Startseite
Forum
Fragen
Suchen
Über Uns
Registrieren
Login
FAQ
Suchen
Foren-Übersicht
->
Grammatik
Antwort schreiben
Benutzername
(du bist
nicht
eingeloggt!)
Titel
Nachrichtentext
Smilies
Weitere Smilies ansehen
Schriftfarbe:
Standard
Dunkelrot
Rot
Orange
Braun
Gelb
Grün
Oliv
Cyan
Blau
Dunkelblau
Indigo
Violett
Weiß
Schwarz
Schriftgröße:
Schriftgröße
Winzig
Klein
Normal
Groß
Riesig
Tags schließen
Optionen
HTML ist
aus
BBCode
ist
an
Smilies sind
an
BBCode in diesem Beitrag deaktivieren
Smilies in diesem Beitrag deaktivieren
Spamschutz
Text aus Bild eingeben
Alle Zeiten sind GMT + 1 Stunde
Gehe zu:
Forum auswählen
Themenbereiche
----------------
Englisch Grundstufe
Grammatik
Textanalysen und Interpretationen
Übersetzungen und Vokabeln
Landeskunde
Sonstiges
Sonstiges
----------------
Off-Topic
Ankündigungen
Thema-Überblick
Autor
Nachricht
Maxi5
Verfasst am: 24. Okt 2005 16:22
Titel: Indirekte Rede
Hi!
Ich hab hier nen Text, den ich in die indirekte Rede setzten muss. Kann vielleicht jemand meine Umwandlung verbessern? Danke schonmal!!!
In a memorable 1980 episode of Yes Minister, the wily mandarin Sir Humphrey Appleby explains to hapless minister Jim Hacker that the purpose of British foreign policy for the past 500 years has been to create a disunited Europe.
"It´s the old divide and rule, you see, that´s why we want to break up the (EU). We tried to break it up from the outside, but that would not work. Now that we are inside we are free to make a complete pig´s breakfast of the whole thing. "
But if that is true, asks the aghast Hacker, why is the foreign office pushing for more countries to join?
"i´d have thought that was obvious,"Sir Humphrey wearily responds. "The more members an organisation has, the more arguments it can stir up, the more furtile and important it becomes."
"What appalling cynism", Hacker sighs. "Yes minister", comes the ever-silky rejoinder: "We call it diplomacy"
Wer spricht denn jetzt eigentlich? Ich habs mal so gelöst:
In a memorable 1980 episode of Yes Minister, the wily mandarin Sir Humphrey Appleby explains to hapless minister Jim Hacker that the purpose of British foreign policy for the past 500 years has been to create a disunited Europe.
Sir Humphrey said (that) it was the the old divide and rule, you see, that was why they wanted to break up the (EU). He explained (that) they tried to break it up from the outside, but that would not work. He said (that) now that they were inside they were free to make a complete pig´s breakfast of the whole thing.
But if that is true, asks the aghast Hacker, why is the foreign office pushing for more countries to join? Sir H. wearily responds (that) he had have thought that was . He said (That) The more members an organisation has, the more arguments it could stir up, the more furtile and important it becomes.
"What appalling cynism", Hacker sighs. "Yes minister", comes the ever-silky rejoinder: "We call it diplomacy"