posted by Henry1 .
I'm sending you the sentences I'm most doubtful about. Thank you. I included my doubts in parentheses.
1) At the school of languages he meets three professors who are meditating on how to (?) improve their own country.
2) The first project they are working on is about (concerns?) shortening discourse by cutting polysyllables into one and leaving out verbs and participles.
3) They believe all things imaginable are but nouns (can be reduced to nouns). The second project consists in a scheme to abolish all words. This project implies the advantage of preventing the lungs from corrosion due to speech.
4) They believe that there is an alternative to using the language (or to the use of the language). Since words are only names for things, they think people should carry the things they need to speak about.
5) Women, however, oppose the project since they want to be allowed to speak "with their tongue", after the manner of their forefathers. The only incovenient to (?) the use of things instead of words is that a man with a business or a culture will have to carry too many things on his back.
1 - OK except for comma needed after "languages"
2 - Yes, delete "is about" and insert "concerns"
3 - "can be reduced to nouns" is better; "consists of" (not "in"); "preventing the lungs from corroding because of speech" instead of what you have.
4 - remove "the" in front of "language" (either phrasing will then be OK)
5 - "The only inconvenience about using things instead of words..."