen only in faraway shots as he dashed from the gym." (Non-native English speaker might have written "... as he hurried from the gym.")

4. "I didn’t want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any séances." (seance -- a meeting where people try to communicate with the spirits of dead people)

5. "careless and offhanded remark. (I should start using "offhanded remarks" in the translation of the Malay word "terlepas kata")

6. "...a warm conversation." (I should really learn to use the word "warm" other than in connection to the weather)

7. "an array of economic advisers." (another way of saying "a team of economic advisers")

8. "...offered no new specifics about what he intended to do to."

9. "But the stagecraft of the news conference, held after a closed-door meeting of Mr. Obama’s economic advisers, was intended to show that he was hard at work in search of solutions." (I just love the chemistry of the two concepts)

10. "The session carried the trappings of an official event, with eight American flags lined against blue drapes."

11. "...to get a brief respite after a 22-month campaign."

Toadying, apple polishing, sycophant

is the english translation for the Malay word ampu-mengampu, suka membodek and mengipas.

New Words: Tatter, Detritus, Clamber, Buck Teeth, Epigraph

... and scraped, fester, hears, lionize. Now that's a lot of new words in just one article, ain't it?

The sad thing is, that is the fact as far as I'm concern. These words are from an article written by Roy Clark of Poynter Institute, titled "What Happens to a Verb Deferred?"

Okay, let's see the meaning of each word:

Tatter, Detritus, Clamber, Buck Teeth, Epigraph, Scraped, Fester, Prophetic, Hearse, Lionize... to be continued; too sleepy to be productive...

New Words, Use It Twice And It Is Yours

Well, some are not exactly new words to me. It's just that I seldom use them.

From the article "Obama surges ahead of McCain":

"...John McCain fumbled his response to a looming US economic cataclysm - one that threatened to match the financial catastrophe of the 1930s Great Depression."

1. Fumble:

• 
  
• grope: feel about uncertainly or blindly; "She groped for her glasses in the darkness of the bedroom"
• make one's way clumsily or blindly; "He fumbled towards the door"
• handle clumsily

2. Cataclysm:

• calamity: an event resulting in great loss and misfortune; "the whole city was affected by the irremediable calamity";
• "the earthquake was a ...

3. Catastrophe:

• calamity: an event resulting in great loss and misfortune; "the whole city was affected by the irremediable calamity"; "the earthquake was a ...
• a state of extreme (usually irremediable) ruin and misfortune; "lack of funds has resulted in a catastrophe for our school system"; "his policies were a disaster"
• a sudden violent change in the earth's surface

My Common Grammatical Errors

I'm as guilty as others in committing many of the grammatical errors stated here, including the one on whether to use who or whom. Thankfully there is an explanation to that:

Whom will succeed?	Who will succeed?	A simple rule-of-thumb is to use "who" when "he" would also make sense; and use "whom" when "him" would also make sense (e.g. "Him will succeed" does not sound right, while "he will succeed" does).
Who did you give it to?	Whom did you give it to?	As above. "You gave it to he" does not sound right, while "you gave it to him" does. Thus, use "whom".

Subjunctive: Is It Possible To Say "He Do" And Not "He Does"?

I have had trouble trying to figure out whether I can use "he do" in certain situation and not "he does" as the situation commonly requires it.

I'm so glad that I've found the solution to the problem. Thus, the sentence "he does this everyday" is correct but not "he do this everyday." However, "I insist that he do this everyday" is correct but not "I insist that he does this everyday."

Then there are also the problems of "I were, he were, she were". For instance, in the sentence "If I were the King of England", shouldn't it be written as "If I was the King of England"?

Bartleby.com says:

"According to traditional rules, you use the subjunctive to describe an occurrence that you have presupposed to be contrary to fact: if I were ten years younger, if America were still a British Colony.

"When the situation described by the if clause is not presupposed to be false, however, that clause must contain an indicative verb.

The form of verb in the main clause will depend on your intended meaning: If Hamlet was really written by Marlowe, as many have argued, then we have underestimated Marlowe’s genius. If Kevin was out all day, then it makes sense that he couldn’t answer the phone."

The key words here are "presupposed to be false". Simply put, if you have presupposed something to be false, use "were". If it's just a probability, use "was".

But, Bartleby.com says:

Remember, just because the modal verb would appears in the main clause, this doesn’t mean that the verb in the if clause must be in the subjunctive if the content of that clause is not presupposed to be false: If I was (not were) to accept their offer—which I’m still considering—I would have to start the new job on May 2. He would always call her from the office if he was (not were) going to be late for dinner.

Can I Use "Would" In Present Tense?

Ya, can I? Some say I can, some say I can only use "would" in past tense. I need answer!

Note to self: must research this one. In the meantime, I may able to find the answer here. Speaking of "may", can I use its past tense "might" in the present tense as well?

Are They Caught Driving Without A Licence?

... or are they caught driving without licences?

Not to self: find out how to shift between singular or plural.

Donkey Comes Second

Which one is the correct expression, I and my friend or my friend and I? If you ever come across this dilemma in your writing, just remember that the donkey comes second.

Who is the donkey? I'm afraid that's you. So, you must come second. It's my friend and I.

Is Research Singular Or Plural?

Research is singular. It's plural is researches. Hence the sentence "Research debunks 'out of Taiwan' migration theory".

How do I know this? Because the New York Times says so. If NY Times says researches, then it must be the plural of research. The Times can't be wrong.

Should The Noun That Follows The Word "Some" Be Plural?

I've heard people use the expression "some people" in reference to a particular person. So, on the same note, can I say "some bloggers" in reference to only one person?

And another thing, should the noun after the word "all" must always be plural? If that is so, then the phrase "people are advised to postpone all travel" will be wrong? Should it be "all travels" instead?

How Pure Is The English Language?

Here's how it is not:

"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."

By James D. Nicoll.

Uniformised vs Standardised

Ok, nevermind the spelling. It's British. The American spelling is "uniformized and standardized".

I've had a sleepless night over the word "uniformised" which I've used to translate the Malay word "diseragamkan". Seragam in Malay is "uniform", so diseragamkan is to make create a uniformity of someting, hence my translation "uniformised".

The Malay phrase in question is... "harga akan diseragamkan di semua kawasan", which I translated "the price of goods will be uniformised in all areas".

But my superior said the correct translation should be "standardised". So the correct translation should be "the price of goods will be standardised in all areas". I kind of agreeing with him. The term is definitely more commonly used, at least in Malaysia.

But to me, standardised has the meaning of having achieve a certain level of quality while uniformised is just about making things looking the same. Had my English was better, I would have argued with him.

But no. I had better learn first.

When In Doubt, Don't Simply Leave It Out

Consult thesaurus.com or Merriam-Webster. Both online.

Phasal Verbs

I find this installment of BBC Learning English, very enlightening. It's about Phrasal Verbs, titled "Face Up To Phrasal".

It has 12 episodes of Fred and Betty battling it our with their "phrasal" ammunition.

Word Has It That...

In not too distant future, I'm going to see a movement, a vertical movement as well as a horizontal one.

A vertical movement because I'll be moving up the rank and vertical movement because I'll be moving from where I sit at the moment to another section of the office.

I've heard about this long ago and in fact, had made known my reluctance to take up the position. So the management knows my stand on the matter but if they decide to proceed with the appointment, I think I'm going to accept it and stick my neck out.

I mean, I can't be writing a letter to reject the appointment. Can I? That would be preposterous.

You might wonder why I'm reluctant to take up the post. Well, because it has something to do with English. Anyone who take up the position must be competent in the language first, and have a good management skills second.

I know I can learn fast and improve my command of the language up to the level required for the post, but not this fast. Not within the next few weeks.

I need at least one full year of intensive learning to be able to become competent in the language.

But I think if the letter is out, like I said, I'm going to accept the post, and then from there, I'm going to learn as fast and as intensive as I can.

I might as well jump into the pond and learn how to swim.

If Feet Is The Plural Of Foot, Why Must They Set Their Foot And Not Their Feet?

Here is the answer. It's call plural noun forms. And set their foot is wrong. It should be set their feet. They've never set their feet on land.

Sixty Per Cent Knowledge, The Rest Is Guesswork And Research

Sixty per cent knowledge, 10 per cent guesswork, another 30 per cent research. That's the amount of competency I could muster when I do translation job.

The ratio needed for good English translators would be 90, 0, 10. Guesswork must be set at zero because you must never allow second-guessing to creep in the translated copy. You must be very sure of the grammar and the choice of words.

Fell Is A Present Tense, Its Past Tense Is Felled

"Fell" is one of the words that confuses me a lot because it has two meaning but both related to something moving from top to below.

Fell is the past tense of fall but it is also a present tense with the meaning "to chop down trees". The past tense of fell is felled. Won't be too confusing for those who learn English from the beginning.

Ah, English!

Buy Books On Amazon

Hi, in case you were suddenly overcome by a strong feeling that you must buy a particular book while reading this blog, here's an Amazon.com search link where you can enter the title book you are looking for and order online. At Amazon.com, you can have the option of buying new, or used ones at a very low price.

No Promo Experiment

I run multiple blogs. Including this one, I have altogether seven active blogs, four of them, with their own domain dotcom names, are hosted on Bluehost, which I don't hesitate to recommend to anyone wanting to have their blogs or websites hosted.

Of the seven blogs,. perhaps this is the only blog that I made no effort to promote, not even submitting to blog directories.

This is meant to be a personal blog which chronicle my experience in learning English and I don't mind if it has only three readers -- me, myself and I -- because I do learn a lot form blogging here.

I shall keep on doing this and let this blog takes the life of its own -- ops, I almost put it as taking its own life -- and if someone does come by, I can only say one thing, thank you for the visit and hope you would come back again if not every day, then every week.

Note: this post is not proofread properly so you might find an intolerable number of grammar mistakes and the weakness in the flow between the paragraphs.

Resigned and Relinquished

Sometimes there are no two ways to learn English other than to use it. And use it often and to try and use it correctly each time. Only then can self-taught English users move forward.

My written English is way better than my spoken English because I seldom speak in the language English. I think a lot in that language though and use the language in its written form more than I use the Malay language.

So you would find me struggling to construct a sentence when you speak to me in English because I keep on correcting the way I speak English and my mind would not be able to process the correction fast enough to make the conversation meaningful.

This is one area I intend to improve on.

Even in its written form I find it hard to express myself in English but at least in writing, I can always hit the backspace or delete keys on the keyboard and type in the new words or correct the tense.

So come to think of it, there no other way to learn English other than to learn how to use it.

Take the word relinquish for instance. I know what relinquish is as opposed to resign. But I have not used the word for maybe three years that I entirely forget that I know the word. So today I had used the word resign instead because no matter how hard I squeeze my brain, the word just don't come by.

Which brings us to my point -- that in order to learn English, you just need to use it as often as possible either actively -- by writing and talking in English, or passively -- by listening, thinking and reading in English.

First Translation Job

Several weeks ago I posted an offer to do free Malay-English and English-Malay translations. Well, guess what, there was finally a taker, a guy who wanted me to translate a blog comment.

The original text was a mix of English and Malay but written in a very colloquial way. Most of the sentences had no proper construction, so I had problems digesting the train of thoughts, something which I must establish first before I could reproduced them in a coherent manner.

Anyway, I've done the translation and emailed it back to the sender, free-of-charge. I'm not sure how he would rate my translation. I hoped it was okay.

I hope also that the guy would at least drop me a note about what he thought of the translation.

My offer still stands. If you want my free translation service, just email me at jaxonsblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Rooting For Grassroots

My senior told me, if you are referring to the root of the grass, then it's grassroot, and if there are many roots, it's grassroots.

However if you are using the term in reference to people, then it must never be grassroot. It should be grassroots.



Hence, he has the support of the grassroots; or if you want to use the term without the letter s, then it must be grassroot leaders or grassroot members. Hence, he has the support of grassroot members.

I think he is both right and wrong. He is wrong about the grassroot being the reference for the root of the grass. I think if I was indeed referring to the root, shouldn't I be writing it as grass root or grass roots, with the spacing in between instead?

The fact that the term is spelled as one word itself is already an evidence that I was not referring to the actual root. No?

Note to self: must research some answer on this. Until and unless I get the definite answer, it would be best that I heed the advice of my senior.

Thinking In English And The Asian Way Of Saying Things

It was another day at work yesterday until my superior came over to my desk in the afternoon and whispered to me to take a look at one of the translations I did earlier in the morning.

"This is very Asian way of saying things," she told me.

The paragraph in question is about a man being struck by lightning at so and so time. I had translated the paragraph literally from the Malay copy without changing the structure of the sentence.

In the original copy, the paragraph was: "Dalam kejadian pada pukul 7 petang itu, Ali, 27, sedang bermain bola bersama rakan-rakan apabila kejadian itu berlaku," -- which itself is already a badly written copy.

So I translated it thus, "In the 7pm incident, Ali, 27, was playing with several friends when the lightning struck."

My superior said the better way of translating the paragraph would be: "Ali, 27, was playing with several friends when the lightning struck at 7pm." I kind of agreeing with her. It does sound better this way.

By the way, in case you want to know the story, the man died in the incident. And according to eye witnesses, the weather was fine at that time. The picture above, taken by yours truly, is for illustration purposes only.

Translation: Pandai Berkata-Kata

Dia pandai berkata-kata: he has a glib tongue; he is a person who is so glib with his tongue.

Antonym -- Lidah kelu: tongue-tied, inarticulate, quiet.

When Do Rain And Flood Become Plural?

I've been questioning myself this question for sometime now. I know rain is rain and flood is flood.

I just that I have no bloody idea when should I use the singular or plural form? Of course I should use the plural form if I'm referring of the rain occurred many times in a day; or flood in plural if I'm referring to several flooding that happened in the past.

But I've seen the plural form of the same rain and the same flood being used in some newsreports.

I guess, it's time to do some research.

Splitting Hairs Over Will And Would

Okay, would is the past tense of will and I don't have any problem using both as long as the tense is clear. Problem arises when using would in the present tense.

According to what I can gather from various online sources:

Will is used when the degree of certainty is higher;
Would is used to indicate a theoretical or tentative situation.

BBC has a brief but extensive explanation over the semantic difference between will, would as well as shall. It says:

3. Would (or the contracted form 'd) is sometimes used as an alternative to 'used to' when discussing past habits:

• 'When we were young, we would spend (we'd spend) every summer holiday at the sea-side.'
• 'You would find him (you'd find him) sitting at the bar every lunchtime, drinking that strong black beer and chatting to the bartender until one day he was there no longer.'

Would is also used to make polite requests:

• 'Would you be prepared to do all this work by yourself without any assistance?'
• 'Would you (be so kind as to) pick Jennifer up from school on Monday?'

Would (or its contracted form 'd in conversational English) is also associated with the conditional in its simple, progressive, perfect and passive aspects:

• 'There's no doubt about it. I would definitely (I'd definitely) travel to Mexico with you, if I could afford it.'
• 'You would still be (you'd still be) working for the World Bank, if you hadn't kicked up such a fuss.'
• 'I would have told you (I'd have told you) all about it, if you had phoned me.'
• 'If you wore smarter clothes, you would be invited (you'd be invited) to all the press conferences.' [BBC Learning English]
  

Thank God for BBC!

Here's another great resource for will/would usage in first, second and third conditional situation.

One Of The Best Editorial I've Read Is About Obama Tackling Race Issues

Perhaps, I may be bias because the editorial speaks about Obama and I'm a great admirer of the man. But here's a New York Times editorial about Obama tackling race issues, in which the writer concludes:

We can’t know how effective Mr. Obama's words will be with those who will not draw the distinctions between faith and politics that he drew, or who will reject his frank talk about race. What is evident, though, is that he not only cleared the air over a particular controversy — he raised the discussion to a higher plane.

Read the article and be enlightened about the man, and about how crisp English writing can deliver meanings so powerfully even without constantly resorting to big, multi-syllable words.

Reneged, Renegaded

I might have renegaded but I haven't reneged on my commitment!

Reneged: Failed to carry out promises or commitment; to disown; to renounce.

Renegaded: One who rejects a religion, cause, allegiance, or group for another; a deserter; an outlaw; a rebel.

Source: The Free Dictionary.

Reporting Reported Speech

I think I've found what I had wanted to find, thanks to English Grammar Secrects:

"...when we are reporting something that was said in the past but is still true, it is not obligatory to make the tense 'more in the past'. The choice is up to the speaker. For example:

"The train doesn't stop here."

He said the train doesn't stop here.
He said the train didn't stop here.

"I like Sarah."

She said she likes Sarah.
She said she liked Sarah.

The keyword is "not obligatory", meaning we can write in both ways.

Number, Majority, Total

Ok, this is weird. The article the and a can either make a noun singular or plural. So, while the total, the majority, the number are singulars; a number, a total, a majority, are plurals.

Another thing, in what situation should a noun be plural or singluar the qualifier "any"?

One general rules, when it's in the negative, it's plural, i.e it didn't show any irregularities. But also depends on whether you are refering to one or more subjects after the word "any".

More Reading...

Here's a list of English grammar resources which I plan to read over the weekend:

1. 100 worst grammar mistakes

In the meantime, I'm still looking for a definite answer on how to safely shift between tenses in a sentence and in an essay/article. I understand that the tense must be consistent in a sentence, e.g. "I knew I'm wrong" is wrong while "I knew I was wrong" is right.

But what about this phrase, "He said the museum will be completed in two years"? Shouldn't it be written, "He said the museum would be completed in two years?" Tell me, tell me, because I don't know.

I've asked a friend, whose command of English is better than mine, and all he could tell me was "both sentences can also".

How To Clean Copy

Here's a a course, which I'm sure will be a great resources, on how to clean your copy but I haven't register. I'll do it this week.

Summer Institute for Midcareer Copy Editors is another great copy editing resources.

Claiming That Racial Tensions Have Increased...

Pembangkang mendakwa bahawa ketegangan kaum meningkat. I wouldn't know how to translate this without changing the structure of the sentence, all because of the inability to utilise the word "mount".

The sentence can be translated without changing the structure, like this: "The oppositions claims that racial tensions have mounted".

Moving Beyond "Enhance, Uplift And Improve"

It's time to welcome the word "bloster bolster" into the oft-used enhance, uplift and improve.

And by the way, you don't shift the tense unnecessarily, I was told. But I think there must be an exception to this rule. I think the ability to weave in and out of the past, present and future tenses, is an art in itself that needs perfections.

The only guide I hold on in as far as tense is concerned is this, "It's okay to move from past to present but it's not okay to move back into the past in the same sentence". I don't know if this is true.

Perhaps I may come to this issue in the course of reading The Element of Style By William Strunk and E B White.

Gambling And Betting

... are two different things. Gambling is not only about betting but betting is definitely gambling. Therefore you can't gamble on the election results, but you can bet on it!

I Can Prove To You That Ducks Were Once Chickens

It happened very, very long time ago in the era of The Big Bang. The animal on earth saw the asteroid coming but it was the chickens who knew what actually was going on.

As the giant asteroid approached the earth, they shouted, "The Sky Is Falling, The Sky Is Falling!"

Many of the terrified animal managed to take cover under some rocks, except for the dinasours because they were too big to be taking refuge under the rocks, and some chickens, that were still in the open because they moved too slowly.

In the final moment, as the giant asteroid slammed the earth, the only thing that they could manage was to duck.

And duck they became until today.

Hopelessly Confused By The Article "The"

I'm having a big problem understanding how to properly apply the article "the" before an abbreviation.

For instance, under what circumstances do I need to use the article "the" in an abbreviation.

And what about the name of electoral constituency. Should I write "in the Perai parliamentary seat" or will "Perai parliamentary seat" suffice?

Perhaps, I should start getting to know more about the article "the", starting from the basic. Maybe I can start doing so at the Online Writing Lab or OWL. By the way, in this case, do I need to say "the Online Writing Lab"?

The Acrimony That Comes With Being Dropped

...seems more intense than ever before. Definitions of acrimony on the Web:

bitterness: a rough and bitter manner
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Acrimony was a Welsh stoner metal band who were active during the 1990s. Although the band never achieved mainstream success, during its career it received much critical acclaim and developed a cult following in the British underground metal scene.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrimony

Source: Google

Are You Still Learning?

I do. I learn all the time. Right now I'm reading "The Element of Style" by William Strunk Jr and EB White. It's an old book, revised many times by White, Strunk's trusted disciple. Mine is the fourth edition.

And I must admit I'm a Strunkian convert although I'm not yet a good devotee. Here's the principle of Strunkian, in 59 words:

Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.

But as much as I admire the wisdom of Stunk, I won't do one thing and that is to write Charles's friend or Burns's poem. I think I'll stick with Charles' friend and Burns' poem.

Does It Matter Whether Or Not I'm Right And You're Wrong?

No it doesn't. The only things that matters here is whether or not the or not should be there in the first place!

I've been trying to find a solution to this problem of how to correctly put two conflicting scenarios where one is the alternate to the other, in one sentence. Can I actually use "whether or not" and get away with it without suffering any repercussions from the grammar police?

Somehow it doesn't feel right to say whether or not I'm right. It sounds gramatically correct with whether I'm right or not but still it's mouthful. Then I just realise that it sounds even better with the plain whether I'm right. I'm not sure if I'm right though.

Apparently, the or not issue has been discussed and debated all this while. Columbia Journalism Review has a brief but very informative article on this issue.

It says, among other things, that, "At times, though, balance, euphony and even logic demand `or not' or something else to specify the alternative outcome."

But even then, from now on, I shall try no to use or not after the word whether if that is possible.

One more thing, can I say whether I'm right or otherwise instead? Hmmm... I guess not. Imagine having to write whether or otherwise I'm right... Ah, Shakespeare is turning in his grave again!

The Last English Train Has Left When I Arrived

The last English train had already left when I arrived as village boy at the door of the country's education system.

So I'd just hopped in on the bandwagon of the new education policy and embraced the systems, not knowing whether I should have questioned them or whether I had missed something important.

When I was in Form One, my seniors of three years still had their lessons taught in English, except for Bahasa Malaysia, that is. They had their mathematics, science, history, geography, even arts and literature in English.

I could still remember them talking to each other very fluently in English. Some with British accent.

Somehow, somewhere, sometime in the past, the Malaysian government decided to do away with English as the medium of instruction. When I started Primary One, the medium of instruction had already been switch to Bahasa Malaysia and the English system was all but gone for a couple of years already.

Ah, I had missed the last English train. Things could be different if only they had delayed the train's departure just so that I could hop in and join the ride. Things could have been different today.

Things could not have been this hard. I could have been a man of letters already!

Online English Learning Resource

I can safely say now that I've improved a lot since I started to seriously learn English three years ago, albeit on a self-taught basis. The Internet has been an invaluabe resource in my quest to at least be comfortable with the language if mastering it prove to be too difficult.

The Internet, the greatest invention of our times, not only provided me with reference on the way certain words and phrases live in their natural habitats, but also housed what seemingly an inexaustible English learning resource.

Askoxford.com one of the websites I came across recently which I found to be extremely useful.

By the way, do you know the answer to this question: The city of Siena, in the Tuscany region of Italy, has two horse races each summer that clatter through the city streets. On what dates do the races take place?

If you do, then head over to Askoxford.com quiz and answer the question correctly. You could win a copy of Oxford Beginner's Bilingual Dictionary! Closing date is on Feb 17.

Ah, Experties, Privelege -- What Was I Thinking?

Sometimes it was not because you don't know the spelling of certain words. For instance, I know exactly how to spell expertise and privilege, but somehow misspellings as embarrassing as experties and privelege can still creep into a copy.

It's okay -- at least, it's okay -- if the copies are for your own consumption. But what if they are sent out to your company's subscribers? Imagine having to pay for a service that contain kindergarten errors! Ah, you'd be disgracing to the whole organisation!

Perhaps it's a wise thing not to take for granted that you have check everything before sending out a copy. Here's what I'm going to do each time I work on a copy after those two embarrassing incidents -- check every word, check every sentence from top to bottom and then check again after corrections are made. Then repeat the process 10 times.

Entertain even the slighest doubt that you might have gotton things wrong. Here are some of the most commonly misspelled words according to Paul Brians:

absence, abundance, accessible, accidentally, acclaim, accommodate, accomplish, accordion, accumulate, achievement, acquaintance, across, address, advertisement, aggravate, alleged, amend, amendment, annual, apparent, appearance, argument, atheist, athletics, attendance, auxiliary, balloon, barbecue, barbiturate, bargain, basically, beggar, beginning, believe, biscuit, bouillon, boundary, Britain, Buddha, business, calendar, camouflage, cantaloupe, category, cemetery, chagrined, challenge, characteristic, changing, chief, cigarette, climbed, collectible, colonel, colossal, column, coming, committee, commitment, comparative, competent, completely, concede, conceive, condemn, condescend, conscientious, consciousness, consistent, continuous, controlled, convenient, coolly, corollary, correlate, correspondence, counselor, courteous, courtesy, criticize, deceive, defendant...

Click on the Paul Brians' link for the complete list.

Free Translation Service For Bed Engish Readers

I provide Malay-English and English-Malay translation. Although my English is not top-notch yet, I'm a competent Malay language writer, so translating English documents into Malay will not be a problem.

It's the other way around that can prove to be a problem. But I'm learning; and eventhough I may have to take more time to translate Malay documents into English, I should be able to deliver to job, provided the subjects are not too complicated.

I can't do rocket science translation though, whether in English or in Malay. This also applies to complex articles for medical journals or legal documents. Other than that, I'm yours. Signed, sealed and delivered. I'm yours.

If you feel I can be of any service to you, feel free to contact me at jaxonsblog at gmail.com. I'm providing this service as part of my learning process, so it will be free-of-charge for documents of up to 600 words per 24-hour day.

Here's the deal. I'll take one translation job per day but if you have a long article, say 2,000 words, I can still translate it for free but I'm going to need some days to do it. That will work out to be around four days.

But what if I receive translation requests from many people at the same time? If that is the case, I'll still be sticking to my schedule of one job per day. So it will be on first-come first-serve basis. I will try as far as possible to accomodate every request though.

Is there a catch? Yes, but it's not binding. It's only that if you find my service to be of any commercial use, then we can of course work out something. A deal of sort that is not too straining for both sides.

Translation: Pemulihan Cara Kerja/Terapi Cara Kerja

I was searching high and low the other day for the correct translation of the Malay phrase pemulihan cara kerja which is also known as terapi cara kerja. If you translate it literally you will end up with work methods rehabilitation or work methods therapy or the closest will be, work rehabilitation or work therapy.

Basically it's about efforts to rehabilitate the disabled so that they can either work or resume working after a period of disability.

Then the word just came in. It's occupational theraphy or occupational rehabilitation. I managed to find the correct translation after Google-ing the Malaysian Health Ministry's website.

When I keyed in the phrase "cara kerja therapy" in the search function, it came back with a list of jobs and one of them is Occupational Therapist, if I was not mistaken. Then I Google again the term occupational therapy just to double check and bingo! It's the right translation.

English And Patriotism

I'd be going for an English copy-editing class in about 30 minutes, so here's a quick post of a story from the Malaysian national news agency, Bernama, about speaking in English and patriotism.

You know, in Malaysia, there is this whole issues of English being the language of our former colonial master, the British. Here's the news:

Using English Doesn't Make One Less Patriotic, Says Raja Zarith

BANGI, Jan 8 (Bernama) -- Having a good mastery of the English language does not make a Malaysian pro-British or less patriotic, says the wife of the Tunku Mahkota of Johor, Raja Zarith Sofia.

Rather, she said, fluency in English and a good and strong command of it as a language was necessary in the 21st century, whether in daily life, at social gatherings or at work.

"It has nothing to do with being pro-English or pro-British, or with glorifying our British colonial past.

"It has nothing to do with us being any less nationalistic or patriotic," she said when delivering her lecture entitled "Going Global: The Use of the English Language in 21st Century Malaysia" at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia here today.

Raja Zarith Sofia said she chose to speak on the topic as she felt it was an important and timely issue.

"Last year, we celebrated our 50th year of Independence after having been a British colony since the 19th century." [Source: "Using English Doesn't Make One Less Patriotic".]

Hmmm... I agree with her completely. I mean, since when knowing less English was an act of patriotism?

Belajar Bahasa Inggeris Melalui Blog

Percaya atau tidak, sebahagian daripada penambahbaikan dalam penguasaaan Bahasa Inggeris, yang telah saya capai sejak beberapa bulan kebelakangan ini, adalah hasil daripada minat saya menulis dalam blog.

Blog memberi saya ruang untuk melatih-tubi penggunaan Bahasa Inggeris, yang walaupun pada ketika ini masih lagi boleh dikatakan lemah, tetapi telah menunjukkan perkembangan yang memberangsangkan.

Menulis dalam blog juga memaksa saya memerah otak untuk meluahkan apa sebenarnya yang ingin saya perkatakan.

Bahasa Inggeris memanglah bukan satu bahasa yang mudah untuk dipelajari. Sememangnya setiap bahasa asing akan sukar untuk dikuasai kecuali kita berkali-kali menggunakannya dalam sehari.

Baca sebanyak-banyak

Kita perlu membaca supaya kita akan berjumpa perkataan baru dan dengan itu otak kita akan disedarkan dengan kewujudan perkataan itu, dan bagaimana perkataan baru itu berfungsi dan hidup di kalangan perkataan lain dalam satu ayat.

Membaca membolehkan kita menemui perkataan baru dalam habitat semulajadinya -- iaitu antara perkataan dalam satu struktur ayat.

Jangan lepaskan peluang untuk menulis dalam Bahasa Inggeris

Selepas membaca seluas-luasnya, seseorang yang ingin menguasai Bahasa Inggeris perlu menulis sebanyak-banyaknya.

Tetapi pada kebanyakan orang, persekitaran kerjanya tidak memerlukan dia menulis dalam Bahasa Inggeris setiap hari. Oleh itu peluang untuk menulis dalam Bahasa Inggeris hampir tidak ada.

Di sinilah blog dapat mengisi ruang kosong itu. Blog, atas sifatnya sebagai laman web yang perlu dikemaskini secara berkala dalam tempoh dua atau tiga kali seminggu, akan "memaksa" seseorang itu menulis. Jika tidak blognya akan mati dan layu.

Bertutur sebanyak-banyaknya dalam Bahasa Inggeris

Bertutur dalam Bahasa Inggeris merupakan satu lagi cara untuk memperdalamkan penguasaan dalam bahasa ini.

Di Malaysia bagaimanapun, kita tidak ada ruang yang banyak untuk bertutur dalam bahasa asing ini. Jika adapun, Bahasa Inggeris yang kita pertuturkan hanyalah Bahasa Inggeris rojak atau apa yang dikenali sebagai manglish.

Malangnya ramai orang tahu cara untuk belajar Bahasa Inggeris secara percuma -- tulis, baca dan tutur -- tapi ramai yang hanya menggoyangkan kaki tanpa berbuat apa-apa untuk memperbaiki penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris mereka.

Sambil itu mereka terus mempersalahkan langkah kerajaan kerana menggantikan Bahasa Inggeris sebagai bahasa pengantar dengan Bahasa Melayu pada suatu ketika dahulu.

Barangkali ungkapan "malangnya" tidaklah tepat untuk menggambarkan sikap yang sebegini. Barangkali ungkapan yang paling tepat ialah "padan muka".