Welcome to fnflife!
We are providing helps for non native students (especially Indonesian) who want to know more about English in many interactive ways ..
Want to know more? Follow this link^^
"Everything is from and for our life, so don't be afraid to learn as much as you can for your life^^"
Regards,
fnflife Team
Friday, November 12, 2010
Welcome
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
Used To
In this usage, the expression used to means the same as would. Used to is always in this form; it can NEVER be use to.
Pattern: Subject + used to + [verb in simple form] …
· Example: When Bella was young, she used to swim once a day. (past time habit)
Compare with this sentence: When Bella was young, she would swim once a day.
Also there are two grammar rules for used to. Notice the difference in meaning as well as in grammar.
1. BE USED TO
Be used to means to be accustomed to.
Pattern: Subject + [be] + used to + [verb + -ing] …
Example: Edward is used to swimming every day. (He is accustomed to swimming every day.)
2. GET USED TO
Get used to means to become accustomed to.
Pattern: Subject + [get] + used to + [verb + -ing] …
Example: Edward got used to swimming every day. (He became accustomed to swimming every day)
Let’s Practice This Topic!
Supply the simple form or [verb –ing] as required in the following sentences and explain the meaning of each sentence.
1. I was used to __________ (eat) at noon when I started school
2. He used to __________ (eat) dinner at seven o’clock.
3. When Obama was young, He used to __________ (read) every day.
4. He used to __________ (like) her, but he doesn’t anymore.
5. Don’t worry. Some day you will get used to __________ (speak) English.
6. Kitou Aya can’t get used to __________ (walk).
7. Lady Gaga used to __________ (dance) every night, but now she swims.
8. Kristen is used to __________ (sleep) late on weekends.
9. Chieko is used to __________ (eat) American food now.
10. She finally got used to __________ (eat) our food.
Answers and explanations for this topic:
Saturday, August 14, 2010
New Science Links Food and Happiness
Joe Hibbeln maneuvers his small blue Mazda 626 around traffic on a wide boulevard in Bethesda, Md.
Joe Hibbeln, M.D., believes our diet is making us depressed, addicted and violent. He thinks he’s found a simple solution.
"How many people," he shouts over the noise from the open window, "even Miss America, say ‘I want to make the world a happier place’?" He turns the wheel sharply to the left. "Well, I’m doin’ it! I’m zeroing in on a nutritional deficiency that makes the world an unhappy place."
Hibbeln, a captain in the United States Public Health Service, one of the country’s seven uniformed services ("army of the Surgeon General," says Hibbeln), is talking about omega-3 fatty acids. He has, in fact, devoted his entire career to studying the long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids that are best known for their heart-health benefits. He loves them. He loves the fish they come from.
Hibbeln, 49, is average height, with dark, graying hair slightly longer on top and matching bushy eyebrows. His love affair with fats began simply. In a musty autopsy suite at the University of Illinois-Chicago medical school more than 25 years ago, Hibbeln, an aspiring psychiatrist, held a brain for the first time. It was jiggly and white, not what one would expect of a computing juggernaut. "What the heck is this thing made of?" Hibbeln asked. Mostly fat, his instructor replied.
Fascinated by the idea that the most complex organ in our bodies was, in large part, a type of tissue most of us want to get rid of, Hibbeln began scouring the scientific literature to learn more about how the fat comprising the brain influenced its function. He kept encountering the work of Norman Salem, Jr., Ph.D., a neurobiologist who studied docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), a particular type of omega-3 fat prevalent in the brain—and in fish. (Fish often consume a lot of omega-3-rich algae or eat other, smaller fish that do.)
During his last year of medical school, Hibbeln reached out to Salem, who told him something that forever changed his career path: Our bodies do not produce DHA or other omega-3s from scratch; we have to get them from food. These words opened up a whole new avenue of inquiry for Hibbeln, and he jumped into researching how the fats we eat (or don’t eat) might change our brain.
He was especially interested in mental illness. He has a family member with mental illness and in 1985, his parents, Raymond and Shirley, helped found the first national support group for families dealing with mental illness, what’s now called the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance.
We careen through the streets of Bethesda and finally pull up to a guard station at the National Naval Medical Center, where we are meeting Col. Mike Lewis, M.D., M.P.H., one of Hibbeln’s collaborators, to talk about some new studies. A soldier in dusty fatigues salutes and waves us in. "Sir, very good sir." Hibbeln returns the salute. Hibbeln tells me that post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression in the U.S. military are affecting 20 percent of those who have been deployed. He points to construction vehicles and men in hard hats who swarm around the medical center. "They’re building new treatment facilities to capture this flood of psychiatric distress," he says. "If I can get the military to change their diet, show that it works to reduce depression and suicide there, then there’s a great potential for societal change."
After a few hair-raising attempts to secure parking, we find Lewis in the waiting area for Pulmonary Medicine. He and Hibbeln recently received Department of Defense funds to compare blood samples from 800 servicepeople who committed suicide between 2002 and 2008 to those of 800 healthy people in the military (matched by age, sex and rank) to see if low omega-3 levels are linked with likelihood of suicide. No results yet.
In addition, the U.S. Army recently awarded the duo almost $1 million to study the effects of giving omega-3 supplements to a special-operations unit that spends a third of the year in combat. They will give half the unit the omega-3 supplements and the other half a placebo, every day for a year, and then follow them for a couple of months to see if the omega-3s might prevent occurrences of depression and suicidal thinking. Hibbeln calls it giving "nutritional armor to the war fighter." They’re also looking at whether it might protect a soldier should he or she suffer traumatic brain injury—not an unlikely occurrence for special-ops persons who jump from planes and engage in combat.
Hibbeln doesn’t fight wars in the traditional sense, but as an officer in the public health service, he’s been serving on the front lines of mental-health research for the last 17 years. "Joe truly wants to help people with his science," says Norman Salem, Hibbeln’s former boss and mentor. "And he’s got a lot of great ideas and great data."
What drives him? "I am motivated by a very strong sense of duty," says Hibbeln. (He mentions finding role models in his mother, a librarian; his father, a World War II vet who fought in Okinawa for 63 days straight; and his scoutmaster, Herb Wittenborn, also a WWII vet.) "Since I have the ability to do it, it is my duty to create the best science," says Hibbeln. "That’s why I wear this uniform."
His government-issued dress, he tells me, is a daily reminder of the people he’s committed to serving: veterans with PTSD, violent alcoholics, people with depression, underprivileged mothers who need access to foods that will maximize their children’s potential. He points out the window to a man on the island of a busy intersection, holding a sign asking for money. "That’s my boss. That’s the guy I’m working for."
Diet-induced epidemic of distress?
In 1995, Hibbeln and Salem published the paper that launched Hibbeln’s career in this field, an article in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition presenting the theory he had been working out ever since he first held that lump of brain in his hands: mental illness could very well be a result of omega-3 deficiency.
His reasoning is this: The modern American diet is vastly different from the one upon which our ancestors evolved. Our ancestors consumed about equal amounts of omega-3 fats and omega-6 fats, the other polyunsaturated fats (found in vegetable oils) that compete with omega-3s for space in the brain. Today, Americans get 10 to 25 times more omega-6s than omega-3s, partly because we don’t eat as many omega-3-rich fish, such as salmon and sardines (or wild animals, which are also higher in omega-3s), but mostly because our diets now contain processed foods that are packed with omega-6-rich oils, including oils made from soybeans, safflower and corn.
Hibbeln presented the possibility that this dramatic shift could have changed the way our brains function—sort of as if a car designed to run on unleaded gas suddenly started using diesel. Might it even trigger or perpetuate psychiatric illnesses? Hibbeln offers an interesting correlation: statistics suggest that depression and homicide rates have risen steadily over the past century—the same time period during which Americans’ annual per capita intake of omega-6-rich oils increased by nearly 500 percent, from 11 pounds to 64 pounds.
"When the brain becomes deficient in nutrients, the first things to go are mood, the expression of emotion and concentration," Hibbeln explains. Though the idea of a nutritional deficiency affecting mood isn’t exclusive to omega-3s (the Institute of Medicine mentions depression and irritability as symptoms of numerous nutrient deficiencies, including iodine and vitamin B12), Hibbeln’s theory is unique in that it proposes too few omega-3s—or too many omega-6s—may be at least partly responsible for a national epidemic of psychiatric illness.
Fifteen years after the publication of that first paper, Hibbeln, who is now Acting Chief, Section on Nutritional Neurosciences at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, is even more passionate about his hypothesis. Now, he has a growing body of scientific research to support it.
Hibbeln started building his case with broad observational studies and in 1998, he compared fish consumption to the prevalence of major depression in nine countries. He found that in countries with higher fish consumption, like Japan, the prevalence of major depression was lower than in countries with lower fish consumption, like the U.S. In 2001, he showed that among 3,204 Finnish people, those who rarely ate seafood were more likely to suffer symptoms of depression than those who ate it all the time. Later, Hibbeln showed that low fish consumption was also associated with bipolar disorder in 11 countries and schizophrenia in 14 countries. Furthermore, countries where people ate less fish tended to also have higher rates of homicide.
Hibbeln and others soon started testing the theory in clinical trials. The results were compelling enough to prompt the American Psychiatric Association (APA), in 2006, to recommend that people with major depression consume a daily omega-3 supplement in addition to their regular medications. (Recommended daily dose: 1 gram of DHA+EPA, eicosapentaenoic acid, another omega-3 fat in fish. That’s the equivalent of what you would get eating 1 pound of oily fish, such as salmon, every week.) Additionally, the APA suggested that people with other mental-health conditions, including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and ADHD, might also benefit from this complementary treatment.
Hibbeln likes these recommendations. He mentions them often. He also mentions the people who call, thanking him for his dedicated work. He played me a voicemail from a colleague whose sister’s severe, treatment-resistant depression improved significantly after she began taking omega-3 supplements at the suggestion of her psychopharmacologist, who happened to be a big follower of Hibbeln’s work.
I asked if he gets that a lot. "There are certainly people who have suffered from debilitating depression for 20 years, despite having gone through every reasonable pharmacological therapy," he says, leaning forward. "They take the omega-3s at high levels (2 to 3 grams per day), and suddenly their brain is freed."
Healthy fats make happy brain chemicals
Hibbeln explains that omega-3 fats help keep the membranes surrounding brain cells supple. This flexibility is important because the proteins that stick in the membrane need to twist to do their jobs, which include helping brain cells communicate. Studies suggest that omega-3s also may improve mental health by altering concentrations of brain chemicals called neurotransmitters—specifically dopamine and serotonin—perhaps by switching "on" or "off" genes that regulate these chemicals. Low levels of serotonin are linked with depression, aggression and suicidal tendencies, while dopamine is a "reward" chemical that the brain releases in response to pleasurable experiences, such as eating or having sex—or taking drugs like cocaine. Depletion of dopamine as a result of low omega-3 levels could cause an addict to seek more and more drugs to get high, worsening the addiction, says Hibbeln.
In 2003, Hibbeln and colleagues looked at omega-3 levels in 38 cocaine addicts in a rehabilitation clinic. Some kicked their addiction; others relapsed after discharge. Hibbeln found that those who relapsed had lower levels of omega-3s in their blood. Whether they recovered or relapsed, addicts with aggressive tendencies also had lower omega-3s. Hibbeln followed up with a controlled trial in 2008, and found that giving omega-3s to substance abusers made them less angry and anxious.
Now Hibbeln and some colleagues are looking at whether the same thing may hold true for alcoholics. (Alcohol breaks down omega-3 fats, depleting the body’s supply.) To find out, Hibbeln and his team recruited 90 aggressive alcoholics. The volunteers underwent 30 days of in-patient rehabilitation, followed by 90 days of out-patient therapy with or without DHA+EPA supplements (the "without" group got placebo pills). By changing levels of neurotransmitters, omega-3s might help remedy issues underlying these subjects’ alcoholism, namely depression, says Hibbeln, noting that it might also make them less violent. "If you treat their underlying depression and irritability and restore their brain DHA," Hibbeln asks, "will that assist them in reducing their drinking?"
Hibbeln can’t say yet, as he’s still analyzing the results of the study. He does, however, offer up an anecdotal account of one man for whom the omega-3 doses seemed to make a profound, positive impact.
When "Mr. D.," in his early 60s, was referred to Hibbeln’s study by a homeless shelter, he’d been living on the streets or in prison for 25 years and had a long history of arrests for physical violence and multiple assault convictions. Basically, says Hibbeln, his daily routine consisted of "panhandling enough money to buy the booze he needed to get really drunk and go to sleep."
After "drying out" for 30 days, Mr. D. underwent baseline tests that found the omega-3 levels in his body to be "profoundly low," says Hibbeln. He was randomly assigned to the group that got the omega-3 supplements. The first thing the nurses and staff noted was that he looked healthier and happier.
He got a job for the first time in 20 years—at a car wash—and he showed up to work every day, says Hibbeln, who recalls: "He came in at one point in the study and pulled $650 out of a sock and says, ‘Doc, this is the most money I’ve had at one time in 25 years. I used to spend all of my panhandling money at the liquor store. I still go there to buy cigarettes and lottery tickets, but I don’t crave any of the booze in the store.’" (This never happened the other times Mr. D. went through detox without omega-3s, says Hibbeln.)
As for Mr. D.’s aggression issues: "Here was a guy who’d had an impossibly long record for drunk and disorderly conduct transformed," says Hibbeln, into "a complete pussycat."
Diet of evolution
It’s midday and we’re standing in one of the medical center’s public waiting areas, when Hibbeln suddenly gets a smile on his face and announces it’s time for lunch. "EatingWell Magazine offers to take me out to lunch. Most people are smart enough to go to the fanciest restaurant in Bethesda. I have a twisted sense of humor, so we’re going to eat what the military eats." He laughs.
We take the elevator to the basement, walk down a long hallway to the galley. It looks like any hospital cafeteria. There’s fish on the menu today—cod.
But all that’s left of the fish is a steaming tray of broth.
"Ten minutes till it’s ready," the lady tells us.
"Glad to see it’s popular," says Hibbeln.
"Yeah, it is," she says. "It’s healthy."
"It’s healthy, there you go," Hibbeln replies.
Hibbeln chooses pepper steak with rice instead. (His normal lunch is "hardtack [Scandinavian flatbread] and a can of tuna.") I have the same. Mike Lewis, who has joined us for lunch, selects a salad with soup.
After talking about Lewis’ ideas for providing omega-3s to protect soldiers’ brains from traumatic injury, Hibbeln reveals his grandest plan, one that applies all his research toward helping people in the "real world." Hibbeln wants to create what he calls a modern-day "Diet of Evolution." He is designing this diet—which he plans to someday introduce into the Naval hospital’s cafeteria—to boost the ratio of omega-3s to omega-6s in the brain, not so much by increasing omega-3s but rather by dramatically reducing omega-6 fats—from about 10 percent to 1 percent of total calories. (On 2,000 calories a day, that’s 2 to 2.5 grams versus the 17 to 20 that a typical Western diet delivers.)
For years, Hibbeln and others have advocated eating lots of omega-3-rich fish to restore the omega balance in the brain. But they haven’t lost sight of the fact that animal studies suggest slashing the omega-6s may work just as well. "We don’t need to increase the world’s fisheries production tenfold to achieve the same goal," says Hibbeln. Eating a traditional Mediterranean-style diet that’s centered on vegetables and fruits, legumes and olive oil, provides plenty of seafood and is limited in meat, will help to lower omega-6 intake dramatically, says Hibbeln. (Vegetables, fruits, legumes and olive oil don’t contain significant amounts of omega-6s or omega-3s; seafood provides plenty of omega-3s; and meat tends to deliver more 6s than 3s. The diet as a whole is low in omega-6-rich processed foods. But overhauling an institutional menu is expensive, he says, "so the question is how do we make the same menus, backing off the omega-6 fatty acids?"
Answer: Replace the inexpensive high-omega-6 oils the military currently uses, such as soybean oil, with lower-omega-6 oils, such as high-oleic safflower and high-oleic sunflower oil (which have been bred or engineered to have more monounsaturated fats and fewer omega-6s).
If Hibbeln can show that balancing the omega-3/omega-6 equation in the medical center cafeteria can reduce risks of depression and suicide, it might convince the entire military to switch to lower-omega-6 oils (which cost a little more than, say, soy oil, but far less than the expense of changing the entire military diet). This could open the door to wider-reaching changes—like commercial product reformulations. Hibbeln is already preparing for that. His research team is figuring out how many omega-3s and omega-6s are in foods on supermarket shelves: Different brands of salad dressings. Mayo. Peanut butter. Chicken. Pork. "Pretty much everything," says Hibbeln.
What if he’s wrong?
Near the end of our long day together, Hibbeln’s conviction of the extreme importance of his work had not waned. After saying good-bye to Lewis and ending up in another of Hibbeln’s several offices, this one at the NIH main campus, I asked: What would it take for him to discard his theory that a lack of omega-3s causes mental illness? He sat quietly for a few seconds, then said steadily, "I could ask Jeremy [the student sitting with us] to find all of the published scientific studies on omega-3s in humans—I think the total is somewhere between three and four thousand. So you’re asking me to override the published data on several thousand studies?"
But, I say, most of the studies are not gold-standard randomized controlled trials (and they’re not all in psychiatric illness; many are in cardiovascular disease).
"You have to take every piece of science for what it’s worth," he says.
OK—but there are quite a few pieces of science, and researchers, who don’t support Hibbeln’s theories. Critics argue that Hibbeln’s initial observational studies simply show associations and note there could be plenty of other reasons why—besides high fish consumption. For example, people in Japan seem less prone to depression than those in the United States. They also argue that the clinical science is equivocal: of the handful of controlled trials examining the effects of omega-3s on people with major depression, the most well-studied of these psychiatric illnesses, only about half suggest they help. In studies of people with milder depression, omega-3 supplementation has worked even less well. The same is true for mentally healthy people, though there have been even fewer studies.
Peter Rogers, Ph.D., an experimental psychologist who specializes in food and nutrition at the University of Bristol in the UK, is one of the skeptics. "I was very excited by this field, when I read the very first studies nearly 10 years ago now," says Rogers. "But the more I’ve been involved in this, the less I’m convinced about the impact" of omega-3s on mental illness. In a 2008 study, Rogers found omega-3 supplements did not improve the moods of people with mild to moderate depression. Rogers also reviewed hundreds of studies on omega-3s and various mental conditions, including depression, anxiety, aggression, ADHD and schizophrenia. That paper, published in Nutrition Research Reviews in 2008, concluded that, while early observational studies were promising, clinical trials have produced inconsistent and inconclusive results overall; much more evidence is needed to recommend omega-3 fats as a way to boost mental health.
Hibbeln waves all this off, acknowledging that the field is still young. What’s important, he says, is finding the conditions under which omega-3s do work. Michel Lucas, Ph.D., M.P.H., a research fellow in the department of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, agrees. "Even antidepressant drugs do not work for everybody," says Lucas, who thinks that, for people with mild to moderate depression, omega-3s might work about as well as antidepressants. Hibbeln, Lucas and Rogers all see the same data but come to different conclusions. Hibbeln’s are the rosiest.
We get back into Hibbeln’s Mazda, which has an ichthys (one of those religious fish tags) on the back—only this one says "sushi"—and drive back to my rental car. Hibbeln draws me a shortcut on my notepad—while driving—so that I can avoid D.C. rush-hour traffic and make my flight. We talk about his hobbies: serving as Cub Scout master, taking his school-age kids to historic presidential homes on vacation, cooking in his open-fire brick oven.
As we circle the garage looking for my car, he starts speaking almost out of nowhere, as if in response to the naysayers I would talk to later. "I think my role is not to provide definitive answers, although I do that on some level," he says, a bit more subdued than he’d been earlier. "My bigger contribution has been to ask the best questions. Open up new fields for inquiry. I’m a psychiatrist. If I only practice medicine, I can only affect hundreds, maybe thousands, of people. But if I do research that shifts the paradigm of treatment, I can create useful therapies that could impact millions."
By Rachael Moeller Gorman, EatingWell.com
Source: health.msn.com
The 7 Healthiest Foods You're Not Eating, But Should
A little culinary adventure can add nutrients, fiber, and flavor to your diet.
Kimchi
Koreans are among the leanest and healthiest people on the planet. Could it have something to do with this spicy pickled cabbage, which they eat the way Americans eat French fries and baked potatoes? Eaten at almost every meal in Korea, kimchi is packed with vitamins and immune system-boosting phytochemicals. Its main ingredient, fermented cabbage, contains lactic acid, which helps with digestion and may weaken infections. Several years ago, kimchi made big news when Korean researchers found chickens infected with the avian flu recovered more quickly after being fed an extract of kimchi. More recently, a study at the University of New Mexico suggested that eating cabbage might help ward off breast cancer. Kimchi is low in calories and rich in dietary fiber.
Pearled barley
The chewy, nutty hulled grain used in soups and bread and as a substitute for rice is quickly becoming a favorite of people trying to lose weight. It’s made up of 43 percent slow-digesting carbohydrates and 12 percent of a fiber known as a “resistant starch” because it goes through the small intestine without being digested at all. In 2008, a Swedish study showed that people who ate barley bread as part of their dinner felt much less hungry than those who munched on plain white bread—and the hunger-quenching effect lasted for more than 10 hours.
Pickled lunch herring
Keep a jar of pickled herring chunks in your refrigerator for a quick omega-3 lunch with crackers. It’s an easy way to get more fish into your weekly diet without the hassle of cooking fresh fish. Herring, essentially a larger sardine, is still small enough to be low in contaminants. And it’s a good source of EPA and DHA as well as calcium.
Shirataki noodles
These noodles made from the root of an Asian yam consist of a no-calorie soluble fiber, so they are a healthier alternative to egg noodles or pastas high in fast-digesting carbohydrates. Studies show that the fiber, called glucomannan, helps lower LDL cholesterol and triglycerides and may even help lower body weight. Researchers say that just 1 gram of this fiber can significantly slow the absorption of sugar into your bloodstream after a high-carbohydrate meal. Because they have little flavor of their own, shirataki noodles take on the flavor of sauces and herbs from the dishes to which they are added. Try them in vegetable salads, soups, and stir-fry dishes.
Paddlefish caviar
When you’re trying to get more omega-3 fatty acids into your diet, expanding your repertoire of egg dishes can help. We’re talking fish eggs as well as those from chickens. Caviar contains three times as much omega-3 as salmon does. Spooning 2 teaspoons of paddlefish caviar into your omelet just before folding it over will give you a tasty morning boost of fish oil. And if you use omega-3 eggs from chickens who are given feed rich in omega-3s, you’ll get a double shot.
Greek yogurt
Called "yiaourti" in Greece, this is a thicker, creamier yogurt because the liquid (whey) has been strained away. It contains probiotic cultures and has twice the protein of regular yogurt and fewer carbohydrates. It is lower in lactose, too.
Flaxseeds
These trendy seeds are one of the few plant sources of healthful omega-3 fatty acids. Toss these tiny brown seeds into cereal, yogurt, soups and stews. Sprinkle them on top of ice cream or on slices of apple coated with peanut butter. My kids call this “ants on apples.”
By Jeff Csatari, Men’s Health contributing editor and author of The Belly Off! Diet
Source: health.msn.com
Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Monday, August 09, 2010
The White House
What really does The White House mean?
The White House is a building which does not only became a house of the President and his family for over 200 years. Of course the President is meant the President of the United States (USA). Throughout history, this building was known as a symbol of the administrative activities of the President of the United States. In other words, we could call the Presidential Palace or the Presidential Office.
The White House has been the scene of many events in the history of our nation. Here the President holds meetings that decide national and international policy, signs new legislation, and carries out the many duties of the office. Here, too, the President and First Family entertain guests and live their private lives, as every President except George Washington has done. Designed by Irish born architect, James Hoban, the White House contains numerous artworks and fine crafts from every era of American history.
Why was it named White House? (The History of White House)
About the Building
For two hundred years, the White House has stood as a symbol of the Presidency, the United States government, and the American people. Its history, and the history of the nation's capital, began when President George Washington signed an Act of Congress in December of 1790 declaring that the federal government would reside in a district "not exceeding ten miles square…on the river Potomac." President Washington, together with city planner Pierre L’Enfant, chose the site for the new residence, which is now 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. As preparations began for the new federal city, a competition was held to find a builder of the "President’s House." Nine proposals were submitted, and Irish-born architect James Hoban won a gold medal for his practical and handsome design.
Construction began when the first cornerstone was laid in October of 1792. Although President Washington oversaw the construction of the house, he never lived in it. It was not until 1800, when the White House was nearly completed, that its first residents, President John Adams and his wife, Abigail, moved in. Since that time, each President has made his own changes and additions. The White House is, after all, the President’s private home. It is also the only private residence of a head of state that is open to the public, free of charge.
The White House has a unique and fascinating history. It survived a fire at the hands of the British in 1814 (during the war of 1812) and another fire in the West Wing in 1929, while Herbert Hoover was President. Throughout much of Harry S. Truman’s presidency, the interior of the house, with the exception of the third floor, was completely gutted and renovated while the Trumans lived at Blair House, right across Pennsylvania Avenue. Nonetheless, the exterior stone walls are those first put in place when the White House was constructed two centuries ago.
Presidents can express their individual style in how they decorate some parts of the house and in how they receive the public during their stay. Thomas Jefferson held the first Inaugural open house in 1805. Many of those who attended the swearing-in ceremony at the U.S. Capitol simply followed him home, where he greeted them in the Blue Room. President Jefferson also opened the house for public tours, and it has remained open, except during wartime, ever since. In addition, he welcomed visitors to annual receptions on New Year’s Day and on the Fourth of July. In 1829, a horde of 20,000 Inaugural callers forced President Andrew Jackson to flee to the safety of a hotel while, on the lawn, aides filled washtubs with orange juice and whiskey to lure the mob out of the mud-tracked White House.
After Abraham Lincoln’s presidency, Inaugural crowds became far too large for the White House to accommodate them comfortably. However, not until Grover Cleveland’s first presidency did this unsafe practice change. He held a presidential review of the troops from a flag-draped grandstand built in front of the White House. This procession evolved into the official Inaugural parade we know today. Receptions on New Year’s Day and the Fourth of July continued to be held until the early 1930s.
* There are 132 rooms, 35 bathrooms, and 6 levels in the Residence. There are also 412 doors, 147 windows, 28 fireplaces, 8 staircases, and 3 elevators.
* At various times in history, the White House has been known as the "President's Palace," the "President's House," and the "Executive Mansion." President Theodore Roosevelt officially gave the White House its current name in 1901.
* Presidential Firsts while in office... President James Polk (1845-49) was the first President to have his photograph taken... President Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09) was not only the first President to ride in an automobile, but also the first President to travel outside the country when he visited Panama... President Franklin Roosevelt (1933-45) was the first President to ride in an airplane.
* With five full-time chefs, the White House kitchen is able to serve dinner to as many as 140 guests and hors d'oeuvres to more than 1,000.
* The White House requires 570 gallons of paint to cover its outside surface.
* For recreation, the White House has a variety of facilities available to its residents, including a tennis court, jogging track, swimming pool, movie theater, and bowling lane.
Rooms in The White House
Oval Office
Diplomatic Reception Room
State Dining Room
Red Room
The Hallway
Blue Room
The China Room
The Vermeil Room
Source:
1. clinton1.nara.gov
2.whitehouse.gov Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Help & Support
We are providing helps for you who have problems in using this site.
Regards,
Fnflife Team Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Sunday, August 08, 2010
Keong Racun (Venomous Snail)
haha.. What's in your mind when you were seeing this "Venomous Snail" title?
It isn't about science explanation about venomous snail, but it is only a title of a song in Indonesia.
Whatever.. Let's begin the story :)
Once upon a time, there were two girls from Bandung city named Shinta and Jojo. They still are students in the college. One day they were having fun with making videos of themselves, singing songs of the lipsync and uploaded it to Youtube.
And Then..
Initially, the videos were only seen by few people, the extent of their closest friends and family. But the videos were stealing the attention of the netters on the virtual world especially "Keong Racun" and became Trending topic on micro blogging site Twitter on July 27, 2010. After that, the media was busy preaching both like an artist and finally they live happily ever after.
--------The end--------
Jojo (Left) and Shinta (Right)
Actually the song has already exists and sung by Lissa, a dangdut singer. But, It becomes popular now after the song (Keong Racun) was sung with lipsync by Shinta and Jojo. That is a short story how do Shinta and Jojo become the famous artists in Indonesia now a days.
hahaha .. how funny this country is. Yes, That is Indonesia, full of sensation. After Ariel Peterporn, now venomous snail, and then what else next? =p
I wonder actually how many the twitter users in Indonesia are. It seems that Indonesian people really love tweeting to each others =)
Although there were many sensation in Indonesia Entertainment world, but this time it's okay .. not too bad though if we compare it to the artist from the Philippines Moymoy palaboy (who is famous from this similar things) is still very different in quality, but at least it could make the majority of Indonesian society laughed and happy after have seen this two girls on youtube. haha XD
This is the video of Keong Racun by Jojo Shinta (lipsync)
Original Lyrics
Reff:
Dasar kau keong racun
Baru kenal eh ngajak tidur
Ngomong nggak sopan santun
Kau anggap aku ayam kampung
Kau rayu diriku
Kau goda diriku
Kau colek diriku
Eh ku takut sekali
tanpa basa basi kau ngajak happy happy
Eh kau tak tahu malu
Tanpa basa basi kau ngajak happy happy
*
Mulut kumat kemot
Matanya melotot
Lihat body semok
Pikiranmu jorok
Mentang-mentang kau kaya
Aku dianggap jablay
Dasar koboy kucai
Ngajak check-in dan santai
Sorry sorry sorry jack
Jangan remehkan aku
Sorry sorry sorry bang
Ku bukan cewek murahan
Back to Reff, *, Reff
English Lyrics (Translation)
by fnflife
by fnflife
Reff:
What the fuck venomous snail you are
just first met eh (you) ask me to make out.
(you) speak without manners
You think I'm a chicken
You flirt me
You tease me
You dab me
Eh I'm so scared
blunty you persuade (me) to have fun.
Eh you are shameless
blunty you persuade (me) to have fun.
*
(Your)mouth is mumbling.
Your eyes is glaring
Seeing plump body
Your mind is filthy
whilst you're rich
I am assumed as bitch
What the garlic chives cowboy (you are)
invite check-in and relax
sorry sorry sorry jack
don't underestimate me
sorry sorry sorry sir
i am not hooker
Back to Reff, *, Reff Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Eggsperiment
.jpg)
This is the first experiment from our site. The aim is to determine which toothpaste is better to protect humans' teeth from being decayed, Formula Strong or Pepsodent. Here are the videos :
fnflife Eggsperiment Introduction
fnflife Eggsperiment The First Step
fnflife Eggsperiment The Second Step
fnflife Eggsperiment The Third Step
fnflife Eggsperiment: The Observation
fnflife Eggsperiment: The Last Observation and Testing
Discussion:
Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Friday, August 06, 2010
Relative Clauses (4)
Prepositions in relative clauses
Part A
In formal styles we often put a preposition before the relative pronouns which and whom:• The rate at which a material heats up depends on its chemical composition.
• In the novel by Meyer, on which the film is based, the main character is a teenager.
• An actor with whom Gump had previously worked contacted him about the role.
• Her many friends, among whom I like to be considered, gave her encouragement.
Notice that after a preposition you can’t use who instead of whom, and you can’t use that or zero relative pronoun:
• Is it right that politicians should make important decisions without consulting the public to whom they are accountable?
(NOT) Is it right that politicians should make important decisions without consulting the public who they are accountable?
• The valley in which the town lies is heavily polluted.
(NOT) The valley in that town lies is heavily polluted.
• Arnold tried to gauge the speed at which they were travelling.
(NOT) Arnold tried to gauge the speed at they were travelling.
In informal English we usually put the preposition later in the relative clause rather than at the beginning:
• The office which Graham led the way to was filled with books.
• Jim’s footballing ability, which he was noted for, had been encouraged by his parents.
• The playground wasn’t used by those children who it was built for.
In this case we prefer who rather than whom (although ‘whom’ is used in formal contexts). In defining relative clauses we can also use that or zero relative pronouns instead of who or which e.g. the children (that) it was built for.
If the verb in the relative clause is a two- or three-word verb (e.g. come across, full in, go through, look after, look up to, put up with, take on) we don’t usually put the preposition before the relative pronoun:
• Your essay is one of those (which/that) I’ll go through tomorrow.
(rather than Your essay is one of those through which I’ll go tomorrow.
• She is one of the few people (who/that) I look up to.
(NOT) She is one the few people to whom I look up.
Examples:
1. They climbed up to the top of a large work, from which they got a good view.
2. I would like to thank my tutor, without whom I would never have finished the work.
3. She has now moved back to the house on Long Island in which she was born.
4. The star is to be named after Patrick Jenks, by whom it was discovered.
5. This is the ball which Dennis scored three goals in the final.
6. He is now able to beat his father, from whom he learned how to play chess.
7. The book is enjoyed by adults as well as children, for whom it was primarily written.
8. There are still many things in our solar system about which/of which we know nothing.
The sentences above in a less formal way:
1. They climbed up to the top of a large work, which they got a good view from.
2. I would like to thank my tutor, who I would never have finished the work without.
3. She has now moved back to the house on Long Island (which/that) she was born in.
4. The star is to be named after Patrick Jenks, who it was discovered by.
5. This is the ball (which/that) Dennis scored three goals with in the final. (or in the final with)
6. He is now able to beat his father, who he learned how to play chess from.
7. The book is enjoyed by adults as well as children, who it was primarily written for.
8. There are still many things in our solar system (which/what) we know nothing about/of.
Others:
1. It’s a piece of jewellery across which I came across in an antique shop.
2. The extra work which she took on was starting to affect her health.
3. My mother, who/whom I looked after for over 20 years, died last year.
4. The people who I work with are all very friendly.
5. Some of the criticisms which they had to put up with were very unfair.
6. He had many friends with whom he had a regular correspondence.
7. The woman who/whom(formal) he is engaged to comes from England.
8. The form which I had to fill in were very complicated.
Part B
In formal written English, we often prefer to use of which rather than whose to talk about things:
• A huge amount of oil was spilled, the effects of which are still being felt, or
A huge amount of oil was spilled, whose effect are still being felt.
• The end of the war, the anniversary of which is on the 16th of November, will be commemorated in cities throughout the century or
The end of the war whose anniversary is on the 16th of November will be commemorated in cities throughout the memory.
Notice that we can’t use of which instead of whose in the patterns described in Relative Clauses (1b) :
• Dorothy was able to switch between German, Polish, and Russian, all of which the spoke fluently.
(NOT) Dorothy was able to switch between German, Polish, and Russian all whose she spoke fluently.
We can sometimes use “that…of” instead of “of which” This is less formal than of which and whose, and is mainly used in spoken English:
• The school that she is head of is closing down or
The school of which she is head of is closing down.
Whose can come after a preposition in a relative clause. However, it is more natural to put the preposition at the end of the clause in less formal contexts and in spoken English:
• We were grateful to Mr Marks, in whose car we had travelled home or
We were grateful to Mr Marks whose car we had travelled home in.
• I now turn to Freud, from whose work the following quotation is taken.
I now turn to Freud whose work the following quotation is taken from.
Examples:
1. Tom, whose car the weapons were found in, has been arrested.
2. Meyer, whose novel the TV series is based on, will appear in the first episode.
3. Dr Jackson owns the castle whose grounds the main road passes through.
4. Tessa Parsons is now managing director of Simons, the company that she was once a secretary in.
5. Allowing the weapons to be sold is an action that the Government should be ashamed of.
6. The dragonfly is an insect that we know very little of.
The sentences above in more appropriate for formal written English:
1. Tom, in whose car the weapons were found, has been arrested.
2. Meyer, on whose novel the TV series is based, will appear in the first episode.
3. Dr Jackson owns the castle through whose grounds the main road passes.
4. Tessa Parsons is now managing director of Simons, the company in which she was once a secretary.
5. Allowing the weapons to be sold is an action of which the Government should be ashamed.
6. The Dragonfly is an insect of which (or about which) we know very little.
Reference: Advanced Grammar in Use - Martin Hewings Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Relative Clause (3)
Other relative pronouns
Part A
Whose
We use a relative clause beginning with whose + noun, particularly in written English, when we talk about something belonging to or associated with a person. Compare:Whose
• Ellen Page is an architect. Her designs have won international praise. And
Ellen Page is an architect whose designs have won international praise.
• Doctor Arthur has had to do all his own typing. His secretary resigned two weeks ago. And
Doctor Arthur, whose secretary resigned two weeks ago, has had to do all his own typing.
We can use whose in both defining and non-defining relative clauses.
We sometimes use whose when we are talking about things, in particular when we are talking about town or countries, and organizations:
• The film was made in Botswana, whose wildlife parks are larger than those in Kenya.
• We need to learn from companies whose trading is more healthy than our own.
• The newspaper is owned by the Mearson Group, whose chairman is Sir James Bex.
We can also use whose when we are talking about particular items, although it is often more natural in spoken English to avoid sentences like this:
I received a letter, whose poor spelling made me think It was written by a child.
(more natural would be I received letter, and it’s poor spelling.. )
Examples:
1. First, go through the text underlining the words whose meanings you don’t know
2. My friend Miriam, whose mother is Indonesian, has gone to live in Jakarta.
3. He’s a teacher in London working with children whose first language is not English.
4. People whose work involves standing for most of the day often suffer from backache.
5. It has been found that the trees are being destroyed by a moth whose caterpillars tunnel under the bark.
6. The airline, whose head office is situated in France, has recently begun to fly between Paris and Lima.
7. An orphan is a child whose parents are dead.
8. A plumber is a person whose job it us to fit and repair water pipes.
9. A refuse collector is a person whose job it is to empty people’s dustbins and take their rubbish away.
Part B
Where, When, Whereby, Why
We often use the words where, when, and whereby as relative pronouns. But in formal English in particular, a phrase with preposition + which can often be used instead:Where, When, Whereby, Why
• This was the place where we first met or
This was the place at/in which we first met.
• He wasn’t looking forward to the time (when) he would have to give evidence to the court or
He wasn’t looking forward to the time at which he would have to give evidence to the court.
• Do you know the date when we have to submit the first essay?
Do you know the date on/by which we have to submit the first essay?
• The government is to end the system whereby (=by which means) farmers make more money from leaving land unplanted than from growing wheat or
The government is to end the system in/by which farmers make more money from leaving land unplanted than from growing wheat.
We can also use why as a relative pronoun after the word reason. In informal English we can use that instead of why:
• I didn’t get a pay rise, but this wasn’t the reason why I left
I didn’t get a pay rise, but this wasn’t the reason that I left
Examples:
1. The beach is the place where I most like to be in the summer.
2. The agreement whereby whisky made in Japan can be sold in Britain has been criticized in Scotland.
3. The period during which Russ lived in Italy was also the time when he began to paint.
4. The new law means an end to the situation whereby charities have to pay tax on money given to them.
5. The building where I used to work had 24 floors.
6. He has been unwell, and this may be the reason why he lost the match.
7. A referendum is a vote in which all the people in a country are asked to give their opinion about a policy.
8. Morse code is a system for sending messages in which letters are represented by short and long marks or sounds.
9. A chat show is a television programme in which famous people are asked questions about their lives and their work.
Part C
Who, What, Whatever, Whoever, Whichever
Who, What, Whatever, Whoever, Whichever
We sometimes use relative clauses beginning with who or what. In this case,
who means ‘the people that’ and what means something like ‘the thing(s) that’:
• Can you give me a list who’s been invited?
• I didn’t know what to do next.
Notice that we can’t use what in this way after a noun.
• I managed to get all the books that you asked for.
NOT (I managed to get all the books what you asked for.)
Relative clauses beginning with
• whatever (=anything or it doesn’t matter what)
• whoever (=the person/group who or any person/group who), or
• whichever (=one thing or person from a limited number or things or people)
are used to talk about things or people that are indefinite or unknown:
• I’m sure I’ll enjoy eating whatever you cook.
• Whoever wins will go on to play Barcelona in the final.
• Whichever one of you broke the window will have to pay for it.
Exercises:
1. Buy vanilla ice cream. It’s the only flavor (that) he likes.
2. Whichever party comes to power at the election will face major economic problems.
3. The room was lit only by the candle (that) Martha carried.
4. It is difficult to predict what she will do next.
5. Whoever wins the contract to build the tunnel will have a very difficult job to do.
6. ‘Do you want to drive or go by train?’ I’d prefer to travel whatever/whichever way is faster.’
7. Help yourself to fruit from the trees in the garden. Take whatever you want.
8. She had bought a lot about what she was going to say.
Reference: Advanced Grammar in Use – Martin Hewings Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Relative Clause (2)
Bella, who is only six, can speak five languages
Part A
Some relative clauses are used to add extra information about a noun, but this information is not necessary to explain which person or thing we mean:• Valerie, who has died aged 90, escaped from Russia with her family in 1917.
• We received an offer of $80.000 for the house, which we accepted.
There are sometimes called non-defining relative clause to add information about a person or people:
We use who as the subject of the clause
• One of the people arrested was Mary Arundel, who is a member of the local council.
We use who or whom as the object of the clause, although whom is more formal and rarely used in spoken English:
• Professor Johnson, who(m) I have long admired, is to visit the university next week.
When we use a non-defining relative clause to add information about thing or group of things, we use which as the subject or object of the clause:
• These drugs, which are used to treat stomach ulcers, have been withdrawn from sale.
• That Masters course, which I took in 1990, is no longer taught at the college.
That is sometimes used instead of which, but some people this is incorrect, so it is probably safer not to use it. We also use which to refer to the whole situation talked about in sentence outside the relative clause:
• The book won’t be published until next year, which is disappointing.
• I have to go to hospital on Monday, which means I won’t be able to see you.
We can also use whose in a non-defining relative clause:
• Neil Adams, whose parents are both teachers, won first prize in the competition.
Notice that we don’t use zero relative pronoun in a non-defining relative clause.
Examples:
1. The Southam Chess Club, which has more than 50 members, meets weekly on Friday evenings.
2. Dr Richard Newman, who is an aviation expert, was asked to comment on the latest helicopter crash.
3. The strike by train drivers, which ended yesterday, is estimated to have cost over $3 million.
4. John Graham’s latest film, which is set in the north of Australia, is his first for more than five years.
5. The police are looking for two boys aged about 14, who stole a computer from the office.
6. The hurricane, which caused such damage in the islands, has now headed out to sea.
Part B
When we want to add information about the whole or a part of a particular number of things or people we can use a non-defining relative clause with of which or of whom after words such as all, both, each, many, most, neither, none, part, some, a number (one, two, etc.; the first, the second, etc.; half, a third, etc.) and superlatives (the best, the biggest, etc.):• The speed of growth of a plant is influenced by a number of factors, most of which we have no control over.
• The bank was held up by a group of men, three of whom were said to be armed.
• The president has made many visits to Japan, the most recent of which began today.
Examples:
1. The film is about the lives of three women, all of whom are played by Angelina Jolie.
2. The island’s two million inhabitants, most of whom are peasant farmers, have been badly affected by the drought.
3. She has two older brothers, neither of whom went to university.
4. About 30 of her friends and relations, many of whom had travelled long distances, came to the airport to welcome her back.
5. The minister has recently visited Estonia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, all of which have large Russian minorities.
6. The fish, the biggest of which is only 2 cm long, are multi-colored.
7. Scotland have won their last five international matches, one of which was against England.
Part C
We can use the following phrases at the beginning of a non-defining relative clause: at which point/time, by which point/time, during which time, and in which case:
• It might snow this weekend, in which case we won’t go to Wales.
• The bandages will be taken off a few days after the operation, at which point we will be able to judge how effective the treatment has been.
• The next Olympics are in three years, by which time Stevens will be 34.
Examples:
1. I might fail the test, in which case I’d probably re-sit it next year.
2. A bull charged towards the car, at which point I drove away quickly.
3. I didn’t finish work until 10 o’clock, by which time everyone had already gone home.
4. The meeting might go on for three or four hours, in which case I’ll be late home from work.
5. Sam started to tell one of his terrible old jokes, at which point I decided that I should go home.
6. I hadn’t seen Jane for nearly ten years, in/during which time I had got married and had two children.
Reference: Advanced Grammar in Use – Martin Hewings Wanna know more? Click me... :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)