Bitte um Korrekur 2

Waschbaer3108 · Anmeldungsdatum: 23.08.2006 Beiträge: 25

nochmal was...ich weiß, es ist viel, aber vielleicht könnt ihr auch ja ein bisschen was davon anschauen...

Danke!

The legacy of Apartheid which challenged the success of the negotiations the most was the appalling high willingness to solve problems with violence instead of words. Lethal weapons were easy to get and used almost naturally.
The ANC officially ended their armed battle in July 1990, whereas the PAC did not do this until January 1994, three months before the elections. Until then, they followed the catchphrase “One settler, one bullet” and boycotted the negotiations.
The Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), which was founded by Chief Mangosuthu Buthlezi in 1990 and brought regional Zulu movements together, boycotted them as well.
The different black organisations tried to solve their political arguments like they were used to: by violence. Supporters of the ANC and the IFP, for example, trained groups for matters of self-defence and supplied them with weapons. Inkatha and ANC supporters fought bloody battles. Political and personal motives got mixed up. Entirely incomprehensible and senseless massacres took place in local trains between townships and towns, where passengers were randomly killed.
The escalation of violence is hard to explain. Some whites tried to distance themselves from the problem and quickly declared that this “black-on-black violence” shows that the indigenous Africans are not capable of living in a united nation. Certainly the lack of resources like shelter and jobs as well as the misuse of desperate people for political purposes were more likely to be the real reasons. Another suspicion, which is now partly confirmed, was that there had been an “agent provocateur”. This means that influential adversaries of reform purposely made mischief in order to sabotage the development towards majority rule.
Officially 5695 South Africans fell victim to “political violence” between 1990 and 1994, but the dark figure is much higher.
Consequently it is easy to understand that people often call it the South African marvel that the elections really took place in April 1994, shortly after more deadly bombs were detonated.

Goldenhind · Ehrenmoderator Anmeldungsdatum: 17.08.2006 Beiträge: 399

"The different black organisations tried to solve their political arguments like they were used to: by violence." gefällt mir nicht so sehr. ich würd stattdessen schreiben: "The different black organisations tried to solve their political arguments by the same means as usual, i.e. violence."
Eine Phrase wie "Entirely incomprehensible and senseless massacres" klingt eher nach einem Zeitungsbericht/-kommentar als nach einer wissenschaftlichen Facharbeit, die du ja meines Wissens schreiben möchtest...
"Sich von etw. distanzieren" heißt laut meinem Wörterbuch "to dissociate o.s. from...".
"Some whites tried to distance themselves from the problem and quickly declared that this “black-on-black violence” shows that the indigenous Africans are not capable of living in a united nation." Wenn du indirect speech in Abhängigkeit von einem Verb in passt tense (declardes) nutzt, müssen alle Verben der indirekten Rede auch in past tense stehen.
Im folgenden Satz würde ich dann aber "are more likely to be..." schrieben, da das (deiner Meinung nach) ja eine stetig geltende Tatsache ist.
Bist du sicher, dass man nach "development" towards benutzen kann?
"Shortly after more deadly bombs were detonated" soll wohl past perfect (Plusquamperfekt) sein? Dann muss es heißen "had detonated".

Waschbaer3108 · Anmeldungsdatum: 23.08.2006 Beiträge: 25

Vielen Dank dass du dir die ganze Mühe machst!
leo sagt, dass es to distance o.s. from auch gibt, aber ich übernehme mal dein Wort, nur um sicher zu gehen.
ob es "developement towards" gibt? Na ja, wirklich sicher bin ich mir nicht, ich bin mir hier mittlerweile bei gar nichts mehr sicher, obwohl ich eigentlich nicht so schlecht in Englisch bin... ;-)
ich hätt hier noch "on the raod to majority rule" im Angebot, aber da wirst du mir gleich wieder sagen, dass das nicht besonders wissenschaftlich ist, stimmt's? Hast du vielleicht sonst noch eine Idee?
Oh, und mit were detonated meinte ich "wurden gezündet"? Oder gibt's das nicht?

The legacy of Apartheid which challenged the success of the negotiations the most was the appalling high willingness to solve problems with violence instead of words. Lethal weapons were easy to get and used almost naturally.
The ANC officially ended their armed battle in July 1990, whereas the PAC did not do this until January 1994, three months before the elections. Until then, they followed the catchphrase “One settler, one bullet” and boycotted the negotiations.
The Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), which was founded by Chief Mangosuthu Buthlezi in 1990 and brought regional Zulu movements together, boycotted them as well. The different black organisations tried to solve their political arguments by the same means as usual, i.e. violence. Supporters of the ANC and the IFP, for example, trained groups for matters of self-defence and supplied them with weapons. Inkatha and ANC supporters fought bloody battles. Political and personal motives got mixed up. Entirely incomprehensible and senseless massacres took place in local trains between townships and towns, where passengers were randomly killed.
The escalation of violence is hard to explain. Some whites tried to dissociate themselves from the problem and quickly declared that this “black-on-black violence” showed that the indigenous Africans were not capable of living in a united nation. Certainly the lack of resources like shelter and jobs as well as the misuse of desperate people for political purposes are more likely to be the real reasons. Another suspicion, which is now partly confirmed, was that there had been an “agent provocateur”. This means that influential adversaries of reform purposely made mischief in order to sabotage the development towards majority rule.
Officially 5695 South Africans fell victim to “political violence” between 1990 and 1994, but the dark figure is much higher.
Consequently it is easy to understand that people often call it the South African marvel that the elections really took place in April 1994, shortly after more deadly bombs had detonated.

Goldenhind · Ehrenmoderator Anmeldungsdatum: 17.08.2006 Beiträge: 399

Ich habe mich noch mal schlau gemacht, ich dachte "detonate" heißt nur "explodieren", aber es kann auch so wie du es benutzen wolltest "zur Explosion bringen" heißen. Past perfect würde ich aber in jedem Fall benutzen, also entweder aktiv "had detonated" (nachdem die Bomben explodiert waren) oder passiv "had been detonated" (nachdem die Bomben gezündet worden waren).
Das mit "on the road to" kannte ich noch nicht, deshalb kann ich es natürlich auch nicht beurteilen, im übrigen aber habe ich nichts gegen development, bin mir halt nur nicht sicher, ob man es zusammen mit der Präposition "towards" benutzen kann, das solltest du halt noch einmal prüfen, sofern du es auch nicht sicher weißt.
Und btw: Ich kann dir nur versichern, dass du auch meinem Empfinden nach keinesfalls schlecht in Englisch bist. Deshalb würde ich mich freuen, wenn du hier auch häufiger mal anderen Leuten helfen würdest, denn es gibt hier ne Menge Leute, die noch weitaus größere Schwierigkeiten haben als du smile

Waschbaer3108 · Anmeldungsdatum: 23.08.2006 Beiträge: 25

Klar, ich kann gerne mal helfen, aber erst nach dem 27.1. , da ist der Abgabetermin für die Facharbeit.