教えてください。

餅 I 日本文の意味を表すように、 次の各文の( )内に適切な語を入れなさい。 W 1. エレンに皿を洗わせよう。 I'll ( bruon u J2 9d2 ) Ellen ( ga) the dishes. da bomes 2. 私は何かが私の右足に触れるのを感じた。 ) something ( mord n) my right foot. onm Jqal sH (anord I(

theseは何を指してますか？

In the US, the age group that gives the most to charity is the over-55s, also known as the Baby Boomers. However, only about 68 % of Baby Boomers own a smartphone. This means the Baby Boomers are more likely to give through traditional methods and those who can be reached by online micro-giving-based charities are fewer in number. In contrast, about 90% of Millennials, who are aged between 23 to 38, own a smartphone. Millennials are an excellent target for micro-giving-based charities because they are accustomed to technology, so the platforms of fast donating by apps or websites work well. In addition, this generation is working and stronglly

英作文の添削をお願いしたいです💦 解答は賛成しかありませんでした🙇‍♂️よろしくお願いします🙇‍♂️

Date TOPIC Is it a good idea for local g0verniments To build fourist such as stes, theme parks and museums I think that it is hot a g00d idea for (oat governments そO (3 build tourist sites Such theme porks and museums, 2。 as I have tuwo veasons why I think 30 SO、 First, if (ocoal gorernments to build theme par ks, {ocal peple 40 pmay be feel bad. For example, to the theme park, üisitors Come 52 they traffic jam. So, local people may be hard to go 64 cause Campany School. Second, it is wor se effect for the envirohmeht. 75 Or If local goveHhvments to build muzeums, とthey Fave to use 85 a lot ot energy. So, more anol more Carbon dioxde consume. 96 It 1s worse ettect for local people to build museuns. (06 There are I do not agree that local governnehts 117 two reasons, to built tourist &tes, such as theme parks and (27 museums、

Their excellence still remains to be proved by the test of time. この文章の日本語訳が、『それらの書物の卓越性はまだ今後において時という試金石によって証明されなければならない。』なのですが、『〜されなければなら... Read More

進研模試高1過去問で質問があります🙏 この問いはグレーで引いているところから答えを導き出すと思うんですが…考え方を誤っていますか？教えてください！

【必答同題) 6次の英文を読んで、あとの問いに答えよ。(配点 22) Can you die from a cultural difference ? That is the question that a filmmaker wanted to ex lore. So she made a movie about the true story of a doctor, his patient, and their two very different cultures. The doctor in the movie is an American. The patient in the movie is from Afghanistan. In 1988, this Afghan man came to the United States with his wife and ten children. In 2000, he started to feel sick. When he went to the hospital, the doctors found a serious problem. He had stomach cancer. He needed an operation. After he had the operation, he felt much better. So when his doctor told him he needed more treatment, he said no. But did he understand his American doctor ? Did his doetor understand him? Was the patient's life in danger because he and his doctor were from different cultures ? (1 That is what the filmmaker wanted to find out. Religion was, one difference between the patient and the doctor in the movie. The patient refused the treatment for religious reasons. However, according to the movie, the doctor didn't ask him why his religion did not allow itt That was-a big mistake. Actually, the patient's religion does allow tke treatment, The problem was how the doctor planned ta give him the medicine, through a needle in his arm /There were other ways to give the medicine, for example in a *pill. But the doctor never told him that, Why not ? The doctor thought that the medicine was the problem. Another difference was language. The patient did not speak English, but his daughters did. The doctor thought that the daughters told their father everything. But they didn't, They never told him he had cancer. In the movie, a family friend explained that in Afghan culture he doctor does not speak to the patient directly. He speaks to the family. And often the family does not tell the patient the truth. Se did this patient know that he was dying ? It is not clear in the movie. The Afghan man died from cancer before the movie was finished. The filmmaker makes it very clear in the movie that the doctor gave the patient excellent medical care. She also makes it clear that the doctor respected and cared about his patient very much. But was the patient's life shorter because he and his doctor came from different cultures ? (2 ) That is why the filmmaker made the movie. She wants both patients and doctors

教えて欲しいです！

1日本文の意味を表わすように, 次の ( ) に適語(旬)を入れなさい。 (1) 彼女が素晴らしいピアニストであることは言うまでもない。 hout).c that she is an excellent pianist. It (2) 来週の日曜日にピクニックへ行きませんか。 What do you (lre ).ro ) )on a picnic next Sunday? (3) 戦争がいつ終わるかわからない。 There is ( ..).when the war will end. 騒音のために私は眠れなかった。 The noise prevented ( .( )falling asleep. 努力せずには成功できない。 You (CAn ) succeed (c.adheel) making efforts. (6) 私はあなたからの連絡を楽しみにしている。 from you. I am (. (7) 議論を続けても無駄だ。 It is (..h )use (cldinuin) the discussion. (8) 今夜は勉強する気になれない。 I don't L.fad..hk.)siadiug tonight

なぜコンマがつくのか教えてください！ コンマがなくても、情報を追加してることには変わりないのではないでしょうか？

B カンマで情報を追加する(非制限用法) 日 pp.271~274 ③ My brother Jeff, who is a chef, lives in Newcastle. 174] us.OW ertけ 175 ④ We stayed at the Grand Hotel, which some friends recommended to 5) I'mgoing to spend two weeks in New York, where my brother lives. 175 ⑥ We looked at two apartments, both of which were excellent. 176] allst ybody19va labas ]el 177| ⑦ She is hardworking, which he is not. Vak O / en-boog \aniblil.] ai inaM 177] 8 My dad is cooking dinner, which doesn't happen very often. 3~8非制限用法:カンマがつく形(非制限用法)は先行詞に追加の情報を加える。 は,関係詞に that を使ったり省略したりすることはできない。 f.[制限用法] She has a son who isa college student. (彼女には大学生である息子が1人いる) ーどの息子かを絞り込むために「大学生である」を加えている。ほかにも息子がいる可能性がある。 [非制限用法] She has a son, who is a college student. ー「彼女には息子が1人いる」と言い切ってから,「その息子が大学生である」という情報を追加して 1Surいる。e 3, who: 固有名詞に追加説明を行う際には,この形が必須。 ④, which: 先行詞は the Grand Hotel。 6, where: 先行詞は New York(関係副詞の非制限用法)。 6, both of which :「その両方」。ほかに half of which(その半分), neither of which(そのどちらも~な い), none of which(そのどれも~ない)など。先行詞が人なら some of whom(そのうちの何人か)など ITips ®この形で gets mo ortt ni abTOW ert odsse ll ot se の形。 Bach had twenty children, some of whom became composers. (バッハには20人の子どもがいて,その何人かは作曲家になった) の8, which は先行する表現や文の内容全体も受けることができる。 の先行する表現(hardworking)を受けている。 8先行する文全体 (My dad is cooking dinner) を受けている。 し うぶ

見辛かったらすみませんが、問2の英作文の添削をしていただきたいです🤲

2015年度 英語 13 They should not have to lose their livelihoods. Secondlv. although I agree 次の英文は、英語のディベートの授業での対話です。この対話を読み,下の問い に答えなさい。 with Keiko that climate change is a serious problem, I think air travel is a much less damaging source of carbon pollution than, for example, burnimg MR. ROBERTS: Good morning, everybody. Today we have the first of our Coal. We should address these more serious causes first. Finally, the most student debates. The topic this morning is air travel, and the argument is. 法 important reason is the issue of freedom. People in a democracy expect the “Domestic air travel in Japan should be discouraged." Keiko will first argue right to travel as they wish. It has made our lives more convenient and in favor of the proposal and Junko will speak against. Over to you, Keiko. created more opportunities for everyone. We should not reduce our quality of life. Thank you for listening. KEIKO: Good morning, everybody. I am going to speak today in favor of the proposal. Limitless air travel inside Japan is a luxury that we can no longer MR. ROBERTS: Thank you to our two speakers. Now, are there any afford. The main reason is that it is extremely damaging to the questions from the audience? environment. The carbon gases produced by aircraft are very high and are a 頭人 proven cause of global warming. Therefore, we should try and reduce air 問1 次の(1)~(5)の文について, 本文の内容と一致するものには○.一致しないも travel as much as possible to protect the environment, not only for Japan but のには×を,それぞれ解答欄に記入しなさい。 also for the whole world. Secondly, air travel is actually unnecessary within the four islands of Japan. Now, while I appreciate that travel to Okinawa is (1) Keiko's main reason for opposing domestic air travel is the damage it a different case, there are efficient train services throughout Japan that are causes to the environment. h fast and environmentally friendly. These make an excellent alternative to air (2) Keiko thinks that air travel is cheap and efficient. flights, so there is really no need to use airplanes in most cases. Finally, (3) Keiko recommends that people travel between Okinawa and mainland there is an economic reason. Air travel is expensive for passengers because Japan by ship. the price of fuel keeps increasing, but airline companies are still struggling (4) Junko thinks that climate change is not an important problem. to make profits. Moreover, regional airports often cannot attract enough (5) Junko thinks that a lot of jobs will be lost if air travel is reduced. customers, and, overall, the industry is not cost-effective, It's time to admit that air travel is too damaging and expensive to be sustainable. Thank you. 問2 次の質問に英語で答えなさい。 Which of the two speakers do you more agree with? Give at least one JUNKO: Thank you, Keiko. I am going to disagree with the proposal for three reason for your answer. (解答欄:13.8cm×4行) reasons. Firstly, I think there is a strong economic case to support flying. Many jobs depend on air travel, not just the pilots and cabin staff, but also people who work in airports or for airlines, or who rely on fast transport.

見辛かったらすみませんが、問2の英作文の添削をしていただきたいです🤲

2015年度 英語 13 They should not have to lose their livelihoods. Secondlv. although I agree 次の英文は、英語のディベートの授業での対話です。この対話を読み,下の問い に答えなさい。 with Keiko that climate change is a serious problem, I think air travel is a much less damaging source of carbon pollution than, for example, burnimg MR. ROBERTS: Good morning, everybody. Today we have the first of our Coal. We should address these more serious causes first. Finally, the most student debates. The topic this morning is air travel, and the argument is. 法 important reason is the issue of freedom. People in a democracy expect the “Domestic air travel in Japan should be discouraged." Keiko will first argue right to travel as they wish. It has made our lives more convenient and in favor of the proposal and Junko will speak against. Over to you, Keiko. created more opportunities for everyone. We should not reduce our quality of life. Thank you for listening. KEIKO: Good morning, everybody. I am going to speak today in favor of the proposal. Limitless air travel inside Japan is a luxury that we can no longer MR. ROBERTS: Thank you to our two speakers. Now, are there any afford. The main reason is that it is extremely damaging to the questions from the audience? environment. The carbon gases produced by aircraft are very high and are a 頭人 proven cause of global warming. Therefore, we should try and reduce air 問1 次の(1)~(5)の文について, 本文の内容と一致するものには○.一致しないも travel as much as possible to protect the environment, not only for Japan but のには×を,それぞれ解答欄に記入しなさい。 also for the whole world. Secondly, air travel is actually unnecessary within the four islands of Japan. Now, while I appreciate that travel to Okinawa is (1) Keiko's main reason for opposing domestic air travel is the damage it a different case, there are efficient train services throughout Japan that are causes to the environment. h fast and environmentally friendly. These make an excellent alternative to air (2) Keiko thinks that air travel is cheap and efficient. flights, so there is really no need to use airplanes in most cases. Finally, (3) Keiko recommends that people travel between Okinawa and mainland there is an economic reason. Air travel is expensive for passengers because Japan by ship. the price of fuel keeps increasing, but airline companies are still struggling (4) Junko thinks that climate change is not an important problem. to make profits. Moreover, regional airports often cannot attract enough (5) Junko thinks that a lot of jobs will be lost if air travel is reduced. customers, and, overall, the industry is not cost-effective, It's time to admit that air travel is too damaging and expensive to be sustainable. Thank you. 問2 次の質問に英語で答えなさい。 Which of the two speakers do you more agree with? Give at least one JUNKO: Thank you, Keiko. I am going to disagree with the proposal for three reason for your answer. (解答欄:13.8cm×4行) reasons. Firstly, I think there is a strong economic case to support flying. Many jobs depend on air travel, not just the pilots and cabin staff, but also people who work in airports or for airlines, or who rely on fast transport.

couldは書いてありますが、canはダメですか？

(3) 以前は,海外旅行は楽しいものであったが, 今 ではストレスが多くて, 危険になることさえある。 「解答 Traveling abroad [overseas / in for- eign countries / to_foreign countries}- used to be enjoyable [fun/ pleasant_/ pleasurable / interesting], but now [nowa- days()/ these days()] it is very stress- ful and might [could / may] even be dangerous. 別解1 In the past(,) you could enjoy trav- eling abroad, but now it makes you feel very stressed_and sometimes puts you even in danger. 別解2 Traveling abroad used to be a won- derful [a good_/ an excellent] experi- ence, but nowadays(,) [these days()] it gives you a lot of stress and might [could 1may] even involve danger [expose you to danger].