Is the sentence correct?: "I eagerly wanted to listen to all the presentations, unfortunately, here is the only summary of which I was able to attend."
Let's analyze the parts.I eagerly wanted to listen to all presentations. This statement is about a desire to listen to all presentations.Here is the only summary of which I was able to attend. This statement implies that you were not able to attend all presentations (only some)What to do -You have to connect both statements and give coherence to their relationship.Coherence in writing is the logical bridge between words, sentences, and paragraphs.Connect the all presentations and only some. Here, you are comparing presentations - not presentations and summary.Hence -I eagerly wanted to listen to all presentations; unfortunately, I was able to attend only some, of which I can give you a summary.Connect first the desire to listen to all and attending some. Then add the thing about summary.Only should define the limited number of presentations you were able to attend.Do not use only to describe summary because you appear to look down on your work or deslike it.Only is used to describe your limitation and that limitation is found in the less than expected number of representations attended. This modifier should be placed close to what it modifies. Only some (presentations) - not the summary.
How do teachers tell plagiarism from essays that just look similar?
Like several posters have suggested in this thread, changes in style from the student’s voice is a dead giveaway. Sometimes, that might be dramatic changes in punctuation and sentence structure from the students’ earlier essays or earlier parts of the same paper.Sometimes, in freshman composition papers, it is the use of advanced terminology that I wouldn’t expect in an 18-year old. (For instance, in a freshman composition paper based on their personal experiences, I wouldn’t expect to find references to typological readings, as most 18-year olds have no idea what medieval typology is.)In my own case, I have a little bit of background in linguistics, so it’s a dead giveaway when one of my students who speaks in class with Appalachian dialect traits submits a paper with linguistic markers that I would expect in a speaker from New Jersey or London, and that leads me to check the paper more closely.Whether a student calls the same outdoor activity, hiking, camping, ambling, or wood-walking is a bit of diction that links them to specific regions. The same is true for dash box, glovebox, or jockey box as a term to apply to the part of a car where you store the owner’s manual, or whether the student drinks pop, soda, fizzy water, carbonated bevs, or “cokes” as a generic term for all brands. When a student points out a yellow jacket swarm in the classroom, did the students call them bugs, pests, insects, stingers, wasps, or use the common Appalachian word waspers? If so, did the student’s word choice indicate a dialect that matches what I see in this particular paper?That diction sings out on the page as I read it. Out of four classes and maybe 90 students in my classes each semester, I pretty reliably catch about four students each semester who plagiarize, and usually it’s diction choice from a dialect that first makes my spider-sense tingle. Once the spider-sense tingles, it is usually less than five minutes to identify a passage from an online source by some quick Google-fu.This is why I usually don’t bother with Turnitin.com. It’s an excellent resource, but for me it’s been redundant compared to just knowing the student’s voice.
How do you avoid writing in run-on sentences?
Hi, this is a very common problem and one that I, being German, get into trouble with as well, since the German language, traditionally, and in its prose especially, is famous for the rather lengthy construction of it's sentences that tend, for whatever reason, to run over half a page or more at times, leaving the reader quite lost and confused, if not intimidated in his endeavor to follow where the writer is trying to take him....see what I mean? So....I take one or a maximum of two thoughts at a time - and just break up the sentence. It actually helps my own thinking: Hi, this is a very common problem, that I get into trouble with as well. I am German and the German language is famous for the rather lengthy construction of its sentences, especially in prose. They can, for whatever reason, run over half a page or more at times. The reader is left quite lost and confused, if not intimidated, as he endeavors to follow (where) the writer (is trying to take him)Most of the time, you will find there are plenty of words or phrases that can be eliminated altogether in order to make the text clearer. Good luck!
Are there errors in the sentence?
1) The first one is not all that incorrect. That rapid, breathless tone might be used deliberately in some kinds of modern fiction. However, if the narrative is not really meant to "gallop," then maybe this would be a good fix: > Then one day as I was randomly flipping through channels on the TV, I noticed it was on, so I decided to feed my curiosity once and for all and give it a shot -- and the rest is history. I don't think a period after "on" would improve this passage, nor a comma after "all." These are the two most obvious places to add punctuation, but I think the sentence is better without them. 2) The second one is a run-on sentence (a comma splice). You have a few choices to fix it, but I think these two are the best choices: > The show really does teach a lot, and even though the morals may seem obvious, I think a lot of us need to be reminded of them. > The show really does teach a lot. Even though the morals may seem obvious, I think a lot of us need to be reminded of them.