killing fields essays

killing fields essays This essay will discuss the events that happened in Cambodia and how these events were similar to the war events that occurred in Vietnam, the essay will also discuss the important differences in the wars in both countries. In the early 1960s many people thought that Cambodia was near to perfect place with such things as flourishing economy e.g.: Fertile rice fields. This can be also compared with a flourishing Vietnamese economy also with such things as rice fields flourished greatly and many other economical similarities. The Cambodian people went though many years of turmoil and suffering this was a very similar comparison that the Vietnamese had to suffer also with many years of being governed by different countries. The Khmer Rouge were a Cambodian activist movement which was led by Pol Pot. Pol Pot could be seen as a ruling similar to Diem, such as ruling with an iron fist. Diem would force people to do things and killing for unnecessary reasons; Diem was put in power by Americans and had worldwide condemnation. Diem would put peasants in strategic hamlets that were similar to the labour camp Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge had in place for the Cambodian peasants. In these strategic hamlets of Diems many of the peasants suffered and died, as did the Cambodians in the labour camps of Pol Pot. Many of the peasants in Pol Pots labour camps suffered greatly also, they worked hard on the rice and rubber plantations and a great number of them lost their lives. Cambodian went through a five year civil war, this can be compared to the for ever battles of the French or US backed South Vietnam against the Communist North Vietnam led by Ho Chi Minh. In Cambodia the Party center consisting of Pol Pot and some other leaders lead the Khmer Rouge to a victory over the US-backed Republic of General Lon Nol. The Communist North also had many success in defeating a well better equipped US- Backed force. The well better equipped fo ...

Spelling and Pronunciation

Spelling and Pronunciation Spelling and Pronunciation Spelling and Pronunciation By Maeve Maddox Posts on the topic of pronunciation usually provoke a lot of attention, often drawing heated defenses of one pronunciation over another and suggesting that only one can ever be â€Å"correct.† In fact, â€Å"correct† pronunciation differs from century to century and from region to region. Words are affected by pronunciation changes of two kinds: 1. Changes that have taken centuries to develop, the kind that have transformed Old English into the English spoken today. 2. Changes that began as a deliberate alteration of the established pronunciation for some purpose or other. According to Ida A. Ward (The Phonetics of English), the latter type of change arises through some person who deliberately adopts a new pronunciation because he thinks it better; it is an affectation on his part. At first it is probably regarded as a false refinement by those who do not use it, but gradually by frequent repetition, the new pronunciation spreads, and a succeeding generation acquires it as its natural pronunciation. This type of deliberate change probably dates from the 16th- 18th centuries when scholars busied themselves with the â€Å"refinement† of English spelling to make it reflect Latin or Greek origins. One change was to introduce an extra consonant sound into words that did not have them. For example, our word perfect entered English from Norman French as parfet or parfit, as in Chaucer’s â€Å"He was a veray parfit gentil knight.† The modern form perfect acquired its c to show the derivation from Latin perfectio. The English pronunciation eventually changed to reflect the /k/ sound represented by the c. The same thing happened to Norman French verdit when the spelling was changed to verdict. On the other hand, Norman French endite, spelled indict in modern English, is still pronounced without a k sound in spite of the c: /in-DITE/. The word victual, pronounced vittle by many speakers, is another holdout against spelling pronunciation. The consonant d was added to the word aventure to produce modern adventure. In 1701, an observer listed several words that were spelled with d’s and t’s that were not pronounced in speech at that time: of(t)en Chris(t)mas cos(t)ly ghos(t)ly mos(t)ly roas(t) beef husban(d) pagean(t) We(d) nesday wris(t)band Wil(t)shire frien(d) ly han(d)maid fon(d)le can(d)le han(d)le chil(d)ren Modern speakers pronounce the d or t in most of these words, but not in all. The pronunciation of at least two of the words- often and Wednesday- is hotly contested in comment columns on sites such as this one. So far, native speakers don’t try to pronounce the t in castle or listen, but some preachers have been heard to insert it into apostle and epistle. Speakers who become really put out with people who pronounce the l in palm, calm, and almond, probably think nothing of pronouncing the l in fault, falter, vault, Walter, falcon, almanac and cauldron- all words that had the l inserted after they’d been adopted into English without it. Spelling pronunciations that are well established in the language, regardless of their â€Å"original† form, are no longer contested. More recent innovations, like restoring the t in often or pronouncing the l in almond, remain the stuff of blogging controversy. Related posts: How Do You Pronounce â€Å"Often†? L Words in English Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Spelling category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:60 Synonyms for â€Å"Walk†50 Idioms About Arms, Hands, and FingersWoof or Weft?