The Increased Use of Genetically Modified Food Essay Example for Free

The Increased Use of Genetically Modified Food Essay Genetically-modified foods (GM foods) have made a big splash in the news lately. European environmental organizations and public interest groups have been actively protesting against GM foods for months, and recent controversial studies about the effects of genetically-modified corn pollen on monarch butterfly caterpillars1, 2 have brought the issue of genetic engineering to the forefront of the public consciousness in the U. S. In response to the upswelling of public concern, the U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held three open meetings in Chicago, Washington, D. C., and Oakland, California to solicit public opinions and begin the process of establishing a new regulatory procedure for government approval of GM foods3. I attended the FDA meeting held in November 1999 in Washington, D. C. , and here I will attempt to summarize the issues involved and explain the U. S. governments present role in regulating GM food. What are genetically-modified foods? The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. These plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. The enhancement of desired traits has traditionally been undertaken through breeding, but conventional plant breeding methods can be very time consuming and are often not very accurate. Genetic engineering, on the other hand, can create plants with the exact desired trait very rapidly and with great accuracy. For example, plant geneticists can isolate a gene responsible for drought tolerance and insert that gene into a different plant. The new genetically-modified plant will gain drought tolerance as well. Not only can genes be transferred from one plant to another, but genes from non-plant organisms also can be used. The best known example of this is the use of B. t. genes in corn and other crops. B. t. , or Bacillus thuringiensis, is a naturally occurring bacterium that produces crystal proteins that are lethal to insect larvae. B. t. crystal protein genes have been transferred into corn, enabling the corn to produce its own pesticides against insects such as the European corn borer. For two informative overviews of some of the techniques involved in creating GM foods, visit Biotech Basics (sponsored by Monsanto) http://www. biotechknowledge. monsanto. com/biotech/bbasics. nsf/index or Techniques of Plant Biotechnology from the National Center for Biotechnology Education http://www. ncbe. reading. ac. uk/NCBE/GMFOOD/techniques. What are some of the advantages of GM foods? The world population has topped 6 billion people and is predicted to double in the next 50 years. Ensuring an adequate food supply for this booming population is going to be a major challenge in the years to come. GM foods promise to meet this need in a number of ways: Pest resistanceCrop losses from insect pests can be staggering, resulting in devastating financial loss for farmers and starvation in developing countries. Farmers typically use many tons of chemical pesticides annually. Consumers do not wish to eat food that has been treated with pesticides because of potential health hazards, and run-off of agricultural wastes from excessive use of pesticides and fertilizers can poison the water supply and cause harm to the environment. Growing GM foods such as B. t.corn can help eliminate the application of chemical pesticides and reduce the cost of bringing a crop to market4, 5. Herbicide toleranceFor some crops, it is not cost-effective to remove weeds by physical means such as tilling, so farmers will often spray large quantities of different herbicides (weed-killer) to destroy weeds, a time-consuming and expensive process, that requires care so that the herbicide doesnt harm the crop plant or the environment. Crop plants genetically-engineered to be resistant to one very powerful herbicide could help prevent environmental damage by reducing the amount of herbicides needed. For example, Monsanto has created a strain of soybeans genetically modified to be not affected by their herbicide product Roundup  ®6. A farmer grows these soybeans which then only require one application of weed-killer instead of multiple applications, reducing production cost and limiting the dangers of agricultural waste run-off7. Disease resistance There are many viruses, fungi and bacteria that cause plant diseases. Plant biologists are working to create plants with genetically-engineered resistance to these diseases8, 9. Cold toleranceUnexpected frost can destroy sensitive seedlings. An antifreeze gene from cold water fish has been introduced into plants such as tobacco and potato. With this antifreeze gene, these plants are able to tolerate cold temperatures that normally would kill unmodified seedlings10. (Note: I have not been able to find any journal articles or patents that involve fish antifreeze proteins in strawberries, although I have seen such reports in newspapers. I can only conclude that nothing on this application has yet been published or patented.) Drought tolerance/salinity toleranceAs the world population grows and more land is utilized for housing instead of food production, farmers will need to grow crops in locations previously unsuited for plant cultivation. Creating plants that can withstand long periods of drought or high salt content in soil and groundwater will help people to grow crops in formerly inhospitable places11, 12. NutritionMalnutrition is common in third world countries where impoverished peoples rely on a single crop such as rice for the main staple of their diet. However, rice does not contain adequate amounts of all necessary nutrients to prevent malnutrition. If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant Sciences have created a strain of golden rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A)13. Since this rice was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation14, a non-profit organization, the Institute hopes to offer the golden rice seed free to any third world country that requests it. Plans were underway to develop a golden rice that also has increased iron content. However, the grant that funded the creation of these two rice strains was not renewed, perhaps because of the vigorous anti-GM food protesting in Europe, and so this nutritionally-enhanced rice may not come to market at all15. PharmaceuticalsMedicines and vaccines often are costly to produce and sometimes require special storage conditions not readily available in third world countries. Researchers are working to develop edible vaccines in tomatoes and potatoes16, 17. These vaccines will be much easier to ship, store and administer than traditional injectable vaccines. PhytoremediationNot all GM plants are grown as crops. Soil and groundwater pollution continues to be a problem in all parts of the world. Plants such as poplar trees have been genetically engineered to clean up heavy metal pollution from contaminated soil18. How prevalent are GM crops? What plants are involved? According to the FDA and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), there are over 40 plant varieties that have completed all of the federal requirements for commercialization (http://vm. cfsan. fda. gov/%7Elrd/biocon). Some examples of these plants include tomatoes and cantalopes that have modified ripening characteristics, soybeans and sugarbeets that are resistant to herbicides, and corn and cotton plants with increased resistance to insect pests. Not all these products are available in supermarkets yet; however, the prevalence of GM foods in U. S. grocery stores is more widespread than is commonly thought. While there are very, very few genetically-modified whole fruits and vegetables available on produce stands, highly processed foods, such as vegetable oils or breakfast cereals, most likely contain some tiny percentage of genetically-modified ingredients because the raw ingredients have been pooled into one processing stream from many different sources. Also, the ubiquity of soybean derivatives as food additives in the modern American diet virtually ensures that all U. S. consumers have been exposed to GM food products. The U. S. statistics that follow are derived from data presented on the USDA web site at http://www. ers. usda. gov/briefing/biotechnology/. The global statistics are derived from a brief published by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) at http://www. isaaa. org/publications/briefs/Brief_21. htm and from the Biotechnology Industry Organization at http://www. bio.org/foodag/1999Acreage. Thirteen countries grew genetically-engineered crops commercially in 2000, and of these, the U. S. produced the majority. In 2000, 68% of all GM crops were grown by U. S. farmers. In comparison, Argentina, Canada and China produced only 23%, 7% and 1%, respectively. Other countries that grew commercial GM crops in 2000 are Australia, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Mexico, Romania, South Africa, Spain, and Uruguay. Soybeans and corn are the top two most widely grown crops (82% of all GM crops harvested in 2000), with cotton, rapeseed (or canola) and potatoes trailing behind. 74% of these GM crops were modified for herbicide tolerance, 19% were modified for insect pest resistance, and 7% were modified for both herbicide tolerance and pest tolerance. Globally, acreage of GM crops has increased 25-fold in just 5 years, from approximately 4. 3 million acres in 1996 to 109 million acres in 2000 almost twice the area of the United Kingdom. Approximately 99 million acres were devoted to GM crops in the U. S. and Argentina alone. In the U. S. , approximately 54% of all soybeans cultivated in 2000 were genetically-modified, up from 42% in 1998 and only 7% in 1996. In 2000, genetically-modified cotton varieties accounted for 61% of the total cotton crop, up from 42% in 1998, and 15% in 1996. GM corn and also experienced a similar but less dramatic increase. Corn production increased to 25% of all corn grown in 2000, about the same as 1998 (26%), but up from 1. 5% in 1996. As anticipated, pesticide and herbicide use on these GM varieties was slashed and, for the most part, yields were increased (for details, see the UDSA publication at http://www. ers. usda. gov/publications/aer786/). What are some of the criticisms against GM foods? Environmental activists, religious organizations, public interest groups, professional associations and other scientists and government officials have all raised concerns about GM foods, and criticized agribusiness for pursuing profit without concern for potential hazards, and the government for failing to exercise adequate regulatory oversight. It seems that everyone has a strong opinion about GM foods. Even the Vatican19 and the Prince of Wales20 have expressed their opinions. Most concerns about GM foods fall into three categories: environmental hazards, human health risks, and economic concerns. Environmental hazards Unintended harm to other organismsLast year a laboratory study was published in Nature21 showing that pollen from B. t. corn caused high mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars. Monarch caterpillars consume milkweed plants, not corn, but the fear is that if pollen from B. t. corn is blown by the wind onto milkweed plants in neighboring fields, the caterpillars could eat the pollen and perish. Although the Nature study was not conducted under natural field conditions, the results seemed to support this viewpoint. Unfortunately, B. t. toxins kill many species of insect larvae indiscriminately; it is not possible to design a B.t. toxin that would only kill crop-damaging pests and remain harmless to all other insects. This study is being reexamined by the USDA, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other non-government research groups, and preliminary data from new studies suggests that the original study may have been flawed22, 23. This topic is the subject of acrimonious debate, and both sides of the argument are defending their data vigorously. Currently, there is no agreement about the results of these studies, and the potential risk of harm to non-target organisms will need to be evaluated further. Reduced effectiveness of pesticidesJust as some populations of mosquitoes developed resistance to the now-banned pesticide DDT, many people are concerned that insects will become resistant to B. t. or other crops that have been genetically-modified to produce their own pesticides. Gene transfer to non-target speciesAnother concern is that crop plants engineered for herbicide tolerance and weeds will cross-breed, resulting in the transfer of the herbicide resistance genes from the crops into the weeds. These superweeds would then be herbicide tolerant as well. Other introduced genes may cross over into non-modified crops planted next to GM crops. The possibility of interbreeding is shown by the defense of farmers against lawsuits filed by Monsanto. The company has filed patent infringement lawsuits against farmers who may have harvested GM crops. Monsanto claims that the farmers obtained Monsanto-licensed GM seeds from an unknown source and did not pay royalties to Monsanto. The farmers claim that their unmodified crops were cross-pollinated from someone elses GM crops planted a field or two away. More investigation is needed to resolve this issue. There are several possible solutions to the three problems mentioned above. Genes are exchanged between plants via pollen. Two ways to ensure that non-target species will not receive introduced genes from GM plants are to create GM plants that are male sterile (do not produce pollen) or to modify the GM plant so that the pollen does not contain the introduced gene24, 25, 26. Cross-pollination would not occur, and if harmless insects such as monarch caterpillars were to eat pollen from GM plants, the caterpillars would survive. Another possible solution is to create buffer zones around fields of GM crops27, 28, 29. For example, non-GM corn would be planted to surround a field of B. t. GM corn, and the non-GM corn would not be harvested. Beneficial or harmless insects would have a refuge in the non-GM corn, and insect pests could be allowed to destroy the non-GM corn and would not develop resistance to B. t. pesticides. Gene transfer to weeds and other crops would not occur because the wind-blown pollen would not travel beyond the buffer zone. Estimates of the necessary width of buffer zones range from 6 meters to 30 meters or more30. This planting method may not be feasible if too much acreage is required for the buffer zones. Human health risks Allergenicity Many children in the US and Europe have developed life-threatening allergies to peanuts and other foods. There is a possibility that introducing a gene into a plant may create a new allergen or cause an allergic reaction in susceptible individuals. A proposal to incorporate a gene from Brazil nuts into soybeans was abandoned because of the fear of causing unexpected allergic reactions31. Extensive testing of GM foods may be required to avoid the possibility of harm to consumers with food allergies. Labeling of GM foods and food products will acquire new importance, which I shall discuss later. Unknown effects on human healthThere is a growing concern that introducing foreign genes into food plants may have an unexpected and negative impact on human health. A recent article published in Lancet examined the effects of GM potatoes on the digestive tract in rats32, 33. This study claimed that there were appreciable differences in the intestines of rats fed GM potatoes and rats fed unmodified potatoes. Yet critics say that this paper, like the monarch butterfly data, is flawed and does not hold up to scientific scrutiny34. Moreover, the gene introduced into the potatoes was a snowdrop flower lectin, a substance known to be toxic to mammals. The scientists who created this variety of potato chose to use the lectin gene simply to test the methodology, and these potatoes were never intended for human or animal consumption. On the whole, with the exception of possible allergenicity, scientists believe that GM foods do not present a risk to human health. Economic concerns Bringing a GM food to market is a lengthy and costly process, and of course agri-biotech companies wish to ensure a profitable return on their investment. Many new plant genetic engineering technologies and GM plants have been patented, and patent infringement is a big concern of agribusiness. Yet consumer advocates are worried that patenting these new plant varieties will raise the price of seeds so high that small farmers and third world countries will not be able to afford seeds for GM crops, thus widening the gap between the wealthy and the poor. It is hoped that in a humanitarian gesture, more companies and non-profits will follow the lead of the Rockefeller Foundation and offer their products at reduced cost to impoverished nations. Patent enforcement may also be difficult, as the contention of the farmers that they involuntarily grew Monsanto-engineered strains when their crops were cross-pollinated shows. One way to combat possible patent infringement is to introduce a suicide gene into GM plants. These plants would be viable for only one growing season and would produce sterile seeds that do not germinate. Farmers would need to buy a fresh supply of seeds each year. However, this would be financially disastrous for farmers in third world countries who cannot afford to buy seed each year and traditionally set aside a portion of their harvest to plant in the next growing season. In an open letter to the public, Monsanto has pledged to abandon all research using this suicide gene technology35. How are GM foods regulated and what is the governments role in this process? Governments around the world are hard at work to establish a regulatory process to monitor the effects of and approve new varieties of GM plants. Yet depending on the political, social and economic climate within a region or country, different governments are responding in different ways. In Japan, the Ministry of Health and Welfare has announced that health testing of GM foods will be mandatory as of April 200136, 37. Currently, testing of GM foods is voluntary. Japanese supermarkets are offering both GM foods and unmodified foods, and customers are beginning to show a strong preference for unmodified fruits and vegetables. Indias government has not yet announced a policy on GM foods because no GM crops are grown in India and no products are commercially available in supermarkets yet38. India is, however, very supportive of transgenic plant research. It is highly likely that India will decide that the benefits of GM foods outweigh the risks because Indian agriculture will need to adopt drastic new measures to counteract the countrys endemic poverty and feed its exploding population. Some states in Brazil have banned GM crops entirely, and the Brazilian Institute for the Defense of Consumers, in collaboration with Greenpeace, has filed suit to prevent the importation of GM crops39,. Brazilian farmers, however, have resorted to smuggling GM soybean seeds into the country because they fear economic harm if they are unable to compete in the global marketplace with other grain-exporting countries.

Characteristics of Becker in the Film M :: Films Movies M Becker Essays

Characteristics of Becker in the Film M The character of Becker in the film "M" had many childlike qualities, which drew in his victims. These qualities that Becker possessed, he exploited to his own gain. The children immediately gave him their trust because of his ability to relate to them, and he knew that. But I really don't think this was really an alter ego, because he seemed to have these traits all the time. Inside he was really a sick man, to kill there has to be something wrong with him, epically to kill small children, and furthermore little girls. Becker knew how to dram them in. He bought them balloons, and whistled. He bought them fruit, and candy, and openly ate on the street with them. Something that was, "against the norm", for grownups to do. He chatted them up, and they even felt comfortable enough to call him uncle. Becker when confronted reverted back to childhood, acting like he didn't know right from wrong. The way he explained it he was like a kid in a candy store, the girls were tempting him, and the only thing he could do was snatch them up. They preserved his youth. This isn't an uncommon thing to do. Epically with mass murders, they have to make their victims feel comfortable enough to go with them. In the case of John Wayne Gasey, he preformed as a clown and acted like a perfectly nice gentleman when luring his victims. People trusted them, especially their victims, or they never would have been killed in the first place. The element of trust and relating with the prey is apparently crucial in gathering up victims. In the case of Hiltler, he had the whole of Germany under his spell, and that is how no one questioned his tactics. He was a very forceful speaker and people trusted him, and they believed in his ideas for a utopia. If no one trusted his, the war wouldn't have been as devastating and the jews would have left Germany far before they were ever marked as pariahs. Becker had to be trusted or his ploys would have never been carried out. He had to be crafty in his manner and nice enough to keep the children calm. So nobody would suspect what his motives were.

Colloquial English Grammar

Estonian Business School Institute of Foreign Languages GRAMMAR OF SPOKEN ENGLISH Term Paper By Maria Esko BBL-2 Supervisor: Ludmilla Podolski Tallinn 2012 Table of Contents Introduction3 Common Features of Spoken English4 Grammar Characteristics7 Clause Combination7 Position of items8 Pausing, Repeating and Recasting8 Organising the discourse9 Ellipsis9 Response Tokens10 Vague Expressions11 Headers and Tails11 Conclusion12 References13 Introduction In the business world, communication is vital for creating new networks and acquiring important business partners.Communication is the activity of conveying information. Effective communication skills can be considered the key to success. I have chosen to investigate English spoken language in order to clarify what spoken English grammar is. As a non-native speaker I consider learning spoken grammar incredibly important in order to understand the other party. The communication process can be considered successfully completed only when the listener has understood the message of the speaker. The fact that speaking and writing are different is quite obvious.The studies of the spoken English grammar have been neglected for a long time, since it was considered as confusing and full of mistakes. Development of technology has made it possible to analyse spoken language more thoroughly. Therefore many fascinating facts about spoken Grammar have arisen. In this paper I will use the term spoken grammar in the meaning of colloquial English. The characteristics of formal English speaking, e. g. prepared speeches are not analysed in this term paper. This paper gives an overview of the main features of the grammar of spoken English.The differences between spoken and written English are supplied with illustrations. In the conclusion the overall characteristics of the grammar of spoken English have been summarised. Common Features of Spoken English Is there any grammar in spoken English? To answer this question I have to define the overall meaning of grammar. According to Encyclopaedia Britannica the term grammar in a restricted sense refers only to the study of sentence and word structure (syntax and morphology), excluding vocabulary and pronunciation.Although language is the same the grammar of spoken English may differ since following the grammar rules during a conversation is time consuming and unnatural. When spoken language is observed in more detail it also has patterns and specific structures which may be considered as the grammar of spoken language. During a conversation we do not have much time to think what we are about to say and can not plan our speech in advance (excluding some special cases). While listening to a recorded speech it feels normal, fluent and easy to follow. On the other hand, when put on paper it is rather difficult to understand.However it gives an opportunity to notice some specific features of colloquial English language, such as silent pauses, voice filled pauses, repetitions , false starts, discourse markers(small words or fixed phrases used to indicate the beginning or the end of an idea) and short forms (Leech, Svartvik, 2002). Specific features mostly have a contextual meaning for the listener and can indicate different changes in the subject of the conversation. In this paper the term Spoken English language is understood in a narrow sense. It only includes the colloquial English and face-to-face interactions.Prepared speeches and other types of formal English speaking are not taken into account and are not discussed in the given work. In the figure below are presented the seven most typical conditions operating in real-time conversation. These features best describe why spoken language is so difficult to put in writing. Figure 1: Seven conditions operating in conversation (Leech, n. d. , figure 2) Further is given an example of a conversation which illustrates the conditions generally operating in a conversation. It will be later analysed and used as an example for various items of spoken grammar.Four speakers are sitting at the dinner table talking about a car accident that happened to the father of one of the speakers. At the end of this sequence they switch to another topic. I’ll just take that off and Have you got hold of it? are references to a large pan which is on the dinner table. The = sign indicates an utterance which is cut short The + sign indicates an interrupted turn which continues at the next + sign A: I’ll just take that off. Take that off. B: All looks great. C: [laughs] B: Mm. C: Mm. B: I think your dad was amazed wasn’t he at the damage.A: Mm. B: It’s not so much the parts. It’s the labor charges for= D: Oh that. For a car. B: Have you got hold of it? A: Yeah. B: It was a bit erm= A: Mm. C: Mm. B: A bit. A: That’s right. B: I mean they said they’d have to take his car in for two days. And he said all it is is straightening a panel. And they’re like, à ¢â‚¬ËœOh no. It’s all new panel. You can’t do this’. C: Any erm problem. B: As soon as they hear insurance claim. Oh. Let’s get it right. C: Yeah. Yeah. Anything to do with+ A: Wow. C: +coach work is er+ A: Right. C: +fatal isn’t it. A: Now.As can be seen in the example taken from Cambridge Grammar of English a comprehensive guide spoken and written English Grammar and usage (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 165), understanding of the text depends on the context and the immediate situation. Example shows some of the units that can be frequently encountered in spoken grammar, such as indeterminate structures ellipted forms, incomplete structures, subordinate clauses not obviously connected to any particular main clause, interrupted structures with other speaker contributions intervening, words whose grammatical class is unclear.Conversation happens in real time and is spontaneous, therefore speakers make mistakes and we can observe common features of spoken grammar. Some sentences are confusing and hard to understand because we do not have the knowledge of the shared background of the conversation. It is difficult to represent speech in writing so that the reader could easily follow the written conversation. In order to do so there have to be made many remarks to explain what the speaker means. In real-time conversations emotions and vocal intonations are important to understand the speaker.Moreover, it is difficult to determine when the sentence starts and when it ends. This conversation is meant to illustrate precisely what is analysed in the term paper. Spoken Language and Interpersonal Communication In this paper only one part of spoken English will be discussed which is colloquial English. It is an informal interpersonal communication and has its own peculiarities. Conversations are typically carried out in face-to-face interaction with others. They are tied to the participants and the immediate situation. Speakers usually share a common contextual ackground and exchange meanings rather than the content of the message. Meanings will vary depending on the specific social, cultural and institutional knowledge (Biber, Conrad, Leech, 2002, 428). Grammar Characteristics Spoken language and written language coexist. They are not divided sharply but have many different characteristics. Therefore the grammar of colloquial English differs from the written one. There are many differences that could be mentioned; however, due to the limitation of space they remain outside the scope of this paper, which gives a brief overview of the main features of spoken English.Clause Combination In spoken English it is typical when the hierarchy of clauses in sentences is in discord. In real-time communication the speaker is not able to construct over-elaborate patterns of main and subordinate clauses. Usual are sequences of clauses connected by coordinating conjunctions (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 170). Conjunctions are a grammatical resource to link text. In speech coordinating conjunctions are more frequent than in writing. Coordination is less empathic and more vague, which is characteristic of speech (Leech, Svartvik, 1983).Often subordinate clauses are used by one of the speakers to maintain the conversation or to give additional comments. They often occur after a pause to give evaluation to what have been said. Sometimes clauses â€Å"blend† in a sentence it happens when the beginning of a sentence is different from how it was completed. This syntactic structure is common in spoken language and is easily understood by the listener. (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 171): Well, no, Melanie’s actually still a student and she still has ten hours of lectures a week, so she works in McDonald’s in her spare time cos she needs the money and she works in McDonald’s in Hatfield†¦.Subordinate clauses: A: So I turned round and chased after him. B: Just as I would have done. Clausal blend: They ’ve nearly finished all the building work, hasn’t it? Position of items Spontaneous speech often requires adjustments to be made according to the communicative needs. Therefore it is natural when the speaker changes the position of items in a sentence in order to help the listener to the understand information better (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 172). In colloquial English subject-verb inversion often takes place.In informal speech it helps to emphasise the subject (Leech, Svartvik, 1983): B: I think your dad was amazed wasn’t he at the damage. Pausing, Repeating and Recasting There are two types of pauses: unfilled and filled. Unfilled pauses are just silent and quite short. They often indicate a change in the direction or the subject of the conversation. Filled pauses are marked by vocalisations, such as er, erm, uh or uhm. These marks can indicate a shift in the topic or that the speaker has not yet finished talking and is thinking of the best way to continue (Ca rter, McCarthy, 2006, 172).Repetition and recasting are very common in colloquial speech. When answering a question by repeating words or phrases the speaker can get some more time to think. Usually repetition occurs at the beginning of an utterance or clause. Recasting is normal in real-time speaking. It happens due to the fact that the speaker is talking very fast and needs to reformulate words or phrases (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 173-174): I spoke to her last night†¦well, she’s not going to take the job. It was, er, the director, wasn’t it? I, I’m, I’m not sure he’ll he’ll be able to arrange that at such short notice.Organising the discourse Spoken language seems quite unorganised. However, speakers often use specific words and structures to indicate how the speech will continue. For example items such as anyway, okay, right, I mean, so, now, etc. These items are named discourse markers. Structurally these markers do not belong to cla uses (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 174-175). One of the more frequent discourse markers in spoken English is like it is used to mark direct speech (Adolphs, Carter, 2003): Right, we’d better try to phone and see what they have to report.And they’re like, ‘Oh no. It’s all new panel. You can’t do this’. Ellipsis Ellipsis is the absence of elements required by the grammar. However the message doesn’t suffer and missing parts can be understood from the context. In most conversations ellipsis can be classified as initial ellipsis and final ellipsis in some cases also medial ellipsis takes place. In initial ellipsis, words at the beginning of the sentence are dropped, in correspondence in the medial ellipsis in the middle and in the final ellipsis at the end of a sentence (Biber, Conrad, Leech, 2002, 441-443).Also ellipsis can be categorised situational, textual or structural (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 181): Initial ellipsis: Didn’t know tha t film was on tonight. – I is omitted. Final ellipsis: A: I suppose Kathy is still living in that same place. B: Yeah, she is. – living in that same place omitted Medial ellipsis: Yeah dude, I’ gotta start working. – instead of I have got to Ellipsis is highly characteristic of spontaneous speech. During a conversation speakers need to reduce syntactic complexity due to real-time pressures.Ellipsis also takes place when avoiding unnecessary repetition and giving fast responses to other speakers (Biber, Conrad, Leech, 2002, 441). Response Tokens Response tokens are very common in spoken language. These are some adjectives and adverbs used to give quick and clear response to the speaking partner and to show that the user is listening and understands what is said to him. Such words include absolutely, definitely, great, fine, good, really. Some words have an association with a particular context. For example fine is used when making arrangements and reaching decisions.Response tokens help the listener to give quick feedback to the speaker, which is very convenient in case of a conversation (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 188-189): C: Yeah. Yeah. Anything to do with+ A: Wow. C: +coach work is er+ A: Right. C: +fatal isn’t it. A: Now. Vague Expressions Speakers tend to avoid aggressive or authoritative language and in order to sound polite and to soften the language vague expressions are used. The most common are stuff, like, anything, kind, whatever, sort of, etc. Vague expressions soften the information and often are used before some accurate or precise information (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 202-203).Sometimes these expressions are overused by the speaker: Between then and like nineteen eighty four I just spent the whole time, I mean for that whole sort of twelve year period or whatever, erm I was just working with just lots and lots of different people. Headers and Tails Headers and tails are very common features of spoken language. The y rarely occur in written English and seem very strange. A header occurs in a sentence where an item within a clause structure is placed before the clause and repeated in the clause itself. In other words the header stands in the initial position.Most typically header consists of a noun phrase and is followed by one or more pronouns. Headers are used by the speaker to help the listener to orientate in the facts (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 192-193): The teacher with glasses, he seems very nice. Tails are similar to headers; the difference is that these items are placed outside the clause structure. Tails are also typically noun phrases. Their purpose is to clarify something mentioned in the main clause. Usually tails clarify or repeat the referent of a pronoun (Carter, McCarthy, 2006, 194-196): They’re incredibly nice, our neighbours.Conclusion In conclusion it is possible to say that English spoken language has grammar. However there is still much to be researched. The need to i nvestigate spoken grammar is important in order to improve the speaking skills. In world where communications are developing so rapidly, spoken language and the mastery of it is an empowering skill. Writing is practiced everywhere in the world but the art of conversation is practiced rarely (Brazil, 1995, 11). Spoken grammar highlights the contextual and interpersonal aspects of communications. It is an interactive process and usually it is quite rapid.Therefore speakers use different structures in order to give quick comments or answers. Those structures include response tokens and ellipsis. Often the speaker changes the position of items in order to help the listener to understand the topic. In order to make the speech softer and less authoritative speakers use vague expressions. During the conversation the speaker often looses track of thoughts and therefore pauses, repetitions and recasting help to combine new clause structures. Many other characteristics of the grammar of spoke n English can be named.The knowledge of the grammar of spoken English is important for business communications. People need the necessary skills to express themselves in a best possible way. Studying this subject will provide a better understanding of grammar as a whole and can be a source of new knowledge. References Adolphs, S. , Carter, R. , 2003, And she’s like it’s terrible, like: Spoken Discourse, Grammar and Corpus Analysis, International Journal of English Studies Biber, D. , Conrad, S. , Leech, G. , 2002, Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English, Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited Brazil, D. 1995, A Grammar of speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press Carter R. , McCarthy m. , 2006, Cambridge Grammar of English a comprehensive guide spoken and written English Grammar and usage, Cambridge University Press Eggins, S. and D. Slade, 1996, Analyzing casual conversation. London: Cassell Leech G. , Svartvik J. , 1983, A communicative grammar of English, Moscow Prosveshchenie Leech G. , Svartvik J. , 2002, A communicative grammar of English 3d edition, London: Pearson ESL Leech, G. , n. d. , English Grammar in Conversation Lancaster: Lancaster University

Understand the principles and values that underpin work with parents Free Essay Example, 1500 words

This is essential because while practitioners are equipped with sufficient knowledge and expertise, it is also important for the knowledge and opinions of the parents to be considered in the process. Thus, both parties working in collaboration are able to devise an efficient and effective plan for the children (Smith, 2004). Another value embedded into the system includes the adoption of a strengths-based approach. It is vital for all parents to be respected and the process being non-judgmental regarding the parents’ abilities to rear and provide for their child. The programme aims to emphasise and reflect upon each parent’s strengths, expertise, and knowledge, and work on enhancing these capabilities (Smith, 2004). The services should all be inclusive and easily accessible to the parents as another principle of the Work with Parents project. This means that the services should be specifically tailored to meet the requirements of different cultures, genders, and specific lifestyles. Hence, the programmes should include no discrimination and should aim to understand and relate to the specific needs of different families. Thus, the programme should be able to conform to the specific circumstances posed by every family (NOSWWP, 2012). We will write a custom essay sample on Understand the principles and values that underpin work with parents or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now It is also highly emphasised in the principles of the National Occupational Standards that workers should be highly aware and conscious of good practice, and it must thus cater to the needs of the families with the utmost skill and competence. They must apply their skills, knowledge, and training in order to provide high-quality parental support (NOSWWP, 2012). While the main principles of the Work with parents programme have been briefly outlined, the Work with Parents National Occupational Standards underpins and defines fifteen specific principles which govern the programme. The first principle outlines the rights of the child as highlighted and described by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), which was approved in the UK in the year 1991. The second principle highlights the need for practitioners to work in partnership with parents and in accordance with the wishes and demands of the parents involved. It also emphasises the need for practitioners to give parents a sense of independence and autonomy while working with their children (NOSWWP, 2012). The third principle acknowledges the supreme knowledge of parents regarding the unique circumstances of their child and assigns them the role of primary educator for their children.