From a linguistic point of view, this sentence is true or false

Advocate ecological civilization and build a green home. The improvement of the ecological environment, the improvement of resource utilization efficiency, and the harmony between man and nature are the new concepts of a well-off society in an all-round way. "Protecting the ecological environment is to protect our jobs", "We not only want gold and silver, but also green waters and green mountains."

With lucid waters and lush mountains, there are sustainable use of gold and silver. This is the language widely spread by the citizens of Ankang, which reflects the great importance that the people of Ankang attach to ecological and environmental protection. Building a moderately prosperous society in an all-round way requires that the ideological, moral, scientific, cultural, and health qualities of the whole nation be markedly improved, and education in ecological ethics should become a part of the building of ideological and moral qualities.

Let the construction of "ecological morality", let the concept of "harmony between human beings and nature" be deeply rooted in the hearts of the people, and let "respect for nature and protect ecology" become the conscious action of the whole people.

Do you analyze this passage to see if it matches the meaning of the sentence?

From a linguistic point of view, there is nothing wrong with this sentence, but from a linguistic point of view, it is a bit awkward.

The continuous improvement of the ecological environment and the continuous improvement of resource utilization have promoted the harmonious development of man and nature, and also promoted the whole society to embark on the path of civilized development with production development, affluent life and good ecology.

I think it would be more fluid and more prominent to the subject-verb collocation and the central meaning of the whole sentence.

There's nothing wrong with it, and the verbal collocation is very reasonable:

Environment (object) - improvement (predicate).

Efficiency (object) - improvement (predicate).

Facilitation (predicate) - harmony (object).

Push (predicate) - society (object) - embark on (predicate) - path (object).

In the sixth natural paragraph of Lesson 24 of Unit 8 of the second grade, "When the World is Still Young", there is a sentence that I dare not agree with.

Look: Just ......In other words, with the condition that "everything does what it is easy to do", there will be the result that "the world is very orderly."

And is this really the case in real life? For example, if a second-grader thinks it is easy to fold an airplane, is there order in the world?

Not necessarily! When students do not listen to lectures in Chinese class and go to origami airplanes, how can there be order in such a class?

Looking at the "easy things" in this sentence, my understanding is that easy things to do are things that do not require challenges, and they can be done easily.

Then the worm is to tell the children to do the "easy things" in life and learning.

That is, tell the child that he doesn't have to do anything when he encounters difficulties, and that he should back down. Because if we don't retreat, there will be no order in the world.

It really doesn't make sense for such a text to be selected as a second-grade Chinese textbook.

As a front-line teacher, I don't know how to guide students to understand this sentence.

So it is advisable to delete this article.

Summary. Good evening, kiss, <>

It has been said that languages should be taught "shallowly+ rather than "deeply". What do you think about this: I think language should be taught deeply, because language is a subject, not only a kind of knowledge, it is also a way of thinking, a cultural background and a mode of thinking, which requires in-depth learning.

Only by in-depth study can we grasp the essence of the language, better grasp the language ability, and better grasp the direction of language learning. <>

It has been said that languages should be taught "shallowly+ rather than "deeply". What do you think about this.

Good evening, kiss, <>

It has been said that language should be taught "shallowly+ rather than "deeply." What do you think about this: I think Chinese should be taught deeply, because Chinese is a key subject, not only a kind of knowledge, but also a way of thinking, a cultural background and a mode of thinking, which all require in-depth learning.

Only with or with in-depth study can we grasp the essence of the language, better grasp the language ability, and better grasp the direction of language learning. <>

I believe that Chinese should be taught in different ways according to the different levels of students. For students who have a foundation in a draft, teachers can conduct in-depth analysis and put forward a deeper understanding; For some students with weak academic qualifications, teachers should adopt a shallow and easy-to-understand approach to help them master basic knowledge and improve learning efficiency. <>

In my opinion, the language should be both shallow and profound, and practice-oriented. To learn to use language, we must go through repeated practice, and we can better master the skills by teaching in simple terms. Therefore, in teaching, we should combine easy-to-understand content and in-depth theories in combination with the actual situation, so that students can not only learn practical skills, but also let them grasp the essence and improve their language literacy.

Liangzhou <>

The author's point of view is that in artistic creation, what ordinary people think is wrong is not necessarily wrong, and if they know how to find the right truth from their mistakes, they will creatively remedy their mistakes, which can not only turn mistakes into right, but also achieve better results than others. As stated in the article:

If you can save, it doesn't matter if it's wrong! Wrong is also right! ”

The article contains such a philosophy: sometimes right and wrong are relative, we cannot simply judge right and wrong about a thing, we must think from a different angle, it inspires us not to be confined to conventions, and to think creatively.

Wrong is also right by Liu Yong. ）

The focus of Chinese language teaching is to develop students' listening, speaking, reading and writing skills. The cultivation of writing ability is the most important part of Chinese teaching, and students' composition level can directly reflect their language proficiency to a certain extent. Therefore, how to cultivate students' writing ability and improve students' writing level in Chinese classroom teaching is a question worthy of teachers.

The classroom teaching process should infiltrate the knowledge of writing in a timely manner, so that students can understand the connection between "learning texts" and "writing texts". Teachers should analyze the content of each lesson "from the perspective of writing" and improve their writing ability through practice. For example, you can practice how to choose materials by analyzing the background of the article, how to review and draft questions by analyzing the topic, how to make sentences by learning words, how to write an outline by analyzing the structure of the paragraph, and how to reveal the topic by summarizing the central part of the paragraph.

In addition, wonderful sentences should be imitated by students on the basis of familiar reading, so as to realize reading with writing and promoting reading with writing, so that students can clearly understand the connection between reading and writing.

Taking "Daddy's Flowers Fall" as an example, because the title of the text is a pun, you can intersperse "how to set an essay topic" in the classroom in a timely manner, and tell students that they can formulate an essay topic through methods such as extension, quotation, imagination and rhetoric, so as to make the essay attract people's attention. For another example, there is a sentence describing the moonlight on an autumn night in the article "A Moonlit Night", which can allow students to understand how to describe the scenery and set off the mood of the characters, and use the classroom to practice the pen, so that students can freely sway the happy scenes and vivid experiences in their hearts.

There will be many experiences of this sentence, and the difference lies in sentence breaks and intonation, so it is not enough to use punctuation alone, and it is recommended to make vocabulary adjustments, such as: in this matter, you are also likely to fail ......

It's not just that your expression is problematic, it's that your expressed opinion is fundamentally inaccurate. You say that what you mean is: "A loser judges a thing based on his own experience, so he thinks that others will fail in doing it as well as him", which is inherently inappropriate.

Because even if a loser does have the experience of failure, it does not mean that others will fail like him, because the attitude and method of others will not necessarily be the same as him.

For example, the loser once wanted to open a door, but he didn't push it open for a long time, and then another person came, and this person also pushed hard, if the door could only be opened, then the loser can tell him, you can't open the door like this. But if the door can be pushed open, but the loser's strength is too small, so he doesn't push it open, then he can't say it to others, and others can't push it open, because maybe others exert more force than him.

However, if another person comes later, and this person is pulling the door, then the loser cannot say that people can't open the door based on their own experience, because although their purpose is to open the door, the method is different.

As a failure, it's better to teach others about your own failures than to say that others will fail too.

Losers often tell others about their failures so that others can learn from them and not repeat their mistakes.

You can put it as: judging by my experience, you will fail to do so.

Losers tend to tell others that you too will fail. Different words have different expressions.

This sentence should be analyzed in context. Different contexts, i.e., speaking contexts, will have different meanings. On the negative side, it is true that people who can't eat grapes and say that grapes are sour will not succeed if they curse others.

On the positive side, it's a lesson based on the experience of the loser to warn people that if you keep doing it, you will fail. Pragmatic analysis needs to be put into context to understand better, otherwise there will be unclear ambiguity, just like them, which makes it difficult for people to understand. Thank you

This is a high school exam question!

Here's the answer! Both B and C belong to the content of time and have nothing to do with the layout of the venue, so they can be quickly excluded.

The remaining two items are quite laborious, in fact, as long as the two sentences in the question stem are condensed, the sentence is "where to hang (embellished, pasted) something", and the end of the sentence refers to the real thing; The sentence refers to "what is hung (decorated, pasted) in what position", and the end of the sentence refers to the location. The sentence emphasizes that it is "banners", "tassels", "slogans" and other general ornaments that are hung (embellished, pasted), rather than other luxury items, which can naturally only be connected with item A; The sentence emphasizes that the position in which these things are hung (embellished and pasted) has been carefully considered, rather than being installed at random, and the connection with it can only be item d.

3.Mom looked at me and Xiaoli and smiled. Looking at my mother, Xiaoli and I smiled.

I'm sorry, I'm just going to do this.