Groupe d'anglais!

[Stefan]

J'y ai pas pensé mais y a une pseudo équivalence pour le systèeme british (je me suis spécialisé USA donc la GB j'ai unpeu oublié) :

CP = year 2

CE1 = yr 3

CE2 = yr 4

CM1 = yr 5

CM2 = yr 6

va voir ce lien , tu a l'équivalence complète : http://www.ac-nice.fr/daric/pdf/SystEdFrancoAnglais.pdf

donc pour ta phrase dis plutôt : children start learning English in year 3 ca serait beaucoup plus fluide ou "English is taught as soon as year 3 " (ca fait plus anglais, enfin pour moi!)

[eriopse]

Merci beaucoup pour tes explications et pour increase: je pensais à sensibiliser????

[Stefan]

Merci beaucoup pour tes explications et pour increase: je pensais à sensibiliser????

si par sensibiliser tu penses à l'éveil aux langues alors tu peux dire : .... even if early-learning English (ou Spannish, German ....) activities are offered in year 1 or in kindergarden in some schools.

[HOPE4ME]

Merci beaucoup pour tes explications et pour increase: je pensais à sensibiliser????

si par sensibiliser tu penses à l'éveil aux langues alors tu peux dire : .... even if early-learning English (ou Spannish, German ....) activities are offered in year 1 or in kindergarden in some schools.

Pourquoi ne pas traduire CE1 par second grade

In France Children learn English in second grade even if some activites may be offered in English in first grade in some schools

[Stefan]

Merci beaucoup pour tes explications et pour increase: je pensais à sensibiliser????

si par sensibiliser tu penses à l'éveil aux langues alors tu peux dire : .... even if early-learning English (ou Spannish, German ....) activities are offered in year 1 or in kindergarden in some schools.

Pourquoi ne pas traduire CE1 par second grade

In France Children learn English in second grade even if some activites may be offered in English in first grade in some schools

on peut traduire par 2nd grade mais le problème c'est que c'est de l'américain et pas de l'anglais britannique .... après je ne sais pas les exigences quand au mélange des 2 anglais (anglais brit. / anglaus américain) : en fac d'anglais on nous a toujours dit de ne jamais mélanger ( exemple : prononciation et syntaxe anglaises mais vocabulaire américain), mais au CRPE les enjeux ne sont peut être pas les mêmes ... en tout cas moi je ne vais pas me risquer à mélanger les 2.

pour info : jai bossé aussi dans une école britannique (étude d'anglais oblige) et làbas on disait bien Year et pas Grade

[eriopse]

Merci pour toutes ces infos, je me sens tellement nulle, je ne sais pas si ça sert à quelque chose de continuer à bosser!!!! J'ai eu 3.5l 'année dernière en bossant sur assimil, je continue cette année mais j'ai l'impression de faire du sur place....

Enfin bon...

[HOPE4ME]

Merci beaucoup pour tes explications et pour increase: je pensais à sensibiliser????

si par sensibiliser tu penses à l'éveil aux langues alors tu peux dire : .... even if early-learning English (ou Spannish, German ....) activities are offered in year 1 or in kindergarden in some schools.

Pourquoi ne pas traduire CE1 par second grade

In France Children learn English in second grade even if some activites may be offered in English in first grade in some schools

on peut traduire par 2nd grade mais le problème c'est que c'est de l'américain et pas de l'anglais britannique .... après je ne sais pas les exigences quand au mélange des 2 anglais (anglais brit. / anglaus américain) : en fac d'anglais on nous a toujours dit de ne jamais mélanger ( exemple : prononciation et syntaxe anglaises mais vocabulaire américain), mais au CRPE les enjeux ne sont peut être pas les mêmes ... en tout cas moi je ne vais pas me risquer à mélanger les 2.

pour info : jai bossé aussi dans une école britannique (étude d'anglais oblige) et làbas on disait bien Year et pas Grade

Les Américains ils ne comprennent pas l'anglais britannique. Quand tu leur dis, I had a pay rise, ils te disent non on dit pay raise. Or rise c'est le bon mot.

[lenig2]

personne n'a un texte a proposé pour bosser ensemble?

[lenig2]

RECYCLING

World : BBC Magazine, August 1992

Recycling is sometimes good for the environment, but not always. Take glass. Many

of the bottles we deliver faithfully to the bank never return as bottles or even as glass.

There are all sorts of costs involved in recycling bottles, financial and environmental.

Under ideal conditions the financial cost of collecting empty bottles, transporting them

to a glass factory, crushing them and then melting down the bits can be justified. But

only just. Once the environmental costs-energy for transport, fumes from lorries,

energy to crush and melt-are added into the equation, it rapidly becomes obvious that

recycling might not be such a good idea after all. It might, indeed, be better to chuck

the things in a hole in the ground. This is especially true if you are in the UK and the

glass is green. Britain has a glut of green glass. We import most of our wine in green

bottles but our factories use mostly clear glass (whisky, jam, gin). Green glass cannot

be bleached, so much of it never returns to our tables as new bottles. In fact much of it

is used by the road-building industry as a filler. (...)

Markets are important if recycling is to work. It's daft collecting the stuff if nobody is

prepared to pay a fair price for it. Throughout the western world politicians have been

pressing for more and more recycling. Local councils have responded and in the

process produced vast quantities of materials, such as scrap-paper and glass, for which

there are no buyers. Vast stockpiles of the stuff lie around in warehouses until it

becomes too expensive to keep and is dumped or burned. This might all sound pretty

depressing but it does not mean that recycling is inherently bad, only that it has to be

better managed. If you subsidise the collection of materials then you have to subsidise the

markets in some way to. Otherwise you get to the point where once sound markets, such

as recycled paper market, are destroyed by an oversupply of cheap material. That's what

has happened and it is good neither for business nor for the environment.

Bon en voilà un! au boulo!t

[Aspidistra]

Just a question : how do you work? Everybody can prepare a summary of the text, and then the summary can be posted here??

[lenig2]

hello Aspidistra!

yes why not!

A summary, ok, and we can also add our point of view...I have juste opened an other subject, which I have entitled "comment dit-on?" to help ourselves to translate words or sentences...

Go on then!

[lenig2]

This text, entitled "recycling", is an extract from the BBC magazine, published in August 1992.

As the title points it out, it deals with environment, and more precisly with the management (?) of refuse (déchets, détritus) and consequently with ecology.

Since some times (?) we often hear that earth is in danger, numerous problems like pollution and environmental degradation, due to chemical industries, automobil exhaust ....

Our mission is to preserve our planet, and many means can be used to.

For instance, recycling. However, the author, puts forward positive but also negative points of such a practise.

He illustrates the negative points with the example of the bottles. In fact, the have to be transportated and the crushed, which emplies financial costs without mentionning environmental impact.

Another problem, is that politicians ask for more recycling to create a recycling market. But, apparently materials are stocked because they can't find any buyers, and then detroyed, because stoking is expansive.

It's my very short summary, but, it hase been a long time since i have not spoken english..;sorry