Una fuente de información para un mejor inglés.
La página con todas las explicaciones de los errores más comunes del Inglés están en el siguiente link:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.htmlSegún mis cálculos son más de 1300 errores comentados y muy bien explicados.
Algunos exjemplos:
crucifix/cross *
A crucifix is a cross with an image of the crucified Christ affixed to it. Reporters often mistakenly refer to someone wearing a “crucifix” when the object involved is an empty cross. Crucifixes are most often associated with Catholics, empty crosses with Protestants.
in spite of/despite *
Although “in spite of” is perfectly standard English, some people prefer “despite” because it is shorter. Be careful not to mix the two together by saying “despite of” except as part of the phrase “in despite of” meaning “in defiance of.”
And note that unlike “despite,” “in spite” should always be spelled as two separate words.
methodology/method *
A fondness for big words isn’t always accompanied by the knowledge of their proper use. Methodology is
about the methods of doing something; it is not the methods themselves. It is both pretentious and erroneous to write “The architect is trying to determine a methodology for reinforcing the foundation now that the hotel on top of it has begun to sink.”
online/on line/in line *
The common adjective used to label Internet activities is usually written as one word: “online”: “The online site selling banana cream pies was a failure.” But it makes more sense when using it as an adverbial phrase to write two separate words: “When the teacher took her class to the library, most of them used it to go on line.” The hyphenated form “on-line” is not widely used; but would be proper only for the adjectival function. However, you are unlikely to get into trouble for using “online” for all computer-related purposes.
As for real physical lines, the British and New Yorkers wait “on line” (in queues), but most Americans wait “in line.”
Algunas opiniones sobre el libro son:
No dejen de ver las:Supplementary Pages,
ejemplo:
Using “who” for people, “that” for animals and inanimate objectsIn fact there are many instances in which the most conservative usage is to refer to a person using “that”: “All the politicians that were at the party later denied even knowing the host” is actually somewhat more traditional than the more popular “politicians who.” An aversion to “that” referring to human beings as somehow diminishing their humanity may be praiseworthily sensitive, but it cannot claim the authority of tradition. In some sentences, “that” is clearly preferable to “who”: “She is the only person I know of that prefers whipped cream on her granola.” In the following example, to exchange “that” for “who” would be absurd: “
Who was it that said, ‘A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle’?” Commonly attributed to Gloria Steinem, but
she attributes it to Irina Dunn.
_.jpg)
