(Untitled)

[bigeyedphish]

Here's another draft of my SOP. Would anyone mind reading it over? Grammatical or any other issues you want to point out are most certianly welcomed as I'm hoping this is either it or pretty close to my final draft. Thanks!

Comments

[littleannemouse]

First of all, there are several typos, so make sure you read it again and again. I'm pointing them out here because I know when you've read your own work over and over, you can hardly spot any mistakes:
Relavant > relevant
during AND International relations > AN
is influence > influenced

I also think it might be too informal.

[bigeyedphish]

Mm, yes, it still needs to be proofread by a couple people for typos. Thanks for catching those!

What do you mean by informal? How do I change it to be more forma

[littleannemouse]

As I mentioned below (in a reply to a comment), I think it's the "so" that made it sound very informal.
Also, I don't know what everyone else thinks about that, but I always say politics IS not ARE. I might be wrong here.

[bigeyedphish]

Ah, okay. That makes sense.

[shetheliving]

I'll agree with littleannemouse. Lots of little stuff:
- You use the phrase "over the course" to start two straight sentences. How about "throughout my/the" for one or the other?
- "Had come" in the second sentence could just be "came"
- World events, in the next to last sentence of your 1st graph
- You can strike the "of" in the first sentence of your 2nd graph
- "not as strong" should be "not as strong there"

[bigeyedphish]

Thanks.

[driveheraway]

-"These topics are so relavant. . ." - I would take out the word "so." It doesn't add anything to your sentence and actually diminishes the forces of your statement

[littleannemouse]

Maybe she could use very instead of so. I think, unfortunately, that "so" has become associated with teen girl speak.

[bigeyedphish]

Thanks! And oops, I meant to take out the professors name but I forgot. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

[rory_l]

one thing to add:

In your 2nd paragraph you mention Zionist ideology, which you discussed in your paper....do you mean Christian Zionism? I think you should define it, especially since there are so many "Zionist ideologies" you really can't lump them into one....Christian Zionism is completely different than old-school Herzl's style political Zionism (which had much to do with nationalism, and little to do with religion), then there is religious Zionism, revisionist Zionism, labour Zionism, socialist Zionism....which one(s) did you discuss in your paper? I'm assuming Christian/messianic/religious, but I think maybe its better to state it clearly....

[bigeyedphish]

Oooh right. That was supposed to say Christian Zionism. Thanks for catching that!