關於 shall will用法 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

毋忘五大訴求　公民抗命有理
—10‧20九龍遊行陳情書
（案件編號：DCCC 535/2020）

——————————————————
「毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中」
撐阿銘，即訂閱Patreon：
patreon.com/raphaelwong
—————————————————

胡法官雅文閣下：

　　2012年，我第一次站在法庭上承認違反「公安惡法」，述說對普選的盼望，批評公安惡法不義，並因公民抗命的緣故，甘心樂意接受刑罰。當年我說，如果小圈子選舉沒有被廢除，惡法沒有消失，我依然會一如故我，公民抗命，並且我相信將會有更多學生和市民加入這個行列。想不到時至今日，普選仍然遙遙無期，我亦再次被帶到法庭接受審判，但只是短短７年，已經有數十萬計的群眾公民抗命，反對暴政。今日，我承認違反「未經批准的政府」所訂立「未經批准的惡法」之下的「未經批准集結」罪，我不打算尋求法庭的憐憫，但請容許我佔用法庭些微時間陳情，讓法庭在判刑前有全面考慮。

暴力之濫觴

　　在整個反修例運動如火如荼之際，我正承擔另一宗公民抗命案件的刑責。雖然身在獄中，但仍然心繫手足。我在獄中電視機前見證6月9日、6月16日及8月18日三次百萬港人大遊行，幾多熱愛和平的港人冒天雨冒彈雨走上街頭，抗議不義惡法，今日關於10月20日的案件，亦是如此。可能有人會問，政府已在6月暫緩修例，更在9月正式撤回修例，我等仍然繼續示威，豈非無理取鬧？我相信法官閣下肯定聽過「遲來的正義並非正義」（Justice delayed is justice denied）這句格言。當過百萬群眾走上街頭，和平表達不滿的時候，林鄭政府沒有理睬，反而獨行獨斷，粗暴踐踏港人的意願，結果製造出後來連綿不絕的爭拗，甚至你死我活的對抗。經歷眾多衝突痛苦之後，所謂暫緩撤回，已經微不足道，我們只是更加清楚：沒有民主，就連基本人權都不會擁有！

　　在本案之中，雖然我們都沒有鼓動或作出暴力行為，但根據早前8‧18及10‧1兩宗案件，相信在控方及法庭眼中，案發當日的暴力事件仍然可以算在我們頭上，如此，我有必要問：如果香港有一個公平正義的普及選舉，人民可以在立法會直接否決他們不認可的法律，試問2019年的暴力衝突可以從何而來呢？如果我們眼見的暴力是如此十惡不赦，那麼我們又如何看待百萬人遊行後仍然堅持推行惡法的制度暴力呢？如果我們不能接受人民暴力反抗，那麼我們是否更加不能對更巨大更壓逼的制度暴力沈默不言？真正且經常發生的暴力，是漠視人民訴求的暴力，是踐踏人民意見的暴力，是剝奪人民表達權利的暴力。真正憎恨暴力，痛恨暴力的人，不可能一方面指摘暴力反抗，又容忍制度暴力。如果我需要承擔和平遊行引發出來的暴力事件的刑責，那麼誰應該承擔施政失敗所引發出來的社會騷亂的罪責呢？

社會之病根

　　對於法庭而言，可能2019年所發生的事情只是一場社會騷亂，務必追究違法者個人責任。然而，治亂治其本源，醫病醫其病根，我雖然公民抗命，刻意違法，控方把我帶上法庭，但我卻不應被理解為一個「犯罪個體」。2019年所發生的事情，並不是我一個人或我們這幾位被告可以促成，社會問題的癥結不是「犯罪份子」本身，而是「犯罪原因」。我明白「治亂世用重典」的道理，但如果「殺雞儆猴」是解決方法，就不會在2016年發生旺角騷亂及2017年上訴庭對示威者施以重刑後，2019年仍然會爆發出更大規模的暴力反抗。

如果不希望社會動亂，就必須正本清源，逐步落實「五大訴求」，從根本上改革，挽回民心。2019年反修例運動，其實只是2014年雨傘運動的延續而已，縱使法庭可能認為兩個運動皆是「一股歪風」所引起，但我必須澄清，兩個運動的核心就是追求民主普選，人民當家作主。在2019年11月24日區議會選舉這個最類近全民普選的選舉中，接近300萬人投票，民主派大勝，奪得17個區議會主導權，這就是整個反修例運動的民意，民意就是反對政府決策，反對制度暴力，反對推行惡法，不容爭辯，不辯自明。我們作為礦場裡的金絲雀，多次提醒政府撤回修法，並從根本上改革制度，而在10月20日的九龍遊行當然是反映民意的平台契機。如今，法庭對我們施加重刑，其實只不過是懲罰民意，將金絲雀困在鳥籠之內，甚至扼殺於鼓掌之中，窒礙表達自由。

堅持之重要

　　大運動過後的大鎮壓，使我們失去《蘋果日報》，失去教協，失去民陣，不少民主派領袖以及曾為運動付出的手足戰友都囚於獄中，不少曾經熱情投入運動的朋友亦因《國安法》的威脅轉為低調，新聞自由示威自由日漸萎縮，公民社會受到沈重打擊，我亦失去不少摯友，有感傷孤獨的時候，但我仍然相信，2019年香港人的信念，以及所展現人類的光輝持久未變。我不會忘記百萬人民冒雨捱熱抗拒暴政，抵制惡法，展現我們眾志成城；我不會忘記人潮紅海，讓道救護車，展現我們文明精神；我不會忘記年青志士直接行動反對苛政，捨身成仁，展現我們膽色勇氣；我不會忘記銀髮一族走上街頭保護年青人，展現我們彼此關懷；我不會忘記「五大訴求」，不會忘記2019年區議會選舉，展現我們有理有節。

　　法官閣下，我對於當日的所作所為，不感羞恥，毫無悔意。我能夠在出獄後與群眾同行一路，與戰友同繫一獄，實是莫大榮幸。若法治失去民主基石，將使法庭無奈地接受專制政權所訂立解釋的法律限制，隨時變成政治工具掃除異見，因此爭取民主普選，建設真正法治，追求公平正義，仍然是我的理想。在這條路上，如有必要，我仍然會公民抗命，正如終審法院海外非常任法官賀輔明（Lord Hoffmann）所言，發自良知的公民抗命有悠久及光榮的傳統，歷史將證明我們是正確的。我期望，曾與我一起遊行抗命的手足戰友要堅持信念，在艱難歲月裡毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中。

　　最後，如9年前一樣，我想借用美國民權領袖馬丁路德金牧師的一番話對我們的反對者說：「我們將以自己忍受苦難的能力，來較量你們製造苦難的能力。我們將用我們靈魂的力量，來抵禦你們物質的暴力。對我們做你們想做的事吧，我們仍然愛你們。我們不能憑良心服從你們不公正的法律，因為拒惡與為善一樣是道德責任。將我們送入監獄吧，我們仍然愛你們。」（We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you.）

　　願慈愛的主耶穌賜我們平安，與我和我一家同在，與法官閣下同在，與香港人同在。沒有暴徒，只有暴政；五大訴求，缺一不可！願榮耀歸上帝，榮光歸人民！

第五被告
黃浩銘
二零二一年八月十九日

Lest we forget the five demands: civil disobedience is morally justified
- Statement on 10‧20 Kowloon Rally
(Case No.: DCCC 535/2020)

Your Honour Judge Woodcock

In 2012, I stood before the court and admitted to violating the "Public Security Evil Law". I expressed my hope for universal suffrage, criticized the evil law as unjust, and willingly accepted the penalty for civil disobedience. Back then, I said that if the small-circle election had not been abolished and the draconian law had not disappeared, I would still be as determined as I was, and I believe that more students and citizens would join this movement. Today, universal suffrage is still a long way off, and I have been brought before the court again for trial. But in just seven years, hundreds of thousands of people have already risen up in civil disobedience against tyranny. Today, I plead guilty to "unauthorised assembly" under an unapproved evil law enacted by an unauthorised government. I do not intend to seek the court's mercy, but please allow me to take up a little time in court to present my case so that the court can consider all aspects before sentencing me.

The roots of violence

At the time when the whole anti-extradition law movement was in full-swing, I was taking responsibility for another civil disobedience case. Although I was in prison, my heart was still with the people. I witnessed the three million-person rallies on 9 June, 16 June and 18 August on television in prison, when many peace-loving people took to the streets despite the rain and bullets, to protest against unjust laws. Some people may ask, "The Government has already suspended the legislative amendments in June and formally withdrew the bill in September, but we are still demonstrating, are we not being unreasonable?" I am sure your Honour has heard of the adage "Justice delayed is justice denied". When more than a million people took to the streets to express their discontent peacefully, the Lam administration ignored them and instead acted arbitrarily, brutally trampling on the wishes of the people of Hong Kong, resulting in endless arguments and even confrontations. After so many conflicts and painful experiences, the so-called moratorium is no longer meaningful. We only know better: without democracy, we cannot even have basic human rights!

In this case, although we did not instigate or commit acts of violence, I believe that in the eyes of the prosecution and the court, the violence on the day of the incident can still be counted against us, based on the August 18 and October 1 case. And now I must ask - If Hong Kong had a fair and just universal election, and the public could directly veto laws they did not approve of at the Legislative Council, then how could the violent clashes of 2019 have come about? If the violence we see is so heinous, how do we feel about the institutional violence that insists on the imposition of draconian laws even after millions of people have taken to the streets? If we cannot accept violent rebellion, how can we remain silent in the face of even greater and more oppressive institutional violence? The true and frequent violence is the kind of violence that ignores people's demands, that tramples on their opinions, that deprives them of their right to express themselves. People who truly hate violence and abhor it cannot accuse violent resistance on the one hand and tolerate institutional violence on the other. If I have to bear the criminal responsibility for the violence caused by the peaceful demonstration, then who should bear the criminal responsibility for the social unrest caused by failed administration?

The roots of society's problems

From a court's point of view, it may be that what happened in 2019 was just a series of social unrest, and that those who broke the law must be held personally accountable. What happened in 2019 was not something that I alone or the defendants could have made possible, and the crux of the social problem was not the 'criminals' but the 'causes of crime'. I understand the concept of " applying severe punishment to a troubled world", but if "decimation" was really the solution, there would not have been more violent rebellions in 2019 after the Mongkok "riot" in 2016 and the heavy sentences handed down to protesters by the Court of Appeal in 2017.

If we do not want social unrest, we must get to the root of the problem and implement the "five demands" step by step, so as to achieve fundamental reforms and win back the hearts of the people. 2019's anti-revision movement is indeed a continuation of 2014's Umbrella Movement, and even though the court may think that both movements are caused by a "perverse wind", I must clarify that the core of both movements is the pursuit of democracy and universal suffrage, and the people being the masters of their own house. In the District Council election on 24 November 2019, which is the closest thing to universal suffrage, nearly 3 million people voted, and the democratic camp won a huge victory, winning majority in 17 District Councils. As canaries in the monetary coal mine, we have repeatedly reminded the government to withdraw the extradition bill and fundamentally reform the system, and the march in Kowloon on 20 October was certainly an opportunity to reflect public opinion. Now, by imposing heavy penalties on us, the court is only punishing public opinion, trapping the canaries in a birdcage, or even stifling them in the palm of their hands, suffocating the freedom of expression.

The importance of persistence

As a result of the crackdown after the mass movement, we lost Apple Daily, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union, and the Civil Human Rights Front. Many of our democratic leaders and comrades who had contributed to the movement were imprisoned, and many of our friends who had been passionately involved in the movement had been forced to lay low under the threat of the National Security Law. I still believe that the faith of Hong Kong people and the glory of humanity seen in 2019 will remain unchanged. I will never forget the millions of people who braved the rain and the heat to resist tyranny and evil laws, demonstrating our unity of purpose; I will never forget the crowds of people who gave way to ambulances, demonstrating our civility; I will never forget the young people who sacrificed their lives, demonstrating our courage and bravery; I will never forget the silver-haired who took to the streets to protect the youth, demonstrating our care for each other; I will never forget the "five demands" and the 2019 District Council election, demonstrating our rationality and decency.

Your Honour, I have nothing to be ashamed of and no remorse for what I did on that day. It is my great honour to be in prison with my comrades and to be able to walk with the public after my release. If the rule of law were to lose its democratic foundation, the courts would have no choice but to accept the legal restrictions set by the autocratic regime and become a political tool to eliminate dissent at any time. As Lord Hoffmann, a non-permanent overseas judge of the Court of Final Appeal, said, civil disobedience from the conscience has a long and honourable tradition, and history will prove us right. I hope that my comrades in arms who walked with me in protests will keep their faith and live in love and truth in the midst of this difficult time.

Finally, as I did nine years ago, I would like to say something to those who oppose us, borrowing the words of American civil rights leader Reverend Martin Luther King: "We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you."

Peace be with me and my family, with Your Honour, and with the people of Hong Kong. There are no thugs, only tyranny; five demands, not one less! To god be the glory and to people be the glory!

The Fifth Defendant
Wong Ho Ming
19 August 2021

「收賄」、「白手套」英文怎麼說？
　
Accept bribes? White gloves?
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
《中華民國刑法》
　
Article 122

A public official or an arbitrator who demands, agrees to accept, or accepts a bribe or other improper benefits for a breach of his official duties shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than three years but not more than ten years; in addition thereto, a fine of not more than two million yuan may be imposed.

A breach of official duties shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or with imprisonment for not less than five years; in addition thereto, a fine not more than four million yuan may be imposed.
　
1. public official 公務員
2. arbitrator 仲裁人
3. accept a bribe 收受賄賂*
4. a breach of official duties 違背職務**
5. be sentenced 判處
6. imprisonment 監禁；關押
7. a fine 罰金
8. impose 強制實行
　
第 122 條

公務員或仲裁人對於違背職務之行為，要求、期約或收受賄賂或其他不正利益者，處三年以上十年以下有期徒刑，得併科二百萬元以下罰金。

因而為違背職務之行為者，處無期徒刑或五年以上有期徒刑，得併科四百萬元以下罰金。

全國法規資料庫: https://bit.ly/2Dk8Ia4

*bribery: https://bit.ly/31bwsFj
**breach: https://bit.ly/3k5qcHJ
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
那「白手套」呢？

White gloves? Not really...
　
The term "white-glove" is typically used as an adjective. It means providing a very high level of service, or involving a lot of care about small details:

白手套(white-glove)通常用作形容詞。表示提供非常高的服務水準，或與諸多照護細節有關：

➣The cruise company does not want to risk alienating the other passengers who don't get the white-glove treatment.

郵輪公司不想冒險讓其他未接受白手套待遇的乘客變得疏遠。

➣We know that when extra attention is required, our white-glove delivery service will not disappoint.
　
當您有特殊要求，我們的白手套配送服務一定不會讓您失望。

—Cambridge Dictionary

https://bit.ly/3hZTw0r
　
Wait…that doesn't fit our context!

★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
According to the South China Morning Post, the expression “white gloves,” when used as a noun, was coined in Taiwan!

“The innocuous-sounding euphemism ‘white gloves’ generally refers to a middleman or outfit that launders dirty or corrupt money under a seemingly legitimate front - dirty hands concealed by a pair of white gloves. The expression, coined by the Taiwanese, is catching up fast on the mainland as rampant corruption is exposed at all levels of the bureaucracy.”
　
9. coin (v.) 創造（新詞或新的表達方式）；首次使用（某一詞語）
10. innocuous-sounding 聽起來無害的
11. launder (v.) 洗（贓款） ; money laundering 洗錢
12. legitimate front 合法的地帶; 僞裝（人或機構的）僞裝；假裝的樣子
13. conceal 隱藏
14. catch up 了解（或討論）最新情況
15. rampant 猖獗的；蔓延的
16. bureaucracy 官僚體制；官僚主義
　
據《南華早報》的報導，「白手套」作為名詞的用法，首見於臺灣!

「聽起來無害的委婉用語『白手套』通常是指中間人或公司，他們在看似合法的地帶清洗髒錢或賄款——髒手則藏於白手套當中。這種由臺灣人首創的表達方式，正在中國迅速傳開，因為猖獗的腐敗現象已於官僚體制的各個層面暴露出來。」

詳見《SCMP》：https://bit.ly/3i2cqUA
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
我個人會用「middleman」或「go-between」。

請注意，「middleman」是指批貨後轉售他人者，或協助他人安排商業交易者。該詞本身並不具有任何犯罪或不法行為等負面意涵（negative connotations），亦須有上下文才足以呈現「白手套」的概念。
　
另一方面，「go-between」是在雙方無法見面或不想見面時，將消息從一人（或一個團隊）傳給另一人（或另一個團隊）的人。例如，聯合國代表將充當兩國領導人的中間人（或掮客）——「go-between」，而它的搭配你可以用「act/serve as a go-between」。「go-between」 的一個同義詞是「intermediary」。

❖再次提醒各位，若缺乏前後文，這些用語就不能完全代表「白手套」的涵義。底下我將舉出一些在腐敗情況中所使用的例子。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
I. middleman
　
"Many of these middlemen stay on the right side of the law, offering advice and connections. But others cross the line. They grease the palms of officials and local managers, and they put a buffer between the payoff and the client, offering plausible deniability if the authorities catch on."
　
17. connections 社會關係；人際關係；可資利用的熟人
18. cross the line（行為）越過界線
19. grease (v.) 用油脂塗；給⋯⋯加潤滑油
20. buffer 緩衝物；起緩衝作用的人
21. payoff 賄款；遮口費
22. plausible deniability 合理推諉
　
「在這些中間人裡，有許多人站在法律這邊，提供建議與人脈。但其他人卻踰越了界線。他們成為官員與地方經理人的潤滑劑，並在賄款與委託人之間置入緩衝物，起到合理推諉的作用，以防當局上門。」
　
詳見《紐約時報》：https://nyti.ms/39MMwkM

★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
II. intermediary
　
"For China’s elite, a 'white glove' is an intermediary who launders your money; they handle the dirty deeds, while you keep your hands clean. 'White gloves' are often well-connected Westerners, such as former top politician Bo Xilai’s two European fixers, British businessman Neil Heywood and French architect Patrick Devillers. Using a BVI shell company, the two men helped Bo’s wife Gu Kalai buy a 7 million euro French mansion and rack up rental fees on it."

23. elite（社會）上層集團；掌權人物；出類拔萃的人；精英
24. deed（尤指很壞或很好的）事情；行為
25. well-connected 與顯貴人物有交情的；與有影響人士有來往的；很有背景的
26. fixer 籌謀者；安排者（尤指精於用不正當手段來操辦事情的人）
27. BVI (The British Virgin Islands) 英屬維京群島
28. shell company 空殼公司
29. fixer 安排者（尤指精於用不正當手段來操辦事情的人）
　
『對中國的權貴來說，「白手套」是幫你洗錢的中間人；他們負責處理骯髒的事，讓你的雙手保持乾淨。「白手套」通常是與權貴有交情的西方人士，例如前副國級領導人薄熙來的兩個歐洲籌謀者——英國商人海伍德以及法國建築師德維利耶。兩人藉由一家英屬維京群島的空殼公司，幫助薄的妻子谷開來買下一座價值７００萬歐元的法式豪宅，並大大提高了租金。』
　
詳見《石英財經網》：https://bit.ly/30lFnEJ
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
III. go-between
　
"The offence is similar to bribery with one important difference: trading in influence concerns the 'middleman', or the person that serves as the go-between the decision-maker and the party that seeks an improper advantage."
　
30. offence (US offense) 犯罪行為；罪行
31. bribery 賄賂
32. trade in influence 斡旋賄賂；影響力交易
33. serve（為⋯⋯）工作；（為⋯⋯）服務；盡職責
34. improper advantage 不當利益
　
『此一罪行與賄賂相似，但有一個重要的區別：斡旋賄賂係指「middleman」或人充當決策者與尋求不當利益方的中間人（掮客）——「go-between」』。
　
詳見 Anti-Corruption Resource Center：https://www.u4.no/terms
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
歡迎在底下留言與我們分享更多相關字詞（例如：prosecutor、corruption charges、litigations⋯⋯）。

圖片出處: Google Image

★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
如果同學對於如何分析英文時事，以及如何進行批判性思考有興趣，歡迎加入我們的課程！

🌎國際新聞英文－六步驟思考術 | 最後優惠倒數 ► https://bit.ly/3eTHIvH

🌎國際新聞英文課程ＦＡＱ：https://wp.me/p44l9b-2lK

很多時候，分類都可以幫助我們更容易掌握文法知識。例如當你學的情態助動詞，你可以先問問自己，你懂得這幾組相似的情態助動詞的分別嗎？

Can / could be / able to

May / might

Shall / will

Should

Must / have to

Have to / need to

Will / would

每一組情態在動詞都有微妙的分別，而不只是時態上的分別哦！（這裡要用台式助語詞強調）

因為解釋部分組別的情態助動詞需要較長篇幅，我今天先和大家解釋must和Have to的分別。

驟眼看起來，must 和 have to 好像都是必須的意思，但是其實兩者是有微妙的分別的。

Must 和 have to 均可以動作表達義務，但如果一個人用must表達自己，例如他說買I must work hard，這表示他認為自己必須努力，但若果一個人說i have to work hard，他的意思很可能就是一些外在因素（無論是規條、他人催逼或其他外在因素）迫使他要努力，例如一個家長假若催逼小孩完成功課，那個小孩根本不想完成這項任務，小孩就可以說I have to work hard (because my mum makes me). 了

當然，以上並沒有解釋了must和have to的所有用法。例如撰寫規條時，我們往往會用must表達必須的意思，又例如have to其實有不得不、沒有選擇的意思。之後有機會再談。

【成人英語 One-day course：Modal Verbs 情態動詞】

12月14日 (三) 7:30 pm - 9:00 pm
Finnie's Club 會員價 ($80) / 非會員價 ($180)
人數：~7人
報名表格：https://goo.gl/forms/hv77wPE68xcLuut82

➡️ YouTube 頻道：http://bit.ly/fla-yt
➡️ 訂閱電子報：http://bit.ly/fla-nl
➡️ 成人班課程資料：http://bit.ly/fla-adult-infosheet
✴️ 搶先看到更新，設定專頁為「搶先看」/ “see first”

高校英文法を「学校」とは異なる視点から解説！
今までに習った内容をヨコに置いて受講して下さい(^-^)/
前回の内容を踏まえた解説をしているので、
下↓の順番に受講することをオススメします。

■文型：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyz4-yapPECFaG4Hp23mLvCU
■時制：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyz1CwcCeeqii-JNSF-y-Nlt
■助動詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyzQH44IANlK_Na8opmaiqd_
■準動詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyxIgptWXN-qFIUb2dZYfzLI
■仮定法：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyw0ksStMEmeXseTPLpnJHQo
■関係詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyzw0aUIUfYg40oLoZVOjI1E
■名詞・代名詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyxvRAnoo7pI79NB6f-pZNA9
■形容詞・副詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyxknRSI0cTcsJRMfH_NJq24
■比較：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyzRDrOUDWo0Dh_LiwofHTBw
■前置詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyw--ZsuOgExO2FUb1ME3TPu

◆【わかったつもり】をぶっとばせ！！◆
『できるまで、覚えるまで』付き合います！
努力が結果になる【勉強のコツ】公開中！　http://x-education.com/

勉強も部活も、上達する道筋は同じ！
部活と同じように、勉強でも本番前に「練習試合」しませんか？

■テスト本番で･･･
「この単語の意味、覚えたのにド忘れした･･･」
「この問題、解いたことあるんやけど、どうやったかな･･･」

と、テスト本番で実力を出し切れない人は、
テスト本番に向けた「練習試合」を！！

◆定期テスト必出問題からの予想問題でテスト対策。
◇解いて終わりではなく、理解度を「テスト(＝練習試合)」で確認し、「自分の力でで­きる状態」までお付き合い！
→【わかったつもり】をぶっとばせ！

詳しくは、面談にてお話します。


◆◇◆◇◆◇無料体験学習受付中◆◇◆◇◆◇◆◇
まずは面談にお越し下さい。
面談も体験授業も、入塾を決定するものではございません。

◆個別クロス　http://x-education.com/

高校英文法を「学校」とは異なる視点から解説！
今までに習った内容をヨコに置いて受講して下さい(^-^)/
前回の内容を踏まえた解説をしているので、
下↓の順番に受講することをオススメします。

■文型：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyz4-yapPECFaG4Hp23mLvCU
■時制：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyz1CwcCeeqii-JNSF-y-Nlt
■助動詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyzQH44IANlK_Na8opmaiqd_
■準動詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyxIgptWXN-qFIUb2dZYfzLI
■仮定法：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyw0ksStMEmeXseTPLpnJHQo
■関係詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyzw0aUIUfYg40oLoZVOjI1E
■名詞・代名詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyxvRAnoo7pI79NB6f-pZNA9
■形容詞・副詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyxknRSI0cTcsJRMfH_NJq24
■比較：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyzRDrOUDWo0Dh_LiwofHTBw
■前置詞：https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6v3wSks0tyw--ZsuOgExO2FUb1ME3TPu

◆【わかったつもり】をぶっとばせ！！◆
『できるまで、覚えるまで』付き合います！
努力が結果になる【勉強のコツ】公開中！　http://x-education.com/

勉強も部活も、上達する道筋は同じ！
部活と同じように、勉強でも本番前に「練習試合」しませんか？

■テスト本番で･･･
「この単語の意味、覚えたのにド忘れした･･･」
「この問題、解いたことあるんやけど、どうやったかな･･･」

と、テスト本番で実力を出し切れない人は、
テスト本番に向けた「練習試合」を！！

◆定期テスト必出問題からの予想問題でテスト対策。
◇解いて終わりではなく、理解度を「テスト(＝練習試合)」で確認し、「自分の力でで­きる状態」までお付き合い！
→【わかったつもり】をぶっとばせ！

詳しくは、面談にてお話します。


◆◇◆◇◆◇無料体験学習受付中◆◇◆◇◆◇◆◇
まずは面談にお越し下さい。
面談も体験授業も、入塾を決定するものではございません。

◆個別クロス　http://x-education.com/