The Paris Peace Conference

Today, in our history class, we watched a video and answer some questions.



1) War guilt.Explain the arguments FOR and AGAINST this term.

2) Which term followed War Guilt? How much would it be today? What consequences/impact did it have on Germany?

3) Why were the victors planning to prevent a future war with Germany in the Treaty?

4) What territorial losses did Germany have to face? What happened to the German colonies? What did Wilson dislike about this?

5) Which new nations were created after WW1?


1)  Germany was responsable…

For war because: It didn’t take long for Germany to declare war on Russia and then on France. Then she invaded Belgium in just a matter of days.

Against war because: There was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand. The terms that Austria-Hungary put on Serbia. The Russians decide to enter war, which gave Germany a pretext to enter war.

2) The term that followed war guilt was reperations.  They had to pay 400 billion 2013 dollars. It humiliated  Germany, future generations that had nothing to do with war, had to pay. But they ended up paying $60 billion 2013 dollars.  It also aaffected it’s economy.

3) The allies didn’t want  future war with Germany because if she had won her points for to declare war would be harder.


4) From Germany territory was taken, as from colonies to land in the proper country. Poland wss carved out of Germany and Alsace Lorraine was given back to France. As for the colonies, they were distribute between de European Empires. President Wilson didn’t like it because in his 14 points for peace, he said that there should be democracy in Europe and countries should have self determination.

5) The new nations were: Poland, Yugoslavia, Austria,  Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia.

Extension work

In groups we wrote a conversation between Clemenceau, Wilson and Lloyd George about what we think their country’s should get as compensation from the war, their views on the 14 Points and the type of punishment Germany should receive. I did it with Lucas Campión.

Process of the dialogue:


The Voicethread with the dialogue:

(To listen the hole dialogue you have to press the arrow)


The personal comment about this project to learn on the Big Three and their aims and objectives:

We feel we had learnt more than if we had studied this from the book, because this way for studying is more funny. And we remember funny things, so we are going to remeber and learn more about the Big Three by using this technique.

What we personally enjoyed from this project was the part in which we had to record our voices. Because it was very funny to hear our voices in Voicethread.

If the class from Senior 1 next year are going to do this proyect again, we wouldn’t change nothing. Because nothing had to be change. We only recomnd you to speak well before you record it.

The Prison

With our literature teacher, Pato Chujman, we start reading the story “Prison” by Bernard Malamud.


In our first class we search about the author. Here are some notes about Bernard Malamud:

• Born in April 26 1914
• Died in March 18 1986
• Grew up in Brooklyn
• Worked in a factory
• Was a professor

He’s themes were:
• Mythic elements
• Isolation
• Social classes
• Conflict between high class and artistic values

• National book award for fiction x2
• Pulitzer prize for fiction
• O Henry award
• Pen/Malamud award

We also took notes about the paragraphs of the story:

• The main character, Tony Castelli, was 29, he had past mistakes
• People decide everything for him
• His marriage was an arrangement
• His wife, Rosa, started calling Tony for Tommy, so he lost his identity
• The landlord resolved a crime problem, he was fighting with his gang
• Rosa’s father open a candy store for him to run
• Rosa was rich
• Tony’s dreams were crushed, he was doomed
• Doomed: destined to fail, he make an attempt to change and it gone worst
• He can’t make any decision for his own

• Tommy started looking for money distributing punchboards and putting a slot machine
• He is giving up
• Rosa’s father got angry and broke the machine
• He curses the candy store, rosa and hia unhappy life
• But he wasn’t doing nothin because of fear
• He is dead alive

If he can not put his thoughts into actions he will be in his prison forever.

After reading the story and analysing it, we produced this scrapbook

Now we are going to do an activity. The activity is in the slide share. I do it with Margui Muller and Flor Claps


This story takes place in the USA. There was a man called Tony, whose name was change into Tommy because that name was more american. He was going through a rite of passage, in which he suffer going from 29 to 30 years old. From being an adolescent to an adult. He could`t take any desition on his own, because he was trapped inside his mind, he was doomed. Tommy found himself in an arranged marriage with Rosa. She was a woman who cared to much about what others thought about her and her couple.

Both, Tommy and Rosa, seemed to be good for each other. But Tommy, in his mind, was always thinking that Rosa wasn’t the woman he loved. He wanted to escape, but he was in a mental prison, a prison inside his mind.

There was a little girl, that always came on mondays since summer to Rosa´s and Tommy´s sweet-shop. This girl asked for something and stole another. One day Tommy saw her stolling, but he did not say anything. (Because this is one epiphanic moment for him, as he stole things when we was a child). Rosa also cathed her, and she called her a thief. But Tommy defended the little girl, and hit Rosa. (The climax of the story). Finally the girl´s mother came and the little girl showed her tongue to her mother.

The themes of the story are: intrapment  or inprisonment,  doom of the self, impossibility to act upon thoughts or to speak your mind, suffering and giving up on life.

Then we had to answer this questions.


Sintaxis y Escritura- en proceso

Carol nos dio una actividad: el trabajo de leer un texto y cumplir las consignas pedidas. Lo hice con Margarita Muller.

1) El inspector Fernández tenía tantas preguntas de este caso, porque como la señorita tenía una obsesión por los cuatros, no pudo haber matado a los gatos debido a que eran 3 gatos y no 4.

3) Lo que hizo el señor Estivenson, fue revisar las evidencias. En la casa del señor acusador, el señor Estívenson vio que los gatos estaban vivos, y dormidos debajo de la cama del señor Popolino. También vio que la señirita Coatrí era una mujer con una manía cuaripartita.

las oraciones claves son:

– el inspector Fernández, conocedor de la manía cuatripartita de la señorita Coatrí, anotaba y aplicaba la prueba de las preguntas

-voy a explicar por qué la señorita Coatrí no es la culpable, como usted seguramente ya habrá deducido.

– sus queridísimos gatos habían robado dos kilos de bofe de la heladera y, después de una gran panzada.


Los Fenicios, Los Hebreos y El Imperio Asirio y Neobabilónico

Nuestra profesora de historia, Maria Marta, nos dijo que busquemos, de a parejas. información sobre los fenicios. Yo lo hice con Lola Argento.

En el colegio corregimos 1 presentación de: los Fenicios, los Hebreos y el Imperio Asirio y Neobabilónico, para tener información corregida para estudiar para la prueba.

Los Fenicios: Federika Marty y Vignesh Manwani


El Imperio Asirio y Neobabilónico: Lucas Campion y María Roggero

Los Hebreos: Gonzalo Criniti y Martín Ananía

(click aquí)

Como Hacer el Análisis Sintáctico


En clase estuvimos analizando unas oraciones, hicimos un repaso general de que significa y cómo se hacen. Después lo profesora nos pidió que hagamos un resumen de la clase.

Pasos para analizar esta oración:

  • Nuestra frase es…


  • Ahora, tenemos que diferenciar los constituyentes

FullSizeRender (1)

  • Después de diferenciar los constituyentes hacemos la prueba de movilidad.

FullSizeRender (2)

  • Después de diferenciar los constituyentes y hacer la prueba de movilidad, podemos empezar a analizarla sintacticamente. Por eso empezamos poniendo los corchetes.


  • Después ponemos el núcleo verbal (NV).


  • Una ves ya marcado el núcleo verbal (NV), marcamos el núcleo del sujeto (NS).


  • Cuando ya tenemos el NV y el NS podemos saber que la oración es bimembre (OB) y podemos separarla en términos. Los dos términos que separamos son el sujeto expreso simple (SES) y el predicado verbal  simple (PVS).


  • Después ponemos los modificadores directos (MD) y/o los indirectos (MI). En esta oración solo hay MD porque “el” es un artículo y “mejor” es un adjetivo.


  • Después de poner el núcleo verbal (NV), el núcleo del sujeto (NS), separar en términos (SES) / (PVS) y poner los modificadores directos (MI), nos quedó el “un tres” en el predicado.


  • Para poder saber si «un tres» es objeto directo (OD), tenemos que hacer comprobaciones: La primera fue cambiar «un tres» por artículos, «lo», «la», «los» y «las». La segunda comprobación que hicimos fue cambiar la oración en voz pasiva.


  • ¡¡TERMINAMOS!! Ahora tenemos la oración analizada



El Objeto Directo (OD)

El objeto directo (O.D), se encuentra en el predicado. Para asegurarnos de que es ese el OD hay 2 formas de averiguarlo:

1. Verificar si se puede reemplazar por artículos: LO/LOS/LA/LAS.

Ejemplo: El mejor alumno se sacó un 3.                                                                               .                 El mejor alumno se lo sacó.

2.  Al pasar la oración a voz pasiva, el O.D sera el sujeto.

Ejemplo: El mejor alumno se sacó un 3.                                                                                –  –             Un 3 fue sacado por el mejor alumno.


El Objeto Indirecto (OI)

El Objeto Indirecto (OI) está en el predicado. El OI es cuando te referís indirectamente (por medio de modificadores) al verbo. Para verificar que es un OI tenemos algunas opciones:

Ejemplo: Juan dio el libro a Pedro / Juan le dio el libro / Juan se lo dio.