Bonjour, j'ai réalisé ce travail avec pour support cet article de presse anglophone ; :http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jan/22/5. Pourriez vous corriger mes erreurs et auquel cas m'expliquer? Merci beaucoup.
 
Summary
 
This article, untitled “Philips promises extra income for shareholders”, was published in The Guardian on the 22 January 2007. The Guardian is a British newspaper published daily. It deals with the firm Philips and especially of the increase in turnover and incomes from shareholders. Philips, the Dutch firm, specializes in apparatus electronic, lighting and Medical systems. This article underlines Philips strategic in 2007. Indeed, in 2006 Philips knew good results with a turnover which (has) reached 5.4 billion that is, a rise of 2.5 billion compared to 2005. We can also see that net income in the fourth quarter has increased from 332m to 680m. The chief executive, Gerard KLEISTERLEE, tries to explain this economic evolution with the thanks to receipts which come from selling of volatiles departments, those produces semi-conductors business and microchips. Thus, Philips explains the fact that, now, they will be able to pay higher dividends to shareholders and to buy back ( to buy out?) shares purchased by investors. Moreover, we understand that Medical systems is a profitable department to the company and make optimistic the chief executive. He is aware that it is a long term work but wants to improve the PHILIPS’ business in sectors of healthcare, lifestyle and technology.
 
 
Personal commentary:
This article underlines the necessity profits for a company. We can see with Philips that it is difficult. Indeed, it always want be the leader and to target profitable sectors. It understood the evolution of markets, mentalities and technologies thanks to an important research and development department. Without which they could not keep their lead over their competitors in this highly competitive field. Nowadays, we know research and development is vital in the consumer society where people want permanent innovation. The fact that PHILIPS rockets net income of shareholders is, certainly, a strategic decision. Indeed, we can think if shareholders win more money they would buy shares. It seems to me that a good decision in the extent that shares improve a development of company. I’d say that it is a long term investment but essential and beneficial to PHILIPS.

Il n y a personne? Pouvez vous au moins me dire si l'ensemble est correct? Merci beaucoup  

des fautes d orthographe ou de grammaire que j ai cru voir...
 
This article, untitled “Philips promises extra income for shareholders”, was published in The Guardian on the 22 January 2007. The Guardian is a British newspaper published daily. It deals(?)(is about the firm) with the firm Philips and especially (of(with)) the increase in turnover and incomes from(of) shareholders. Philips, the Dutch firm, specializes in apparatus electronic, lighting and Medical systems. This article underlines Philips strategic(gy) in 2007. Indeed, in 2006 Philips knew good results with a turnover which (has) reached 5.4 billion that is, a rise of 2.5 billion compared to 2005. We can also see that the net income in the fourth quarter has increased from 332m to 680m. The chief executive, Gerard KLEISTERLEE, tries to explain this economic evolution with( the thanks to)the receipts which come from selling(s) of volatiles departments, those (that,  which) produces semi-conductors business and microchips. Thus, Philips explains (the fact) that, now, they will be able to pay higher dividends to shareholders and to buy back ( to buy out?) shares purchased by investors. Moreover, we understand that Medical systems is a profitable department to the company and make  the chief executive optimistic. He is aware that it is a long term work but wants to improve the PHILIPS’ business in sectors such as healthcare, lifestyle and technology.  
 
 
Personal commentary:  
This article underlines the necessity(necessary ou necessity of) profits for a company. We can see with Philips that it is difficult. Indeed, it always want(s) be the leader and to target profitable sectors. It understood(?) the evolution of markets, mentalities and technologies thanks to an important research and development department.(,) Without which ( , problème de syntaxe)they could not keep their lead over their competitors in this highly competitive field. Nowadays, we know research and development is vital in the consumer society where people want permanent innovation. The fact that PHILIPS  net income of shareholders rockets is, certainly, a strategic decision. Indeed, we can think that ,if shareholders win more money they would buy shares. It seems to me  a good decision in the extent that shares improve the development of a company. I’d say that it is a long term investment but essential and beneficial to PHILIPS.

Merci
 
Bonne soirée

Je dirai plutôt : " « The Guardian » is a British daily newspaper. "  
Cela te permet de ne pas répéter 2 fois "published" (il a été dit une fois précédemment)
 

Que voulais tu dire avec la 2ème phrase ? juste présenter Philips ?
Si c'est bien ça que j'ai compris, je dirai plutot : " It deals with Philips, the Dutch firm, specializes in apparatus electronic, lighting and Medical systems, and also of the increase in turnover and incomes from shareholders. "
Pas de redondance de Philips
 
 
 

Le "we understand", qui est ce? J'en déduis que c'est le chief executive ? si c'est bien ça, je dirai : According to Gerard KLEISTERLEE (ou according to the chief executive), medical systems is a profitable department to the company and it makes him optimistic.
 

Je dirai plutôt : " We can see how's difficult with Philips' example.
 

J'ai pas compris cette phrase non plus, mais d'après ce que j'en comprends, je dirai plutot : In my opinion, this is a good decision in (ou for) the extent that shares improve a development of (a ? the ?) company.
 
J'ai surement pas tout compris, mais je tournerai les phrases de cette manière.  
 
Maintenant, je ne suis pas bilingue, j'ai surement pas tout dit correctement. Si jamais j'ai mal tourné une phrase (dans le mauvais sens), n'hésitez pas à me corriger.

Bonjour !  
J'ai un travail de vacance en anglais pour lequel je dois faire le resume de 4textes. Pour le reussir au mieux, pouvez vous m'aider a les corriger ? Merci beaucoup d'avance !  
 
Voici le premier resumé:
 
Francais:
Bien que certains d’américains gardent beaucoup d’appréhensions concernant la peine de mort. Elle est toujours de mise dans beaucoup d’états..
Cependant suite a plusieurs a annulation comme celle de Willaim Castiollo qui fut innocente juste avant son exécution grâce a un test ADN, crée débat a propos de la égalité de cette pratique qui consiste a injecter un produit puis un deuxième ainsi qu’un troisième pour masqué les effets des 2er donnant l’impression que le prisonnier ne souffre pas. C’est pourquoi des procès on été ouvert au Texas et on Kentucky. Ils demandent une reforme de la loi sur l’application de cette peine ainsi qu’un élargissement de celle-ci pour les récidivistes et les pédophiles. Jusqu'à ce que cette reforme sois prise, toute les peine de mort sont suspendues.
D'autre part  Anita Dunn soutenue par le gouverneur républicain de Illinois demande l'abolition de cette peine.
 
Anglais:
Although lots of Americans retain some misgivings about the death penalty. It is still appropriate in many states.
However following more cancellations like William Castillo that he had been cleared just before his excution, creates debate about the legality of this practic, which involves injecting a product and then a second and a third to hide the effects of the first two giving the impression that the prisoner does not suffer.. Therefore Some cases have been opened in Texas and Kentucky. they demand a reform of the law on the application of capital punishment and a elagant of this one torecidivistent and pedophiles. Until this reform, all death penalty is suspended.
Moreover Anita Dunn supported by the Republican governor of Illinois called for the abolition of the death penalty.