英検1級二次スピーチ添削結果:If your family was abducted by the North Korean government, would you support the idea of Japan's threatening North Korea with a possible military action?





Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

This is yet another excellent essay arguing for not fighting with another country - it can be a brave choice, choosing peace, I believe ... very well written here.

Let's see ... it's not wrong to say "would" at the beginning, but in cases like this, we normally talk about what we "should" or "should not".

You'll also see that I changed your use of "it" to "this" in a couple of instances; "this" best directly references what comes right before in the previous sentence, and is more immediate and direct.

It's not just disheartening, but disheartening "to learn" or "to discover" things; and it can be hard to determine which adjective to write first when qualifying a noun, but we would write "innocent Japanese" and not "Japanese innocent", because we want to keep the most defining adjective closest to the noun it qualifies (like "a red velvet dress" or "a tall Nordic man").

Finally, Article 9 is a proper noun so it doesn't need an article to qualify it; and when we say "any other" we mean "any single other", so we need to say "any other country" and not "countries" here - it's "all other countries" or "any other country."

I hope this helps you - fabulous work!

 It is difficult to decide whether or not I would should support the idea of Japan's threatening North Korea, if a family member was abducted by the North Korean government. Many people would support Japan's military actions against the country Korea, but I dare to choose the opposite viewpoint here. I will elaborate on my reasons for this.

 First of all, the abductions have nothing to do with the use of military force. It was absolutely disheartening to discover that a lot of many innocent Japanese Japanese innocent people were seized and many of them have not returned yet. But However, it this is totally different from violent attacks from North Korea, like missile attacks to on our country. From this point of view, I believe we should not mix up the individual issues.

 Second, we should follow the Constitution of Japan, although the Japanese government is trying to change the Article 9, which outlaws war as a means to settle of settling international disputes. Whatever the case, we should not support the idea of Japan's military actions against any other countries country if it becomes legal.

 Finally, if we proceeded with the policy, "An eye for an eye", it this would probably cause another conflict, making it hard to maintain international peace. I think there are ways to communicate without resorting to violence and understand mutually by fostering mutual understanding.(_N) We could ask for help from other countries such as China and the U.S. and stick to peaceful solutions ever .

.... 最後の渾身の ever は言及もされずに無残にも削除されていた。。


posted by Jun at 19:34| Comment(0) | 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


英検1級二次スピーチ添削結果:Why do you think there are few referenda in making important decisions in Japan?



Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

Thank you for this excellent essay about a subject I know so little about - now I can understand it much better!

You did well to write "referenda", though we can also write "referendums" or at times, "a referendum", depending on the context, as you can see above.

We have trends "in" things like popular music; and since you mean that people in other countries listen to the same hit songs regularly and currently, let's use present and not past tense here


Finally, make sure to use articles to qualify countable nouns like mobocracy and amount of money, and to pluralize words like plebiscite when you meant to use these nouns in a general sense!

I hope this helps you - great job!

a mobocracy



There are a couple of reasons for that there are so few referenda in Japan. Let me talk about my opinions on it about this matter.

First of all, I believe one of the characteristics of Japanese people is to be capricious. We are apt to get bored easily(B) and forget many things in a short period. For example, trends of in popular music change quickly in our country compared to in other nations. People in other countries listened to the same hit songs for more than 6 months or even longer. If such citizens like us have the power to vote directly on important selection decisions, the country itself could be become unstable. This is why it is better for the representatives we have chosen to make important judgements.

Second, referenda itself themselves tends tend to cause a mobocracy or Ochlocracy because most people are unfamiliar with politics and do not have knowledge of effective governmental operations.

Moreover, if we hold a referenda, a tremendous amount of money and time are needed. Even when some cases prefer decisions by plebiscite plebiscites, we lack resources, including human resources, making the results meaningless.

These are the reasons why there are few referenda in for making crucial decisions in Japan.




posted by Jun at 16:59| 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

英検1級二次スピーチ添削結果:Politics is the art of compromise. Do you agree?



Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

This is another extremely thoughtful and well-argued essay; thank you for your great efforts. Your writing is impeccable and your errors very subtle and minor!

We can insist "only on our way", but a more common expression is to insist on "our way alone" if we want things to go only our way.

We don't say "contrary" but "on the contrary" to introduce an opposing opinion in a sentence.

There is no need to say "and eventually" - we don't want to start sentences with "and", and "eventually" has the effect of saying "and in the end", so we can just use this word.

Finally, since at the end, you mean "in any given, particular situation", we actually use the article "the" and not "a".

I hope this helps you! Excellent work!

our way aloneはこの機会に覚えちゃいたいです。

I totally agree with the statement that politics is the art of compromise, for several reasons.
First of all, politicians who insist only on their way on their way alone are dangerous on a number of levels. Rarely are these positions based on data or evidence or science.

Contrary On the contrary, effective politicians are pragmatic and pragmatism welcomes compromise. When more than one party discusses a topic, each member gets to know his or her counterpart's arguments, and then they can revise their strategies. And eEventually, they can reach the best solution.

あ〜。his or herを入れないとダメなのか、なるほど!
on the contraryについてはなぜそのようなミスをおかしたのか自分でもわかりません。。

Second, almost all no issues that should be dealt with are not all-or-nothing matters. Let's take an the example of the US military base in Okinawa. Many residents are against keeping the base there because of security reasons. However, due to the location of the Okinawa islands facing to North Korea and China, they need protection by the US military. Even though we hear sometimes sometimes hear sad news about crimes committed by US military soldiers, we have to understand that it this is a political trade-off.
In conclusion, although some people do not like taking (M)a middle way between extremes, I believe compromise is vital to successful politics.




posted by Jun at 16:44| Comment(0) | 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

英検1級二次スピーチ添削結果:Juggling work, marriage, and childrearing



Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

Great job with the essay! I am very proud to see that you had written about such an important topic as gender equality.
For this assignment, I suggest you pay particular attention the corrections regarding sentence structure.

Also, for even more natural English, consider removing first person from your argument. Usually in persuasive and academic essays, words like "I", "me", and "we" are avoided. Instead passive tenses should be used. So, in place of "Also, I believe that the most essential is not to feel guilty about not being able to do everything perfectly," consider the phrasing: Also, removing guilt for not being able to do everything perfectly is essential."





Also, in regards to your argument in general, in the beginning, you state that "women have achieved gender equality", but your following body paragraphs argue that women still have much to worry about that men do not. Be careful not to contradict yourself in this kind of way.
Keep up the great work!

contradict myselfしてた!?




Let me talk about mothers in our country, juggling work, marriage and childrearing child-rearing. Women have gained achieved gender equality in society and a lot of mothers are actually working while raising children. However, I have heard that many of them are experiencing depression from feeling like they are not doing well all the tasks. At work they are required to demonstrate perform excellent performanceexcellently and at home, their children need they are required to provide love, attention, guidance, support and protection to their children. In addition, their partners need them, too.

One of the culprits problems could be deep-rooted cultural assumptions about women's positions roles in and outside home. In Japan, traditional ways of thinking are still predominant when it comes to raising children and doing household chores. For example, when working moms go to work with children left behind and leave their children behind, relatives and even neighbours come to have reservations about the kids' mental and physical development.

渾身の culprits と 付帯状況のwithがいとも簡単に訂正されてるっていう。。

Another cause might be women's desire to be perfect. They aspire to make some achievement to achieve at work. The reality, however, is totally different. After coming back home, babies are tired and cranky, there are dinner dinners to make, dirty dishes are stacked in the sink from breakfast and a heap heaps of laundry to deal with. Exhausted with these tasks, they might make mistakes at work next day. Then job security can be at risk.


To solve these problems, to involve involving their partners is important. To stay connected with friends and their own mothers is helpful as well. Also, I believe that the most essential is not to feel guilty about inability not being able to do everything perfectly. ItMotherhood is just temporary. Eventually their kids grow and they can be free.


inability はnotっていう否定語を使わなく済むようにがんばったのだけどそうでもなかったみたいね。
not being able





posted by Jun at 16:31| 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

英検1級二次スピーチ添削結果:Is the family becoming obsolete?


family_obsolete_ 225584.png

Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

Hello there,

You make excellent points here - this is a very lucidly-constructed essay. Thank you for working so hard!

In terms of articles, we need to refer to "the" particular traditional family "of" previous times, since you are referring to a particular kind of family; and it is "the" particular option of not getting married - here we can best add "at all" to mean "forever" or "for their whole lives."


at all

Then, to introduce the main points of your essay, let's state that you have reasons for "believing this" - you believe the statement you are making.

I have a couple of reasons for this.

Also, "lifestyle" is one word, and you mean that these lifestyles are "varied" - "various" is not ideal, but "varied" is best to mean "really eclectic".


varied VS. various

That's a good point !
But it's so difficult to distinguish one from the other.

- Varied vs. Various?
- various vs varied

various - several different
several - more than two but not very many
varied - 1. of many different types, 2. not staying the same, but changing often

So "varied is used for one thing which changes over time.
"I have had a long and varied career."

- Varied vs various - Grammarist

Finally, "single status" would require an article, but in the context of this sentence, it's ideal to use the action of "being single." It's "being single" that's more accepted now.

I hope this helps you - really great work here.


I totally agree with the statement that the family is becoming obsolete, especially the traditional family in of most developed countries. I have a couple of reasons for believing this.


First off, even though same-sex marriage is not legalized yet in Japan, there is are growning growing number of those who choose to live with their same-sex partners. Also, people now have an the optioin option not to get married for their entire lives.(_E) Understanding and acceptance of such various varied life styles lifestyles are more prevalent, compared to the past.

first off をちょっと初めて使ってみたfirst offデビュー作だった、これ。

そして、a number ofは複数形の名詞がくるから there are じゃん。えw

Furthermore, most women have little desire to get married merely for survival because of their economic independence. They do not rush into marriage, as single status being single In that way is no longer stigmatized. That way, an increasing number of women with college degrees have become career-minded(I) with less interest in finding an ideal partner. People can construct successful lives outside marriage in ways that would have been very difficult to manage 50 years ago.
Even with this far greater range of choices available to them, I personally believe given the current situation, with serious issues of the extremely low birthrate and aging society, something should be done to improve this trend.

That wayは口癖になってた。
TOEFL Speakingで使ってたりしたんだけど。




posted by Jun at 11:21| 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

添削結果:Are food-safety standards strict enough?




Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

Hello there,

This is an excellent essay about a very serious topic I think we all need to think more about. Great job.

At (A), we can use "regarding", but the best phrasing for this kind of sentence is "when it comes to ...".

At (C), we believe "that" certain things are true - this is a case where we do need to include the word "that".

At (D), we want to use "every summer" as the time reference clause, and then state what we "commonly hear in the news" - we also use "in the worst case scenario" when we mention extreme consequences.

Restaurant chains are countable, so we don't use "some", but "many" or "several" or "a few here", or even "various."


It's most natural to refer to "occasional incidents" or say that "occasionally, there are incidents in which ..."

Finally, I know what you mean to say about the dangers of GM food, and how we usually phrase this is to talk about the "long-term" consequences or effects of doing things, and they they are not known, or unknown.

I hope this helps - wonderful work.


Many people are content with the status quo about when it comes to food-safety standards in Japan. They argue that we can depend on the reliability of the food in Japan, protected by strict regulations. I believe, though, that there is still more room to improve the food quality in our country.

First, it is common that every summer every summer, we commonly hear in the news about food poisoning causing many people to get sick or die in the worst case, in the worst case scenario. Some Several restaurant chains sometimes intentionally violate rules at times, which brings about disastrous consequences.(_F)

Second, there are occasionally incidents there are occasional incidents related to food companies, most typically frozen food makers, using production place deception deception at the place of production, as well as forged certificates. Because of this, we cannot trust in what we purchase from supermarkets.

Finally, imported foods food can be harmful. For instance, genetically modified foods pass through inspection because those containing less than 5% of GM crops can be labeled as 'non GM' 'non-GM'. I am afraid of this fact, (K_)since possible results from the long-term effects of eating GM food are still unpredictable not known.

In conclusion, even though Japan is proud of its food safety standards that are strict enough to protect people's lives, something more should be done so that we can believe in what we eat.



posted by Jun at 05:13| 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

添削結果:Are consumption taxes a fair way of raising government revenue?



consumption_tax_ 224602.png

Lv4 ほとんどネイティブの書いた英文と同じレベルに達しています。

This is a very persuasive essay arguing against the wide use of consumption taxes - I agree with your opinions!

You wrote excellently! You'll see that I added a few commas, so take note of their use above, especially around descriptive clauses, which require them on either end.

After we say what is most logical in the first paragraph, we can most naturally say "for reasons of", though you did not write incorrectly here.

I changed a use of "so" to "therefore" - we can always correctly begin a sentence with "therefore", or join the two sentences and use "so" correctly as a conjunction after a comma.

We can refer to the rate of consumption tax, but it's more efficient and natural to refer to the "consumption tax rate", the way we refer to "computer keyboards" and "strawberry cake", using one noun and an adjective for a second noun.

Finally, in terms of natural phrasing, we want to refer to luxury "goods/items" and the "tax burden" at the end.

I hope this helps you - this is really great work.


My answer is NO. Most people claim that consumption taxes are the most logical system, because of their for reasons of simplicity and fairness.(_B) Moreover, consumption taxes are known as "sin taxes", as they are usually levied on items like tobacco, alcohol, and other non-essential purchases. However, necessities are still subject to the tax. So Therefore, I believe that necessities are not a fair way shouldn't be taxed.

First of all, consumption taxes impact taxpayers disproportionately even though the tax itself is proportionate. The baseline cost of living does not change as (F)people's income changes. For example, when the rich purchase milk, the price might be negligible for them, but it could be very costly for the poor. From this point of view, consumption taxes are unfair.

In addition, businesses, specifically small businesses, are forced to raise their product prices and service charges according to the (I)consumption tax rate. Due to their being less competitiveness competitive, this could negatively affect their profits. Big businesses, on the other hand, have systems to deal with tax collection, and they always strategically pass along expense increases to customers strategically.


Considering this the unfairness of consumption taxes, I think the government should impose heavier tax taxes on unnecessary, luxury wares items, or they should offer subsidies to the needy in order to relieve their tax burden.



posted by Jun at 04:48| Comment(0) | 英作文 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする