« IELTS Writing Task 2: both sides or one side? | Main | IELTS Speaking Part 2: 'foreign culture' topic »

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Japan was on the second place

hi Simon i find here vocabulary for TASK2..unfortunately,i lost this page..please can you send me ?

Hi, Simon. I think the mistakes are:
- 131 million (not 'millions') tonnes of waste
- 28 million (no 's')
- 5 million (no 's')
- 151 million
- 192 million (no 's')

the US -> the number of US
131 millions -> 131 million
Is it right?

Hi Simon,
I think we should say "the figure for the US was 151" instead of "the US was 151"

Japan was in the second place..
In 1990, the figure for the US was 151, and in 2000 it rose to 192 millions.

Hi Simon,

All "millions" => "million" without "s"

Japan was in the second place...

In 1990, the figure for the US/the amount of waste in the US....

In 1980, US produced 131 million ton of waste. Japan was second with 28 million, while Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million. In 1990, US produced 151, and in 2000 it rose to 192 million.

In 1980, US produced 131 millions tonnes of waste. Japan was second in place with 28 millions, while Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, US produces 151 millions tonnes, and in 2000 it rose to 192
millions.

Dear Simon,

I have got my IELTS result: L - 7.0, R - 8.0,
W - 5.5, S - 5.5. I'm quite disappointing for my speaking and writing part. but anyway your site really helpful too me.

Thanks!!!

it suppose to be million tonnes, right?

Hi dear Simon,
First of all, I think it is million not millions.

Secondly,Japan was in the second place, I mean we need the artical (the)here.

Lastly, in the last sentance we need a verb.

In 1990 the US created 151 milloion of tonnes which rose to 192 million by 2000.

Hi Simon:
1.In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste.
2.Japan was in the second place with 28 millions, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions.
3.In 1990, the figure in the US was 151, and in 2000 it rose to 192 millions.

Actually, I am confused about "millions" or ''million'', can you explain it in detail?

Cheers.

In 1980, the US produced 131 million of tonnes of waste.
Japan was in the second place with 28 million, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million.
In 1990, the figure of US'waste was 151 million, and in 2000 it rose to 192 million.

In 1980, the US produced 131 millions of tonnes of waste. Japan was in second place with 28 millions, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, the US was 151, and in 2000 it rose to 192 millions.

Corrections: In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste. Japan was the second place, with 28 million, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million. In 1990, the US's figure stood at 150 million, and in 2000 it rose to 192 million.

So what are the mistakes? What's the right answer?

ln 1980,Us produced 131 million tonnes of waste.Japan was second with 28 million,while the figures for Poland,Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million.In 1990,US produced 151 million tonnes of waste,and it rose to 192 million in 2000

In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste, and Japan was in second place with 28 million, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million. In 1990, the US was 151 and in 2000 it rose to 192 million.

In 1980, the US produced 131 millions of tonnes of waste. Japan was in second place with 28 millions, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, the US was 151, and in 2000 it rose to 192 millions.
Correction: In 1980, the US produced 131 millions of tonnes of wastes, followed by Japan producing 28 millions while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, figures for US rose significantly to 151 with a sharp rose to 192 million by 2000.

In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste, followed by Japan producing 28 million while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, figures for US rose significantly to 151 with a sharp rose to 192 million by 2000.

In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste, followed by Japan who produced 28 million tonnes while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, figures for US rose significantly to 151 with a sharp rose to 192 million by 2000.

Hi Simon,

Most of the time i love to read essay in sites. I read about ideas and organization. I don't feel energized to write, i just want to read. Does this finally help me to write good essay in exam or i need to practise writing?

In 1980, the US produced 131 millions of tonnes of waste. Japan was in second place with 28 millions, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 millions. In 1990, the US was 151, and in 2000 it rose to 192 millions.

In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste .Japan was in second place by producing 28 million tonnes of waste, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million. In 1990, the waste production in the US was 151 million tonnes, which rose to 192 million tonnes in 2000.

CORRECT ANSWERS FROM SIMON:

Mistakes:

1. When there is a number we say "131 million tonnes". Only use "millions of tonnes" when there is no number.

2. Don't write "in first/second place". It's not a competition!

3. Don't write "the US was + number"

So, here's my corrected paragraph:

In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste. Japan produced the second largest amount, with 28 million tonnes, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were less than 5 million. In 1990, the US created 151 million tonnes of waste, and in 2000 this rose to 192 million tonnes.

...

Hi Ram,

Reading essays will definitely help, but it's a good idea to do some practice too.

Dear Simon,
Just one question.
Is it ok to use "at" 28 million tonnes instead of using "with"?
I'm a bit confused..

Hi Ai,

Yes, both are fine and can usually be used in the same way.

Hi, Simon,
you suggested that "in second place" is not appropriate, as it is not a competition. My question is whether other phases, such as "next came Japan" "followed by Japan", "Japan ranked 2nd" are also inappropriate? in which circumstance will these phrases be used?

thanks a lot for your instruction.

Hi Ken,

Phrases with 'next...' and 'following...' are fine, but I wouldn't use 'ranked' because that also suggests some kind of competition.

If you had a graph about "the top ten universities in the world", for example, then you could use 'first place' or 'ranked second' etc.

Thanks a lot, Simon,
I also noted that some people use "occupy" instead of "account for", use "ascend" instead of "increase" and use "descend" instead of "decrease". but i think these words are awkward, atlhough they appear to be different from the words we normally use. do you think so?

thanks again for your comment.

Hi Ken,

Those are examples of students trying to hard to be "original". An English speaker wouldn't use the alternatives you mentioned in this kind of context.

Hi Simon,
this is a formula popular among Chinese students and teachers, do you think it is suitable? Will the student lose marks for using it?

I guess in the test if you met a student using the formula(or any other formula like this one), you would be able to recognise it at once, is that right?

" I guess I could begin by saying something about (Question 1) and I think I would have to choose (Details for Question 1)
Going on to my next point which is (Q2), I really need to emphasise that (Details for Question 2).
And now with reference to (Question 1) the point I want to make here is that (Details for Question 1)
And so finally, if I have time, in answer to the question of (Question 4), really I should mention that (Details for Question 4)"
Thanks in advance.

Hi Gary,

Those "formula phrases" are fine for organising your ideas, but don't expect them to get you a high score. The examiner will mainly be listening to the "real content" BETWEEN those phrases.

Look at this lesson:

http://ielts-simon.com/ielts-help-and-english-pr/2012/01/ielts-speaking-linking-phrases-dont-impress.html

Hi Simon,

Thanks for your posting. I have purchased your book and hopefully my grade would be improved with your idea.

Let me give it a try.

In 1980, the US produced 131 million tonnes of waste. Japan was in the second place with 28 millions, while the figures for Poland, Portugal and Ireland were lower than 5 millions. In 1990, the figure for US was 151 millions, and it rose to 192 millions a decade later.

Hi Jenny,

Read my "correct answers" comment further up this page. Hopefully you'll notice your own mistakes.

Good luck with the ebook!

Don't feel too bad if you didn't spot all the mistakes! If you're used to reading a lot of bad writing on the Internet (forums, YouTube comments, etc) your brain might be wired to extract the main points while automatically correcting the mistakes. When I quickly glossed over the text the first time, I didn't catch anything except "millions" although I had a gut feeling that something was not quite right.

hi Simon
I just wonder that 'Japan produced the second amount' why you chose amount not number ?

Hi Cherry,

We say "amount of waste" rather than "number of waste".

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment