Bygrtgrt
|
On page https://www.gmx.net/magazine/panorama/erzbischof-gaenswein-kehrt-strafversetzung-zurueck-39808352 one reads:
First as a cardinal, then as pope and finally as pope emeritus, Gänswein served the first German head of the church in almost 500 years.
(1 votes)
Loading...Of course if you had to and not in your own 🙂
I'm also open to criticism! I'm not a professional writer. Do you like the text, is anything unclear? Subject: Brochure about orthopaedic custom-made shoes, profession orthopaedic shoemaker Title: Your specialist for orthopedic Custom-made shoes Text: Max Mustermann's workshop in the heart of Vienna has been manufacturing orthopaedic custom-made shoes, shoe adjustments and insoles since 1997…
That's what I'm wondering, I can't find much on the internet.
Were there other problems besides environmental pollution, social problems, health hazards, economic consequences of industrialization.
My friend wants to apply for a job and he asked me for help spelling is not his thing but it is not my thing either { Certificate from my former work as a bakery seller, I took third place in the coffee selling campaign. I also managed to score 59 out of 59 points…
Hello! With verbs ending in a or e, the penultimate syllable is stressed. This stress must remain the same. If there are only one or two syllables, the first one is stressed. So from Comprame Compress For echar: échame ? or normal echame? Abrir: Abreme or Ábreme? The first one has to be emphasized, right?
It may be something unusual, but I don’t see a mistake.
Otherwise I have to agree with you after just hearing: Gundula Gause just said in 2023, instead of 2023.
This has nothing to do with a lack of mastery of the native language, but with poor style and misunderstanding communication. Similar is possible for any language.
It should be understood that “Gänswein served him, the first German church leader for almost 500 years, as this cardinal was, then Pope and finally emeritus Pope.” It would be better to divide the information into several sentences.
Where’s the mistake?
Do I really have to explain this to you?
Yes
Obviously…
No way.
Yes. Otherwise she would have had to interpret the sentence differently
That’s what she has not overlooked.
Then the AI overlooked that there was never a pope of geese wine
I’m not talking about any context here, but only about the sentence itself and what his author wanted to say about it.
Clearly, however, the AI has seen and assessed him in the light of other information that is accessible to them (just as people would do).
The AI is not human. It cannot capture the context
I think it’s very amazing that this AI recognizes a sentence that is purely formal nothing but one that doesn’t testify to what the author thought to testify.
On the question
answers the AI claude-3-5-sonnet-20240620 so:
The set design is not more correct. And I was just talking about it.
I’ve read it through and I have to say that you’ve been wrong. The complete section is:
Surely the author mentioned it before
I said yes, what the writer really meant can (and will) only take from the sentence who already knows it from another source.
Then you should be aware that geese wine cannot be meant.
Quite the contrary, there were still teachers where you almost learned a lot without effort. I’d like to think about her.
Then your teachers were not good teachers
My German teacher would have known that this is not the case.
The sentence is correct. Good. You can read it like that. The author simply presupposes the knowledge that the reader knows that geese wine was never Pope or he conveys this knowledge somewhere before
Ask someone who is already a pensioner (and therefore probably can still German).
That’s still right. You just read it wrong
The sentence would also be incorrectly constructed if the timeline “for almost 500 years” were missing.
Then you read it wrong. But admittedly, the secret reveals itself only at the end of the sentence
Pure grammatically, it should be noted that geese wine was served only as a cardinal, then as a pope and finally as an emeritus Pope for 500 years.
What the writer really meant can only take the sentence from who knows it from another source.
Includes the Pope
half a millennium geese wine?
Something unhappy.
This is inconsistently formulated, but correctly in terms of content.
I think it’s more like you’re lacking knowledge of your native language.
No. Here the impression arises that he had these functions and not Benedict.
You should have shared the sentence instead. Then it would be more understandable.
It’s not wrong.
On the other hand, what FS wants, “he has been serving him for 500 years” would actually be wrong. He served him for 500 years.
That would actually be wrong
Better would have been: Gänswein served Benedikt when this cardinal, Pope and Pope emerald was. Benedikt was the first church leader for 500 years.
Yeah, well, I didn’t think so. That is quite right and cannot be misunderstood.