11-08-2017 Daily Star Vocabulary

নতুন নতুন চাকরির পোষ্ট পেতে আমাদের পেজ লাইক ও শেয়ার করে রাখুন

Daily Star Vocabulary

###- Kim Jong-un’s methods in his madness…..(opinion)

1. appeasement – তুষ্টি(gratification, contentment)

2. emanate – উৎপন্ন হত্তয়া

3. bellicosity – মারমুখো

4. dismantling – নিরাবরণ করা

5. vis-à-vis(French) – সামনাসামনি

6. benefits of détente – শিথিলতার উপকারিতা

Full Column Link….( http://www.thedailystar.net/…/kim-jong-uns-methods-his-madn…)

Time to take a step back…..(editorial)

1. plateau – মালভূমি

2. locus standi – স্থির অবস্থান

3 confrontation – শক্তভাবে মোকাবেলা

4. bilateral meeting – দ্বিপক্ষীয় বৈঠক

5. conciliation – শান্তকরণ

Full Column Link….( http://www.thedailystar.net/…/b…/time-take-step-back-1446661)


###- Govt’s reaction to verdict on 16th Amendment ….(sub editorial)

1. Amendment to the Constitution – সংবিধানের সংশোধন

2. supplementary comment – সম্পূরক মন্তব্য

3. conclusive proof – চূড়ান্ত প্রমাণ

4. contemptuous – ঘৃণাপূর্ণ

5. democratic dispensation – গণতান্ত্রিক ব্যবস্থা

6. deteriorating – অধোগামী

Full sub editorial……

Govt’s reaction to verdict on 16th Amendment
Spare judiciary from unfounded attacks

Star file photo
We are heartened by the law minister’s reaction to the verdict on the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. In well-measured words chosen to stake out his government’s position, he said he respects the verdict although he disagrees with it. He also termed as “unacceptable” the reason for which the amendment was declared unconstitutional. We are also happy that he said, “The parliament never had any intention to limit or hamper the independence of the judiciary by any amendment.”

However, we are alarmed by the minister’s supplementary comments on the verdict that it was “driven by hatred.” A similar instance of attack on the Supreme Court has been made by a former chief justice on Wednesday, who seemed to have suggested that the verdict may have been predetermined. We think such a comment without any conclusive proof to support it is contemptuous of the highest legal institution in the country.

Disagreeing with the verdict of a court is common in a democratic dispensation, and while constructive criticism is welcome, as has also been made clear by the Chief Justice, questioning the integrity of the judges and the Supreme Court is disconcerting, to say the least.

We cannot but express our deep concern at the deteriorating and often personal nature of the attack directed at our highest court. We request all concerned to respect the institution of the parliament on the one hand, and that of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice on the other.