I just discovered this very cool web service called Shared Copy. It allows you to make notes on web pages and share them with others. I tried using it and I think it may be useful for what we do here at ESL Podcast.

I took a news article from today’s Voice of America website and highlighted (made a different color) in yellow certain difficult words. Then on the side I put the definitions of these words so you can get some help if there is a word you don’t understand. It is even possible for you to go on to the page and put your own comments or questions (although in this first experiment, I turned the comments option off).

The article is about the subject of yesterday’s post, the sex scandal involving Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York. Take a look at it here and tell me what you think.

~Jeff

A scandal is when someone does something wrong, usually a well-known person such as a politician or a movie star. There can be many different types of scandals, including scandals involving sex. In today’s U.S. papers, the American press is reporting on a story about the Governor of the State of New York, Eliot Spitzer. Governor Spitzer is accused (is said to be guilty of) visiting a prostitute (a man or woman who provides sex in exchange for money) while on a trip to Washington DC. The governor has admitted to doing something wrong, and will probably resign (give up his job) very soon.

Sex scandals are nothing new to American politics, or probably the politics of any country. One newspaper ran (published) an editorial cartoon (a visual joke usually involving politics) showing the governor in his underwear with his pants down on the ground. We have an expression, “to be caught with your pants down,” which means to be discovered doing something wrong, often while committing the act. Although the expression relates obviously to a sexual situation, it can also be applied to any situation where you are discovered by other people doing something wrong.

So whatever you do today, try not to get caught with your pants down.

~Jeff

Yesterday, Sunday, March 9, at 2:00 a.m. was the beginning of Daylight Saving Time in the U.S. Like many other countries, Daylight Saving is used to save energy (electricity, fuel) by adjusting (changing) the hours of the day to better match the hours when the sun is out. One way Americans know whether to turn the clocks ahead or set them back is to remember: We “spring” ahead in the spring, and we “fall” back in the fall. “Spring” is not just a season; it also means to jump. “Fall” isn’t just a season; it also means to move backwards. This is a very useful way for many people, including me, to remember.

In the U.S., Daylight Saving Time began during World War I. Since there are later hours of daylight between April and October, it made sense to take advantage of (to use for the best results) that daylight for war production (making things useful for the war). The same thing happened during World War II. The federal government again required the states to observe (to obey) Daylight Saving Time to save energy. After World War II, each states decided whether or not to observe Daylight Saving Time. In 1966, Congress passed the Uniform Time Act which standardized (make the same) the length of Daylight Saving Time.

However, not all states observe Daylight Saving Time. Arizona (except some Native American Reservations) and Hawaii are the two states that do not. (Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa also do not observe Daylight Saving Time.) This decision does make sense (have good reason) for the states and areas closer to the equator (the horizontal (side to side) line in the middle of the globe/Earth). The daylight hours there stay more consistent (the same) throughout the year.

Growing up in Arizona, it didn’t seem strange to me that half of the year, I shared the same time with family and friends in other states, and half of the year, I was an hour ahead or behind. In fact, to this day, I still find Daylight Saving Time strange. The worst parts? Losing an hour of sleep in the spring and changing all of the clocks around the house!

~ Lucy

I got an interesting question recently from a listener, Mauricio, about how the different English proficiency tests compare to one another. Mauricio took the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC), and wants to know what his approximate score would be on the International English Language Testing System (IELTS), another popular test of English skills. All these tests can be very confusing, since there is also a test for university students, the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), which is the most popular of them all.

Unfortunately, these tests are different and cannot always be directly compared. In fact, the publisher of the TOEFL and the TOEIC says that you just can’t compare those two tests because they are so different. However, one Canadian language school published this comparison on their website:

Source: Vancouver English Centre

These comparisons are not official or taken from the companies that make these tests. They are what at least one school uses, so they may be helpful to you.

~Jeff

P.S Did you know that ESLPod.com has several lessons to prepare you for taking tests such as the TOEFL? You can find them on ESLPod.com’s Guide to the TOEFL Test page. This series also available to download for free on iTunes. We are not currently updating this podcast, but the older lessons will still be useful to you if you are studying for the exam.

Well, the results are in (are available): Hillary Clinton won the elections in Texas and Ohio that I discussed in yesterday’s post, and so the fight for the presidential nomination in the Democratic Party will continue. The next big election will be in Pennsylvania, seven weeks from now.

So far (up to this point in time), neither Barak Obama nor Hillary Clinton has enough votes to win the nomination. For the Republicans, John McCain will be their nominee (the person who has been named or nominated as the candidate) for president. I talked about McCain a few years ago on English Cafe #40.

One expression that I heard watching the election coverage (news) last night was buyer’s remorse. A buyer is someone who buys or purchases something. Remorse is when you feel sorry for something you did, when you regret doing something. Buyer’s remorse is an expression we use when we buy something (a new car, a new house, a new MacBook Pro with a 15″ screen and 250 gigabyte hard drive!) and then later regret our purchase. We wish we had not bought it.

So how is this related to the election? Well, Hillary Clinton’s opponent, Barak Obama, has become very popular, very quickly in the past two months. He has become so popular that some people think that he has not been as carefully scrutinized (examined closely) as Senator Clinton. For this reason, some news commentators (people who give their opinion on the television and radio news shows) were suggesting that perhaps voters were sorry for supporting him earlier, that they changed their minds and instead are now supporting and voting for Hillary Clinton.

Of course, no one actually buys a political candidate. We should probably say “voter’s remorse.” We will have to see what happens in the upcoming (future) elections to know if the commentators are right.

~Jeff

Today is a very important primary election in the states of Texas and Ohio (see my explanation of the U.S. election system here). One expression that you can read in the American newspapers today is “do or die.” People are saying that these elections today are do or die for one of the candidates, Hillary Clinton.

When something is do or die, we mean that if the person fails now, their chances of winning or succeeding are over, that they will not win in the future. This is often said of situations where the person has one last chance to try to win something. Clinton has lost 11 primaries in a row (one after the other) to her competitor, Barak Obama. If she loses in Texas and Ohio, it will be almost impossible for her to win the race (election) to be the nominee of the Democratic Party in the November elections.

We’ll know the answer to that question by tomorrow morning.

~Jeff

In last week’s post, I talked about how to address a formal and informal letter or email. But what do you do when you don’t know the person’s name to whom you’re sending your letter or message? Or, you don’t know what gender (male or female) that person is?

For a formal or business letter, you can use “Dear Sir or Madam:” “Sir” is a very polite term for a man and “madam” is a very polite term for a woman. This is useful no matter which gender the person reading your letter may be. Perhaps 50 years ago it was acceptable to only use “Dear Sir:” if you didn’t know the gender of the person you’re writing. However, it is not acceptable today. The woman reading your letter, especially if you’re applying for a job, scholarship, or anything else, may not have a favorable (good; positive) opinion of you right off the bat (immediately; right away). She may think you’re sexist (think women are less important than men) or presumptuous (don’t know what is appropriate or socially acceptable), and that’s probably not the impression or impact you’re trying to make.

Some people use the greeting “To whom it may concern:” when they don’t know the name or gender of the recipient (person receiving something). This greeting is useful when, for example, writing a letter to the telephone company because there is a mistake in your bill. However, it is not considered the most respectful or courteous for formal business correspondence (letters and notes). Instead, use “Dear Sir or Madam:” or the job title of the person you are writing:

• Dear Recruiter: (the person accepting applications for a job or position)
• Dear Claims Adjuster: (the person who takes care of your insurance matters)

If your note or email is very informal and you don’t know who will be reading it, it’s acceptable to just use:

• Hi,
• Hello,
• Greetings,
• Good morning/afternoon/evening,

I hope these two posts have answered some of the questions you may have had about salutations.

~ Lucy