2016/07/17

The influence of Suzuki wrong fuel economy tests problem

My family visited the Mazda car dealer yesterday to take inspection of my husband's car and my car.

I like to visit there because we can wait to finish the inspection while drinking coffee and reading magazines.

Since various ideas are devised so that children do not get tired of the shop, my children can wait without boring.

They played with Origami and made cranes, rode a small car and moved around the dealer, read books and watched TV.

They were able to drink anything they want and eat snack.

This time, I was surprised that no Kei car was displayed in the dealer.

Kei car is a Japanese category of small vehicles.

Mazda was selling small vehicles which were OEM of Suzuki and my previous car was one of them.

The dealer displayed the Kei cars before.

But they removed them maybe because Suzuki admitted to improper fuel economy testing methods on 16 of its automobile models since 2010 in a statement released in May.

I am not familiar with cars, but I thought they are struggling with sales now.



 
Thank you(^o^) for reading this article!
If you enjoy it, please click the button below and vote me!
I will be encouraged by you.

にほんブログ村 英語ブログ 英語の日記(英語のみ)へ
         

2 件のコメント:

  1. Hello Kumi-san,

    Like you I do not know very much about cars but we have also been affected by car producers with dishonest fuel efficiency numbers. The worst offender here is Volkswagen. A lot of people could not pass their vehicle inspections because of them and needed to get help to get their cars fixed. I do hope all the car makers who had dishonest numbers get fined a large amount to set an example.

    The one advantage of Kei car is that even if their fuel economy numbers were inaccurate they are still going to be much better than most other cars.

    Here is a list of some of the other issues found with the rest of the post:

    Part 1:

    This line:
    The influence of Suzuki wrong fuel economy tests problem

    Should be:
    The influence of Suzuki's (fraudulent/dishonest/misleading/deceptive) fuel economy (tests/numbers)

    Reason: There were a few mistakes in the title of the post, the first was that Suzuki should have 's added to it to indicate possession/ownership (similar to the effect of の in Japanese). The second issue is a little more difficult to explain. In your original sentence you used "wrong". But the word wrong says that something is incorrect but it may or may not be a deliberate mistake. For example if I say that 2+2=5. It's wrong but you dont know from the sentence weather I just made a mistake in my maths or if I am deliberately trying to mislead someone into thinking that 2+2=5, I could just be very bad a mathematics. In the case of Suzuki they deliberately tried to mislead their customers. There was fraud and active deception involved. In that case you need to use a word which indicates that something is wrong but that also there was deliberate dishonesty involved.

    So that is why I changed "wrong" to "fraudulent/dishonest/misleading/deceptive". As these words also include the meaning of being wrong and deliberately trying to mislead.

    This line:
    My family visited the Mazda car dealer yesterday to take inspection of my husband's car and my car.

    Should be:
    My family visited the Mazda car dealer yesterday to (take an/have an) inspection of my husband's car and my car.

    Reason: Added filler word "an" to make sentence sound more natural and grammatically correct.

    Or:
    My family visited the Mazda car dealer yesterday to (take an/have an) inspection of our cars.

    Reason: The above sentence removed "my husband's car and my car" and changed to "inspection of our cars" As this flows slightly better and is less repetitive and still implies that both you and your husband had your cars inspected.

    This line:
    I like to visit there because we can wait to finish the inspection while drinking coffee and reading magazines.

    Should be:
    I like to visit there because we can drink coffee and read magazines while we wait for them to finish the inspection.

    Reason: Word order changes and filler words added to make sentence sound more natural.

    This line:
    Since various ideas are devised so that children do not get tired of the shop, my children can wait without boring.

    Should be:
    Various activities are (devised/provided) so that children do not get bored, so my children can wait without getting bored.

    Or:
    Various activities are (devised/provided) so that children do not get bored, so my children can wait without it getting boring.

    This line:
    They played with Origami and made cranes, rode a small car and moved around the dealer, read books and watched TV.

    Should be:
    They played with Origami and made cranes, rode a small car and moved around the dealership, read books and watched TV.

    Reason: Changed "dealer" to "dealership". As I assume you mean that the children wandered around the building the dealers are in not that they found the individual person (the dealer) and travelled around him). Dealership means the space that dealers are in (the room/building they are in).

    返信削除
  2. Part 2:

    This line:
    They were able to drink anything they want and eat snack.

    Should be:
    They were able to drink anything they wanted and eat snacks.

    Reason: Changed word "want" to "wanted" as the past tense version of the word is more correct as use in your sentence. Also changed "snack" to "snacks" as I am assuming there was more that one type of snack they could eat.

    This line:
    This time, I was surprised that no Kei car was displayed in the dealer.

    Should be:
    This time, I was surprised that no Kei cars were displayed in the dealership.

    Reason: Changed "car" to "cars" (as I am assuming there are normally more that one Kei car displayed). Changed "dealer" to "dealership" to indicate that you mean the space/building that cars are displayed in/at.

    This line:
    Kei car is a Japanese category of small vehicles.

    Question: Does Kei car also mean generally that they have small engines and are fuel efficient as well as being physically small?

    This line:
    Mazda was selling small vehicles which were OEM of Suzuki and my previous car was one of them.

    Should be:
    Mazda was selling small vehicles which were (originally made by/originally manufactured by/made by/manufactured by) Suzuki and my previous car was one of them.

    Reason: Replaced acronym OEM as this is a little technical and it is clearer to use different words.

    This line:
    The dealer displayed the Kei cars before.

    Should be:
    The dealership has displayed the Kei cars before.

    Reason: Word changes and filler words added.

    This line:
    But they removed them maybe because Suzuki admitted to improper fuel economy testing methods on 16 of its automobile models since 2010 in a statement released in May.

    Should be:
    But they removed them maybe because Suzuki admitted to improper fuel economy testing methods on 16 of it's automobile models since 2010 in a statement released in May.

    Reason: Changed "its" to "it's" as I think this is more correct (but am not certain that this is more grammatically correct, if you know for certain it is wrong then please ignore).

    This line:
    I am not familiar with cars, but I thought they are struggling with sales now.

    Should be:
    I am not familiar with cars, but I thought their sales must be (struggling/suffering/affected/impacted).

    Reason: Word substitutions to make sentence a little more natural sounding.

    返信削除