語学

The 109th brigade planned a counter-attack in the early hours of 24 March but before dawn German troops entered Golancourt, just north-west of Villeselve, so British troops were forced to remain in their defensive positions. The front ran roughly between Cugny and the south of Golancourt. An example of the condition of many British units, was the 54th Brigade of the 18th Division where by nightfall on 23 March, the 7th Bedfordshire and 6th Northamptonshire battalions had c. 206 men each and the 11th Royal Fusiliers had 27 men, who were hurriedly reorganised and then took post in the wood north of Caillouel at 10:00. The battle continued throughout the morning along the entire front and at 11:00, the remnants of the 14th Division were ordered to withdraw further south to the town of Guiscard. A series of small German attacks dislodged the exhausted British troops piecemeal and gaps in the front created by this staggered withdrawal were exploited by the Germans. The 54th Brigade was slowly outflanked by attacks from the north-east and north-west, the brigade fell back into Villeselve and were heavily bombarded by German Artillery from around 12:00. British troops, supported by French infantry attempted to hold the line here but the French received orders to retreat, leaving the British flank exposed; the British retreated with the French and fell back through Berlancourt to Guiscard. The 54th Brigade ordered the retirement of what was left of its battalions to Crepigny and at 03:00 on 25 March they slipped away under cover of darkness to Beaurains. Further north, the 1/1st Hertfordshires war diary read, After an intense bombardment of our trenches the enemy attacked with large numbers. The Bn, after heavy fighting, retired to a crest in front of the FEVILLERS-HEM WOOD ROAD. Here the Bn lost its Commanding Officer, Lieut. Colonel E. C. M. PHILLIPS, about whom, up to the time of writing, nothing is known. In the evening the Bn got orders to withdraw through the 35th Division to MARICOURT where the Bn spent the night.(24 March 1918) By nightfall, the British had lost the line of the Somme, except for a stretch between the Omignon and the Tortille.

奴隷と同じ意味だが少し軽めの表現とは？ 日本語カテゴリー皆さんの ご回答のほど、 お待ちしております。

I'm sort of seeing a guy and things are good, we're sort of between FWB and relationship on the whole scale (we haven't labelled it but I got him a card and chocolate for Valentine's and he bought me lunch in return. Side note: trying to buy a generic valentines card that doesn't use the word lover/bf/partner is hard). http://community.sparknotes.com/2017/03/07/auntie-sparknotes-im-jealous-and-i-hate-it on the whole scaleとlabelled itとgeneric valentines cardはどのような意味でしょうか？よろしくお願いします

サーバントは本来は食べなくても生きられるってサーバントってどういう意味ですか？

英語の子音の聞き取りについてお聞きします。 日本語と英語では周波数が違うので日本人には聞き取りにくいと解説した本も ありますが、例えば bat と　bad を単語単体で聞いた時にネイティブは最後のｔとｄという、 日本人が耳を澄まして聞かないと分からない違い（時には耳を澄ましても 殆ど聞こえない語尾の子音）を明確に「違う音」として聞き分けているのでしょうか？ それともやはり音として聞こえてはいなくて、経験上脳が子音を補完して理解しているのでしょうか？ 上記に派生した質問ですが、とある映画の中のセリフで "　I am Wyatte. " というセリフが有りましたが、どんなに耳を澄まして聞いても最後のｔは聞こえません。 これはそもそもｔを話者が発音していなくて、ネイティブは経験上「ワイアッ」の後にｔを補完して話者も聞き手も理解しているからでしょうか？　だとすれば Wyatte という名前を生まれて初めて聞いたネイティブは「最後はｔ？それともｄ？」なんて聞き返したりしないのでしょうか？

英文添削お願いします。Singapore My name is XX calling from Room100,I'd like you to bring two blankets to my room. I need them because the AC is too strong and it's so cold in the room I can't get to sleep with only one you provide（with only a prepared one） 「（最初から）部屋に用意されているブランケットだけでと表したいのですがどの様な表現が適当でしょうか？ここでのoneはblanketsを指しているつもりなのですが。（二枚いる理由は2人で一室に泊っているからです。）」ちなみにthe AC in the room is working so sttrongly that~.又はthe Ac in the room so strong that~のように表せないものでしょうか？ ２You'd better take some jackets when going to Singapore. It because the ACs are so strong everywhere inside the buildings in the country you catch a cold easily. 全文的には「シンガポールに行くときは上着を持って行った方がいいよ。シンガポールの建物（あくまで経験則上建物内が寒いという意味です）のなかのどこも風邪を引きやすい（すぐ引く）ぐらい寒いから。」のような意味なのですが。ちなみにここはthe ACsと複数にするか単数にするか微妙なのですが複数との理解でよろしいでしょうか？ 3You'd better take some jackets You'd better take some jackets in case you catch a cold when going to Singapore. It because the ACs are so strong everywhere inside the buildings in the country you would/could /might screw up/mess up your trip with your cold. （風邪で旅行を台無しにするかもしれないほど）寒いと表現したいのですが不自然でしょうか？良い表現があれば教えていただきたいと思います。 同様に「風邪で寝込んでしまうほど」と表す場合にyou would /could/might be in bed with cold. とするのは不自然でしょうか？１～３を添削の上良い表現があれば教えて頂ければ幸いです。

和訳はあっているでしょうか？(外国人） Defendants violated Plaintiff's right against self-incrimination, because their policy to refuse suspects from writing their own statements in defense, directly compels Plaintiff to violate his right or have no defense at all. 被告の方針により、被疑者が防御に自分の陳述書を書くことを拒否させられたことは、原告に権利の侵害を直接強制したか、あるいは全く防御がないを完全に否定したことになるので、被告は原告の自己負罪拒否権を侵害した。

和訳はあっているでしょうか？ (外国人） Defendants violated Plaintiff's right to present a defense, by forcing Plaintiff to violate his right against self-incrimination and falsely confess, in order to prevent Plaintiff from going to trial and presenting a defense. 被告は、原告が裁判で防御を提示するのを防ぐために、原告が自らの自己負罪拒否権を侵害し、虚偽の自白を強要することによって、原告の防御権を侵害した。

英文添削お願いします。Argentine I heard from my friend who made a trip to the U.K that when he was at Heathrow Airport , an /one immigration officer had asked him many 1uestions about why you came to England ,how long he would be staying,and how much money he had and so on .Then he had fed up with them and and felt himself being racially discriminated After retuning to Argentine,he told me he would never go there again. 2 I heard from my friend who made a trip to the U.K that when at Heathrow Airport,he had been asked many questions about～.（上記と同じ） ３heard from my friend who made a trip to the U.K that an/one immigration officer at Heathrow Airport had asked him many questions by saying"Why did you come to England?,How long and where will you be staying? ,How much money do you have? and so on."Then～. アルゼンチン人と話をしていて、時制など関係なく話していて、３等はaboutをlike"～"のような言い方だったと思うのですが、「イギリスに行った友達が空港で何しに来たの、何日間どこでいるの、所持金は？とかいっぱい質問されたって聞いたよ。もう行かないって言ってたよ」と一文で纏めたいのですが（自然な表現で）１から３をは不自然とは思うのですが使える部分や修正して頂ければ有り難いです。 また違う表現があれば教えていただければより有り難いです。 よろしくお願いします。

第２次大戦中の英国海軍の活躍を描いた映画を観ていたら、船の航海シーンや敵機との戦闘シーンで Ship bearing Red 1-4-0 Green 8-0. といった号令が聞こえました。このRedとGreenは方向を表しているのでしょうか。どういう意味なのでしょうか。よろしくお願いいたします。

父は意識が先程戻りました。 意識が戻って最初に言った言葉が、「けいこに会いたい。会いに行く。」と言ったそうです。 私は父が意識が戻って本当に嬉しいです。

画像の漢字は何て書いてあるのでしょうか？ 明治時代の本です。 よろしくお願いします。

Whenever I'm trying to work on my portfolio or learn new skills (such as coding a website or learning a new program) she barges in on me and demands to know why I haven't found a job yet, why I'm such a failure child, and compares me to her friends' children my age who work tech jobs and are eating at five-star restaurants every week. barges in on meはどのような意味でしょうか？よろしくお願いします

I'm a 15 year old trans guy in high school. I came out to my parents earlier last year (which was unbelievably terrifying) and they seemed okay with it at the time. Except, well, now things are a bit different. First off, when I first came out to them they refused to let me go by a different name, since my birth name is technically unisex. Even after I explained to them that since it's only ever been used femininely for me and therefore causes all sorts of bad feelings, they wouldn't budge. I figured, whatever, I can deal with it until I get my name officially changed. Their pronoun usage has been... questionable. They still won't use my actual pronouns for more than a sentence even after I correct them. Their pronoun usage has been... questionable. They still won't use my actual pronouns for more than a sentence even after I correct them. の意味と解説をよろしくお願いします

1年半ぐらい前ですけどあるyoutuber同士が「ある留学生が間違った英語を教えている(というかそもそも彼らは教師ではないですけど)」みたいな動画があってそれを見たのですが では留学経験もない、もしくは何ヶ月の短期留学程度で英語教師になっている日本人教師はなんか一体どうなんだと思ったのですが…

onboardの用法についての質問です 英文) Officials at Japan's space agency have reason to celebrate after successfully putting a microsatellite into orbit onboard a domestically made mini-rocket. 訳）日本の宇宙局の職員には、お祝いをする理由があります。それは、国産のミニロケットに搭載した超小型衛星を順調に軌道へと投入したからです。 解説)onboardは乗り物などに「搭載された」という形容詞で、ここではmicrosatellite「超小型衛星」を修飾しています。 解説に形容詞とありますが、前置詞の"on"の用法に近い前置詞ではないかと思われるのですが、いかがなものでしょうか？ 但し、どの辞書を見ても、形容詞(限定用法)としてしか載っていません。

What was the 3/5 compromise?という質問に対しての回答を探しました。 The southern states wanted their slaves to be counted. Their purpose was simply to maximize their influence in the new government. Virginia had 500,00022 free people and 300,000 slaves. South Carolina had 140,000 free people and just over 100,000 slaves. The other southern states had 1/3 or more of their total population as slaves. The northern states, by contrast, were critical of slavery and had fewer slaves in their population. Pennsylvania had 430,000 free people, but less than 4,000 slaves. Massachusetts was the second largest state with 475,000 people, but had no slaves. These northern states objected that the southern states treated slaves as property, to citizens, so it was inappropriate to count them at all for purposes of representation. ＊ In the end they compromised on including 3⁄5 of a state’s slaves in determining their population for determining how many Representatives they would get in the House. つまり最後の文章の、「国の奴隷の３／５を含めた住民数で、人口を決定することに妥協した。これがThe 3⁄5 Compromiseだ。」ということでいいでしょうか？

(大学へ行くのが嫌だという相談投稿に対して回答者が）There's no law that says you have to go straight from high school to college, and straight from college to a career, without ever stopping to consider your options, change your perspective, or explore the world. Gap years are a thing. Minimum-wage temp jobs are a thing. ここでのa thingはどのような意味でしょうか？よろしくお願いします

To prevent anyone from getting too much control over any part of the federal government’s power, each branch was given some share in the other branches’ powers. This is called what? という質問があり、それに該当するであろう文章を探しました。 かなり長く申し訳ないです。 一段落目の最後の☆マークのところを参考にしました。 特に不要でしたら全文読んでいただかなくても大丈夫です。 The powers of the three branches are not, however, entirely separate. The President plays a role in the legislative process, authorized to propose legislation, and given the veto. The President appoints ambassadors, judges, and executive branch officials, and negotiates treaties with other countries, but the Senate has the final say on all that. The great presidential scholar Richard Neustadt went so far as to say that the Constitution didn’t really have separation of powers at all, but “separated institutions sharing powers.” ＜☆＞ The purpose of these shared powers, however, was still to act as a constraint on tyranny. They didn’t want anyone to have too much power, but they also didn’t want anyone to have too much control over their own power. Madison argued that the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachment by others. The constitutional means were these checks and balances of shared powers, while the personal motive was simply jealousy of power. “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition,” Madison argued. あまり自信がないのですが、答えは「separated institutions sharing powers」でしょうか？（☆マークのところです。） もしくは見当はずれの文章を引用している可能性もあります。 全然違うこと言ってるよ、などあればそちらを指摘していただきたいです。 （この以下の文に答えがあるかと自分で訳して読みましたが、特にそれらしきものは見つけられませんでした。） よろしくお願いします。

When designing Congress, what kind of representation did the small states want? What kind did the big states want?　という質問に対して該当する文章を探しています。 As the country developed a stronger sense of national identity after the Civil War, and as claims of corruption in the selection of Senators grew, the demand for direct election of Senators grew. This was finally achieved with the 17th amendment in 1913. A minority of people still argue that this amendment was a mistake, and that an important check on the federal government was lost when the state legislatures’ representation in Congress was eliminated. But even though the state legislatures are no longer directly represented in the Senate, each state still has equal representation, and are so are still represented as distinct political bodies: Wyoming’s less than 600,000 people and California’s 40 million people have the same voice. Some people argue that this is undemocratic, and see the Senate as illegitimate, while others see it as important to ensure the small states are not dominated by a handful of big states. こちらの文章の１段落目を参考にしたのですが、 質問に対して、small stateは州議会の議論を求めている。ということでいいでしょうか？ そして２段落目では、big stateはsmall stateが数の少ないbig stateを支配しないことを求めている。 ということでいいでしょうか？