[quote=Ishizu;180172]Bonjour ! Je vous mets ci-dessous un commentaire d'article en anglais que j'ai rédigé il y a peu. J'aurais aimé, si possible, que vous en corrigiez les fautes de grammaire et de langue afin de l'améliorer. Thanks in advance !
This article, taken from the weekly London-based magazine The Economist of July, 28th 2007, deals with the (the definite article here is wrong. We are not talking about political life as a subject not as a specific) current political life in Great Britain. It especially centres on the sharply contrasting situation of the most famous two politicians of England, that’s to say David Cameron, the leader of the Conservative party and of the Opposition since December 2005, and Gordon Brown, the former deputy leader of the Labour party and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom since June 2007. As a matter of fact, the journalist tackles a burning issue and wonders why Mr. Cameron – who was considered not so long ago as the most skillful Tory statesman since Margaret Thatcher – can’t avail himself of Mr. Blair’s unpopularity at the end of his mandate and of his opponent’s incompetence, whereas Mr. Brown – who seemed not so long ago overwhelmed by his incapacity and his predecessor’s heritage – enjoys such a the indefinite article is not required here repute among the definite article here is wrong British citizens. That sentence is horrendously long and very difficult to follow !! What’s more, the author of the article endeavours to account for this strange reversal by emphasing, on the one hand, the Opposition leader’s bad luck, and, on the other hand, the legacy of both Conservative and Labour parties and Gordon Brown’s current clever policies. Therefore, we shall draw attention to David Cameron’s problems with his fellow Members of Parliament and to his notoriousness in the electorate. What’s more, we shall delineate awful choice of word - set out is simpler how the journalist compares his (to whom does "his" refer ? as is, it refers to the journalist) situation to his opponent’s one and displays discretion in his analysis of Mr. Brown’s sudden success.
When he was promoted to the Opposition front bench, David Cameron had to struggle with the notoriety of the Tory party, that he tried to make less harsh and severe. As the journalist explains, the leader of the Conservatives strove to seem a young, new politician, who wanted to reposition the mainstream policies of his fellow MPs and to impart new vigour to their image. He paid particular attention to environmental issues and he denied promising the electors major tax cuts (the journalist seems to be in favour of this attitude, for he describes tax-cutting as an outdated, « erstwhile Tory principle »). Mr. Cameron even asserted that the United Kingdom had to reform grammar schools – selective secondary schools which put the stress on a more traditional education – since they no longer offer an escape route for children from the poorest backgrounds. This viewpoint is clearly different from the usual, basic tenets of his party, and that’s why the journalist throws light upon two relevant words, which sound like a slogan for the politician : « newness » and « niceness ». Such unprecedented a (indefinite article is wrong here) behaviour proves inconsistent with the usual standpoints of the Tories, but it enabled Mr. Cameron to grow more popular, to reveal his proficiencies and to have the lead in the main opinion polls. Furthermore, the journalist suggests that the Labour party itself was afraid of the Tory leader, and some words as « talented » or the flattering comparison he draws with Margaret Thatcher (the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom between 1979 and 1990, who managed to reverse the economic decline of the country) bespeak his bias towards the candidate for the premiership.
I'll try and read the rest later !!
|