How to study I am very interested in British philosophers. For example, D. Hume, J. S. Mill, Jeremy Bentham, etc. I study them in my university classes . I would like to read their original texts without translation, but they are so difficult for me. I guess one of the reasons is the long sentences. For example, there are a lot of colons and semi-colons in “On Liberty," so the sentences don’t end clearly. Sometimes when I read them, I can’t understand where the subjects are in the sentences. Are they dropped? Is their literature different from today’s books? If the original language is English, is it easy to interpret? Please, teach me how to read a book with such long sentences.

My question I am very interested in British philosopher .For example D.Hume and J.S.Mill ,Jermy Bentham etc.I study them though university’s lesson . Hopefully I would like to read only the original textwithout translation . But they are so difficult for me .I guess one of the reoson is long sentences . For example there are a lot of “:” or “;"in “On Liberty” ,and so a sentence don’t end easily .Sometime , when I read them I can’t understand where is the subject in this sentence?Are there any hang ?Are there literature different from today’s books ? If the mother language is English, is it easy interpretation? I am very interested in British philosopher . For example D.Hume and J.S.Mill ,Jermy Bentham etc. I study them though university’s lesson . Hopefully I would like to read only the original textwithout translation . But they are so difficult for me .I guess one of the reoson is long sentences . For example there are a lot of “:” or “;"in “On Liberty” ,and so a sentence don’t end easily .Sometime , when I read them I can’t understand where is the subject in this sentence?Are there any hang ?Are there literature different from today’s books ? If the mother language is English, is it easy interpretation? Please teach me how to read a book which sentence is so long .

about institution of marriage

I am Japanese university student.

I am studying the　how to create a system in which married women can have the choice to keep their maiden names .

First I will tell you my situation.
I agree with this system and I think the system should be introduced in Japanese civil law.
A lot of people undertake it themselves to revise Japanese civil law about this problem for more than 30 years ！！

Especially a lot of women are demanding their right .
But from past to present, the argument continues between proponents and opponents of this problem .
Generally, the conservative　people advocate “ if the system is introduced into Japanese society, it will surely lead the destruction of the family.
And the system is against the spirit of community and community ethics
I think that they want to stick to the patriarchal capitalist society in Japan that is became a custom after the age of Meiji .

I’m so glad that you corrected my sentences .
Japanese civil law article ７５０　provide as fellow .
”　If you（husband and wife ) married ,you have to give the choice between
husband’s family name or wife’s .”
So I choice husband’s family name .
I and my husband have an objection this stipulation before marriage
and we　covet for　amendment to the Civil Code.
The former civil law made in Meiji Period〔1868-1912〕tended to predominance of men over women .
After World War Il, new civil law was established and made up supposedly egalitarian society（equality for men and women）.
It looks equality external .
But inveteracy observance　is taking up residence inside of Japanese people .

 

Itarian culture I am very interested about one thing about Italia. I read one article about divorce rate in the world . Italia carry a low incidence of divorce worldwide . I'm very dying of curiously and I want to know the reason . Please teach me . I study at Japanese university and search about　institution of marriage　and family institution.

relative pronoun I can't understand relative pronoun especially"that""what""which". When do we should use each of them ?Please teach me.