Paul Clapham wrote: happy isn't appropriate for that kind of communication.
Campbell Ritchie wrote:Ask somebody else to listen to your speeches.
Satyaprakash Joshii wrote:Agreed. I am talking about US.
When I hear my recorded voice, it sounds harsh to me. So that's why I wanted to know how should the voice be in general (not for exception case).?
Some people, when well-known sources tell them that fire will burn them, don't put their hands in the fire.
Some people, being skeptical, will put their hands in the fire, get burned, and learn not to put their hands in the fire.
And some people, believing that they know better than well-known sources, will claim it's a lie, put their hands in the fire, and continue to scream it's a lie even as their hands burn down to charred stumps.
You can indicate doubt very firmly, or say, “Don't know,” very firmly.Satyaprakash Joshii wrote:. . . lack of firmness (showing doubt). . . .
Some people, when well-known sources tell them that fire will burn them, don't put their hands in the fire.
Some people, being skeptical, will put their hands in the fire, get burned, and learn not to put their hands in the fire.
And some people, believing that they know better than well-known sources, will claim it's a lie, put their hands in the fire, and continue to scream it's a lie even as their hands burn down to charred stumps.
Tim Holloway wrote:And why is that stupid fly buzzing around in the snow on the first day of Winter?
Tim Holloway wrote: Innumerable questions posted on the Ranch begin with "Doubt in" when the standard phrase would be "Question about/regarding".
Paul Clapham wrote:lot of variation based on context. Are you trying to get your audience to buy something, or buy into something? Are you in an ordinary discussion about what needs to get done next week and who is going to do it? Are you in a subordinate position to your audience or a superior position?
Satyaprakash Joshii wrote:In general I think the voice should not have negative aspects (Barring exception scenarios). And harshness, dullness, lack of firmness (showing doubt) are negative.
Queen's English has outward-facing "doubt". That is, "doubt about" (or "I have doubts about"), "doubt over", doubt on" not inward-facing ("doubt in").
And why is that stupid fly buzzing around in the snow on the first day of Winter?
Satyaprakash Joshii wrote:
Tim Holloway wrote: Innumerable questions posted on the Ranch begin with "Doubt in" when the standard phrase would be "Question about/regarding".
But "question" does not have the same meaning as "doubt".
Some people, when well-known sources tell them that fire will burn them, don't put their hands in the fire.
Some people, being skeptical, will put their hands in the fire, get burned, and learn not to put their hands in the fire.
And some people, believing that they know better than well-known sources, will claim it's a lie, put their hands in the fire, and continue to scream it's a lie even as their hands burn down to charred stumps.
In English, doubt means primarily a distrust, and you can question something if you have doubts about it, but if you are asking a straight question with no pre-conceptions about the subject, "doubt" wouldn't be the word, because you haven't assumed a position to distrust.
I was her plaything! And so was this tiny ad:
SKIP - a book about connecting industrious people with elderly land owners
https://coderanch.com/t/skip-book
|