In the recent years, Singapore has shifted its educational focus towards one which emphasizes more on creativity and one involving more critical thinking. Our universities have also adopted a modular system which requires students to expose themselves to a wider scope of subjects, along with more opportunities to have overseas study attachments. Thus, apart from specializing in a particular field of study, the university hopes to produce all-rounder graduates who will be more adaptable and versatile in the working environment. Furthermore, the universities these days are equipped with better facilities and technologies. We can expect to see recent graduates to be more technology-smart, creative and have more exposure to the world.
Security has always been dependent on technology, and being technology-smart gives our security a competitive edge. The Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) have channelled a large sum of investments in the form of scholarships to nurture bright candidates to become part of their research team. With better trained critical analytical skills and creativity, the recent graduates breathe fresh air into the R&D sector of DSTA. With better brains trained with better facilities and technology, we can foresee better improvements in our defence technologies.
Overseas exposure is good for undergraduates because the environment overseas is different from ours. Learning their positive examples and implementing them locally is a form of improvement for our environment. Implicitly, overseas exposure may even alter future working attitudes when the undergraduates enter the workforce. For example, it is part of the western culture to express one’s feelings openly, while it is part of our culture to be reserved and tolerant. If this western culture is infused into the graduates, the new generation of workforce may be more expressive and outspoken, which I believe will benefit communication and efficiency of the workforce.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
6 :: Common Grammatical Mistakes
This module has made me realise some of my grammatical errors which were left uncorrected over the years!
My first common error lies in the usage of articles. To make my sentences concise, I often omitted articles which must be present. Perhaps this habit came from note-taking, when we often construct incomplete sentences, especially with missing articles. Take the following sentence as an example:
High cost of living has caused a large number of people to immigrate.
I often missed the article ‘the’ in front of High cost. Since ‘high cost’ here is a singular, countable noun, and requires a specific reference, ‘the’ is required. Otherwise, ‘high cost’ could be changed to a plural form, because no article precedes an uncountable noun. Specific reference is required as the noun ‘high cost’ in this case was further elaborated.
My next common error is the sloppy use of pronoun references. While constructing sentences, I do not pay close attention to the subject of my pronoun reference, formally known as antecedent of the pronoun reference from the grammar notes. An example would be:
The need for a rental of lockers has brought much inconvenience to the rugby players. Furthermore, they are in a poor condition.
The use of the pronoun reference ‘They’ in the second sentence is vague and not appropriate. It seems to refer to the rugby players who were in a poor condition. A proper pronoun reference for the lockers should be ‘it’.
My last common error is in using the forms of verb, especially in the usage of has, have and had. These words depend on both the tense and whether the subject is singular or plural. If I do not recall the tenses and the forms that match, I will make the mistake. Perhaps this error stems from my usage of Singlish, when we often use ‘got’ to substitute for any of the forms. Here are some examples of the mistakes I would make:
1) She have been trying hard to pass her ‘O’ level Physics.
2) She had been trying hard to pass her ‘O’ level Physics.
‘Have’ is used with plural subjects or with I/you/we. ‘Has’ is used with singular subjects such as he/she/it. These two forms are used for present tense. Hence, for case 1, ‘have’ should instead be ‘has’. For past tense usage, ‘Had’ can be used with all subjects .Case 2 is correct grammatically if it is a case of the past. However, if we were to refer this as a present ongoing case, we should use ‘has’ instead.
My first common error lies in the usage of articles. To make my sentences concise, I often omitted articles which must be present. Perhaps this habit came from note-taking, when we often construct incomplete sentences, especially with missing articles. Take the following sentence as an example:
High cost of living has caused a large number of people to immigrate.
I often missed the article ‘the’ in front of High cost. Since ‘high cost’ here is a singular, countable noun, and requires a specific reference, ‘the’ is required. Otherwise, ‘high cost’ could be changed to a plural form, because no article precedes an uncountable noun. Specific reference is required as the noun ‘high cost’ in this case was further elaborated.
My next common error is the sloppy use of pronoun references. While constructing sentences, I do not pay close attention to the subject of my pronoun reference, formally known as antecedent of the pronoun reference from the grammar notes. An example would be:
The need for a rental of lockers has brought much inconvenience to the rugby players. Furthermore, they are in a poor condition.
The use of the pronoun reference ‘They’ in the second sentence is vague and not appropriate. It seems to refer to the rugby players who were in a poor condition. A proper pronoun reference for the lockers should be ‘it’.
My last common error is in using the forms of verb, especially in the usage of has, have and had. These words depend on both the tense and whether the subject is singular or plural. If I do not recall the tenses and the forms that match, I will make the mistake. Perhaps this error stems from my usage of Singlish, when we often use ‘got’ to substitute for any of the forms. Here are some examples of the mistakes I would make:
1) She have been trying hard to pass her ‘O’ level Physics.
2) She had been trying hard to pass her ‘O’ level Physics.
‘Have’ is used with plural subjects or with I/you/we. ‘Has’ is used with singular subjects such as he/she/it. These two forms are used for present tense. Hence, for case 1, ‘have’ should instead be ‘has’. For past tense usage, ‘Had’ can be used with all subjects .Case 2 is correct grammatically if it is a case of the past. However, if we were to refer this as a present ongoing case, we should use ‘has’ instead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)