Quote:
Originally Posted by Jahangir Mushtaque
Kindly check out my expansion.
We live in deeds, not years.
When an old man of ninety died in a certain locality no one cared; however, world mourned when young John Keats died. Men are remembered by their deeds, but not by the years they spent in the world. Great men emerged out of obscurity and princes vanished in history, it is their feats which count in the end. Every day, countless men die only few make news. This news is not about how long they lived in the world, but what they did for the word. There is a common maxim that lion’s single day life is better than a hundred years of fox’s; the saying implies that lion who rules bravely even for a single day is more dignified than a fox who lives for years prowling in fear and darkness. Every person in the world wants to become great, in the one or the other day, but only few reach the pinnacle of greatness. These few great men are always remembered in history as great kings, philosophers, scientists, writers etc. When Muhammad Bin Qasim attacked Sind, he was merely a boy of seventeen and died when he was just twenty; his age is of no importance but his actions are recorded in history, for they changed the course of Indian Civilization. All these examples from history and everyday life testify to the fact that we live in deeds not years
|
Dear line is good, coupled with fine sentence structure.. No grammatical mistake seems to be there... it is better divide the expansion into minimal 3 paras, but contrary to it, you have compressed all stuff into a single paragraph, as if the whole paragraph was concerned with single thought, which is not the case: In the first para. what we are supposed to do is explaining and elucidating the meaning lying implicitly or explicitly in the given maxim. In the second para, the relevant details, illustrations, instances, supportive arguments, to be added to justify the maxim concerned. While in the third para. we conclude the debate esp. with the moral/lesson drawn either by us in view of its relevance to the leading sentence, or the one explicitly suggested by the main sentence/proverb.
P.S it is not the hard and fast principle to develop the expansion in three paras. it can exceed if so necessary..
On the whole Good piece of writing...Regards