por Hukambir Kohli hace 3 años
158
Ver más
The part of speech is a category to which a word is assigned according to its syntactic functions. In English the main parts of speech are noun, pronoun, adjective, determiner, verb, adverb, preposition, conjunction, and interjection.
A conjunction is a word like 'if' 'but' or 'and' which is used to connect sentences or clauses together.
Subordinating conjunctions are conjunctions that are used at the beginning of subordinate clauses. Some examples of these conjunctions are: although, after, before, because, how, if, once, since, so that, until, unless, when etc.
Coordinating conjunctions always connect phrases, words, and clauses. They are: for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so.
A preposition is one of the most exciting parts of grammar. A preposition is used to describe the location of something in relation to something else.
A group of words used with the force of a single preposition is called phrase preposition.
--> This case was about two aboriginal indigenous people, who were born o/s but came to live in australia. Whilst living here, they committed a crime & meant that they would've been deported as aliens since they failed to meet the character test. --> These two men challenged the meaning of aliens in s51 subsec19 of the constitution. The court ruled with the two people and said that aboriginal people are not aliens to the land and hence the alien definition in s51 ss19 does not apply aboriginal non-citizens as they are citizens through their spiritual and cultural heritage --> This impacted the law making power of parliament, by disallowing it the ability to deport aboriginal non-citizens based on the 1958 Migration Act.
--> The H.C, by taking a literal and narrow approach ruled that any members in parliament which attained a citizenship of another country (within immediate reach, i.e., they still have rights of that country), cannot serve in parliament and are disqualified under s44.
--> At two seperate times the H.C ruled against the CMW's usage of various sections of the constitution. --> At first it ruled against the nature that the CMW said that it had the right to rule under executive power (s61). --> And secondly, it ruled against the usage of s51(ss 23a) that it was a benefit to society hence part of the welfare system.
--> In 2018, QLD made ammendments to their electoral laws stating that property developers couldn't donate to registered political P's. Later, the CMW made an ammendment to it's electoral law adding a new clause - 302CA that allowed for donations to political parties which could be used at a state level - bypassing the state. --> Spence argued that QLD law was invalid because it clashed with CMW law & hence s109 came into play. --> QLD argued that their law was valid since it is within their state powers to control state elections. QLD argued the 302CA clause was invalid because it affected state powers in controlling donations which may impact a state level. --> The H.C. dismissed Spence and upheld QLD's arguement, meaning that clause 302CA was invalid.
Participle preposition consists of words that end in “ing”.
--> GetUp! Australia created a way to allow aussies to enrol online in future elections by having a digital signature. --> The AEC invalidated a person's application due to that signature. Federal Court ruled in favour of GetUp! and allowed aussies to sign up online for the election. --> Impact of this was that it changed the ability of the AEC to decide whether an application was in "order" and resulted in people signing up online
--> Reduced the close of rolls period. Prior to this, new electors could enrol, and enrolled electors could update their details in the 7 days following the issue of the writs. --> The new change meant changes to enrolment details had to be received within 3 days of the issue of the writs. --> The H.C ruled the Voting Amendment to be unconstitutional and declared that the voting period be reinstated to 7 days
--> Argued that the people in jail should be able to vote in federal elections. The AEC argued people shouldn’t be allowed as they committed a crime against the community, hence it's justified to take their right to vote. --> The Court held that voting in elections is fundamental to democracy & disenfranchisement of a group of adult citizens w/o a substantial reason would not be consistent with it. --> Decision = people serving under 3 years in jail are now able to vote in federal elections. Initially, this was not possible.
--> This case was about seeking financial compensation for aquired native land which came about due to clause built in the Native Title act allowing compensation. --> In Federal court Justice Mansfield ruled that 3.3m would provided to the people of which 1.3m was for cultural, spiritual and social loss & 2m for economic --> NT & other State govts appealed this in the H.C stating that the 1.3m compensation was excessive, however, the H.C ruled that it was not excessive only decreasing 2m for economic to 1.2m. --> The impact of this case was that it set a precedent - common law - for the calculation of compensation provided to Claimants on basis of Native Title.
An interjection is used to express emotion in a sentence.
Think of other interjections!
Roach v Elec Comm (2007) (funded by the Human Rights Commission) --> set a legal precedent on the right to vote under s7 & s24 of the Constitution of prisoners less than 3 years in jail
Equal Marriage Act (2016/17)
Rowe v Elec Comm (2010)
GetUp! v Elec Comm (2013)
Limiting Judicial Discretion through Mandatory Sentencing
Carbon Tax (2011/12)
ABCC
Medevac
An adverb is used to describe a verb, but it can also describe an adjective or another adverb.
Adverbs normally help paint a fuller picture by describing how something happens.
Riley vs California (2014) = warrant to search digital info on phone
Roe vs Wade (1973) = right to privacy (abortion)
NY Times vs US (1971) = protection for freedom of press
Civil Liberties Act (1988)
Voting Rights Act (1965)
Civil Rights Act (1964)
Bill of Rights: --->1st = freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly & petition ---> 4th = search/arrest warrants not issued without probable cause ---> 5th = right to silence in circumstances of self incrimination ---> 6th = right to fair trial ---> 7th = jury trial in civil cases according to common law ---> 14th = all US citizens recieve protection & cannot be taken away or denied
Article 3, s2 = jury trials
Dietrich (1992) --> right to legal representation
Mabo (1992) --> led to aboriginal land rights --> led to timber creek
Disability Discrimination Act Berry v State of SA (2017) (Upholding DDA) --> Ms Berry, a SA police officer suffered from endometriosis (extreme period pain) & claimed she had been discriminated against by her employer due to her ‘disability’ as she had been denied work leave. --> This was brought to the Federal Circuit Court where the justice Natalie Charlesworth ruled that endometriosis could be classified as a ‘disability’ under the act, and accordingly ruled that the SA Police had breached the Act. --> Without the DDA, Ms Berry would not have been able to obtain any help in terms of leave & with the Circuit Court’s interpretation of the DDA, the Act was amended to define diseases like endometriosis.
Sex Discrimination Act (1984) McBain v State of Vic (2000) (Upholding SDA) --> Dr McBain, a gynaecologist was prevented under Victorian law, in 2000, from assisting Ms Meldrum, a single woman, to conceive using IVF treatment. --> Dr McBain argued that this Victorian law (IVF Amendment Act) was inconsistent with the SDA, which prohibited discrimination on the basis of marital status. --> In the Federal Court, Justice Sundberg agreed with Dr McBain as he ruled that the IVF treatment was a “service” & “Ms Meldrum had been discriminated against solely because she was single”. --> The impact of this was that it invalidated Victoria’s IVF Amendment Act,
Implied rights: --> rowe, roach and theophanous & lange v abc
Express rights: -->s80 = jury trial --> s51xxxi = just compensation for acquisition of land --> s116 = freedom of religion --> s117 = discrimination from state --> s92 = free trade
2) The Executive branch itself: Evident in Trump criticising Justice Ginsburg for her ruling in a decision and saying she should resign. This undermines judicial independence as one branch of govt is actively undermining another branch.
1) In many US jurisdictions, judges must be elected, making them political (since they must please a majority of voters and powerful pressure groups), exposing them to party politics and therefore bias and thus undermining their independence.
Justices on the Supreme Court serve for life meaning their tenure cannot be changed for external factors hence justices cannot be intimidated for external entities.
1) The US Constitution expressly achieves judicial independence by vesting judicial power in the Supreme Court of the US and other federal courts and judges, outlining the apt process for SCOTUS Justices & even allowing judges to be impeached (making them accountable);
2) The ability of the PM & Cabinet to directly influence the composition of the high court and other federal courts through the ability of s72
1) Limiting of judicial discretion (mandatory sentencing).
3) Judicial supremacism is enabled to a moderate extent by Sections 75 and 76
2) "Brandy's Case (1995)" narrowly defined and thus defended judicial power; and
1) The judiciary can freely make decisions free from any interference or influence from individuals seeking for better case outcomes. This is guaranteed through justices in the HCA having a security around their tenure and a predetermined salary, that can't be changed by the EXEC.
3) Electoral college undermines representation because the delegates are not obligated to vote with their electorates. For Example: there were 7 faithless electors in the 2016 presidential election, which shows how 7 district's votes weren't upheld
2) Different states have different rules around electoral voting methods and rights, which leads to gross inequality in one state for example, where if you become a prisoner in some states (Iowa, Kentucky & Virginia) you are disenfranchised for life
1) Vote Wastage: people who vote for micro or minor parties are essentially wasting their votes because there is an over-representation of major parties in both houses.
3) The executive, specifically the President and Vice-President (VP), is elected relatively directly, although still in an ultimately indirect manner (through the Electoral College)
2) The FPTP voting system is simple & easy for voters to understand which enables them to vote for their representatives w/o being confused. Also, it provides a strong link between representatives and electors.
1) Short electoral cycles and fixed terms, with two-year terms for Congresspersons and six-year rotating (every two years) terms for Senators. This allows citizens to change the composition of Congress every 2 years.
3) Senate malapportionment (section 7) undermines representation as people in one state have less representation compared with those in another state. For example, TAS gets the same representation as NSW - where NSW has a population approx. 10x bigger than TAS.
2) The quota system in the senate undermines representation as it has a over-representation of minorities. An example of this is Fraser Anning with only 19 1st preference votes, but was still elected to CP.
1) The exec is elected only indirectly, being drawn from the legislature, in accordance with Westminster convention (and as somewhat established by Section 64);
3) Elections are free from intimidation or influence from those seeking office, which ensures that the public is able to have their beliefs represented in parliament without any hindrance. This is ensured through the aspect of secret ballot voting (no intimidating) and an independent electoral Commission (AEC)
2) Elections are regular and frequent (s7 & 28) which allows the public to regularly have their beliefs represented in Parliament
1) The electoral system provides for both a true expression of the will of the majority - thus achieving popular sovereignty - through the use of Preferential and Proportional Voting Systems
2) After the War on Terror, many people's rights were violated such as right to legal counsel and those who violated the rights were never held to account due to secrecy laws.
1) Overrepresentation of African American people and certain other ethnic minorities in prison --> 1 in 3 AA men are likely to go prison in their life compared with 1 in 10 caucasian men
3) Any persons or groups can challenge law, to make sure that no one is being disadvantaged. This occurred in the Rowe v Wade
2) The principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' is upheld in the American legal system and if it is not granted, then it can be a basis for appeal.
1) USA's Constitution clearly sets out a separation of power through Articles 1-3, and in particular an independent judiciary, in order to effectively uphold the rule of law and prevent an arbitrary exercise of government power
3) Parliamentary privilege means parliamentarian aren't accountable for their words --> Derryn Hinch
2) Overrepresentation of ATSI people and certain other ethnic minorities in prison --> 1 in 3 ATSI men are likely to go prison in their life compared with 1 in 10 caucasian men
1) Retrospective laws (which are not capable of being known/predictable) are tolerated in the nation's political and legal system such as COVID restriction laws in Australia, where the restrictions are announced before the laws are passed.
3) Any persons or groups can challenge law, to make sure that no one is being disadvantaged. This occurred in the Rowe v Electoral Commissioner.
2) The principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' is upheld in our legal system and if it is not granted, then it can be a basis for appeal.
1) Australia's Constitution clearly sets out a separation of power through Chapters 1-3, and in particular an independent judiciary, in order to effectively uphold the rule of law and prevent an arbitrary exercise of government power
3) Voting is on Tuesday, only providing opportunities to the wealthy individuals or those who can afford to take a day off. Middle class American citizens don't have that ability, and having to wait in long lines (many hours), discourages them from voting.
2) There are increased restrictions on voting in recent years by state governments in USA, such as having two forms of voter ID or not being able to vote early and even not being able to provide food to those waiting in voting lines in some states
1) Criminals are disenfranchised if they spend a year in prison, disproportionally disenfranchising African Americans and Natives
3) Citizens in USA have the ability to vote for judges and also run a campaign if they want to be a judge, without having been chosen or elected
2) Voting of the lower house occurs every 2 years, fixed, which means that the people have a greater ability to vote for their representatives.
1) Primaries and caucuses allow direct voting for exec, which allows citizens to have an active role in all aspects of the political system .
3) Being able to protest has been currently limited from 2020 to currently during COVID as people can be charged
2) Do not have the ability to directly select the PM due to Westminster Conventions.
1) Lack of media (150 news media outlets have closed in the last 5 years)
3) The ability to influence legislation without being elected to Parliament through various forms of Pressure Groups --> Rowe v Elec Com (2010)
2) Due to compulsory voting, there is a wide turnout (91% in 2019 election) which results in the participation of more people in the AUS political system (s7&24)
1) A diverse range of political parties are able to win seats to Parliament such as One Nation or the Motor Enthusiasts Party (PREF & PROP voting systems);
A verb is an action word or 'doing' word that signifies movement in some way.
A participle is a verb form that can be used as an adjective or to create a verb tense. There are two types of participles: Present participle (ending -ing) and Past participle (usually ending -ed, -d, -t, -en, or -n).
Roadmap To Recovery (2020): In 2020, the National Cabinet instigated the "Roadmap to Recovery from COVID-19", which was agreed to by all States/Territories except for WA. This aimed to reopen (i.e. Allow travel in) the nation by Christmas but avoid hotspots of the virus.
Close the Gap Initiative (2020): Also in 2020, the Close the Gap initiative became the responsibility of the National Cabinet, which aimed to reduce the disparity between white and ATSI experience in the nation. This involves targets of 91% of ATSI babies being born with healthy birthweights, 96% completing year 12 or equivalent and reducing their incarceration rate to 15%.
Economic Cooperation (2020/21): The co-operative nature of the National Cabinet established Jobkeeper and Jobseeker which was a push from state premiers in order to keep the economy in hibernation, whilst the States had the responsibility of quarantining returning o/s citizens and slowing the spread of the pandemic.
Intergovt Agreement on Federal Financial Regulations (2009): The IGA FFR aims to improve the quality and effectiveness of government services by providing the states with increased flexibility in the way they deliver services to the Australian people, clarify the roles and responsibilities of each level of government and improve accountability for the outcomes achieved.
A modal is a type of auxiliary (helping) verb that is used to express: ability, possibility, permission or obligation. The main modal verbs in the English language are: can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would.
A linking verb connects the subject with a word that gives information about the subject, such as a condition or relationship.
A verb with its own meaning: a verb that is not an auxiliary verb.
Shift in Financial Power Towards States: Due to the COVID pandemic, the Federal govt has provided the State govts with the necessary economic support upon request (most cases) with little limitations on how to spend the. This shows how the States have gain slightly more independency as their expenses are not being closely monitored by the Federal govt.
"Ha v New South Wales (NSW)" (1997) A HC case in which the plaintiff, Ha, challenged the constitutionality of the NSW Government's "Business Franchise Licenses (Tobacco) Act" (1987), which legally required businesses to possess a bought license to sell tobacco products, under Section 90 of the Constitution. The HC ruled in Ha's favour, interpreting this as an excise (the imposition of which is an exclusive power of the CP). Thus, another financial power of the States was removed, shifting the federal balance in the CP's favour and increasing the VFI.
"First Uniform Tax Case" (1942) A HC case in which the States challenged the constitutionality of CP legislation which effectively eliminated their ability to collect income tax (primary source of revenue), including the "Income Tax Assessment Act (1942)", which forced State residents to pay a federal income tax before any State version thereof. The HC was asked to interpret Section 51 (ii) - the taxation power - and it ruled in the CP's favour. Consequently, the VFI was significantly expanded and the States were now forced to rely increasingly on Commonwealth grants (s. 96) for sufficient funding to finance their spending obligations.
"WorkChoices" (2006) A HC case in which various States challenged the CP's "Workplace Relations Amendment (WorkChoices) Act (2005)", which used Section 51 (xx) - the corporations power - as a head of power to hereby impede upon the ability of unions to operate for "constitutional corporations". However, the HC ruled in the CP's favour, upholding this as a valid head of power and thus shifting the federal balance further in this institution's favour.
Spence v QLD (2019) --> In 2018, QLD made ammendments to their electoral laws stating that property developers couldn't donate to registered political parties. Later, the CMW made an ammendment to it's electoral law adding a new clause - 302CA that allowed for donations to political parties which could be used at a state level - bypassing state. --> Spence, argued that QLD law was invalid because it clashed with CMW law and hence s109 came into play. --> QLD argued that their law was valid since it is within their state powers to control state elections. QLD argued the 302CA clause was invalid because it affected state powers in controlling donations which may impact a state level. --> The H.C. dismissed Spence and upheld QLD's arguement, meaning that clause 302CA was invalid, hence ruling that State have the ability to regulate their elections.
"Tasmanian Dam" (1983) A HC case in which the Tas Govt challenged the validity of the CP's "World Heritage Properties Conservation Act" (1983), which codified the UN's "World Heritage Convention", under Section 51 (xxix) - the external affairs power. However, the HC ruled in the CP's favour, reaffirming its ability to ratify binding international law. This further shifted the federal balance land management powers of States, impeding upon their legislative powers.
"Engineers Case" (1920) A HC case in which the Amalgamated Society of Engineers challenged the ability of different States to grant varying award wages from one another, under Section 51 (xxxv), which governs industrial relations. The HC ruled in their favour, upholding the ability of the CP to legislate to create a national award wage. The CP thus gained legislative power in this area at the expense of the States, shifting the federal balance in its favour.
An article is a word used to modify a noun, which is a person, place, object, or idea. Technically, an article is an adjective, which is any word that modifies a noun.
--> Prior to the 2019 election, Sports Minister Bridget McKenzie approved $100m+ of grants to sport clubs --> The AudG, in a report of the affair, found that many of the grants to the clubs were not awarded through an appropriate assessment process nor sound advice. --> In fact, many were found to be awarded to clubs in marginal seats - feeding into the rumours that voters were being vote --> The AudGeneral made recommendations as a result of this affair, one of which being having a consistent framework in place when awarding grants.
-->The AAT, IN 2019, ruled that the NDIA was wrong to deny vital swallowing support funding to a 34 y/o man who has dysphagia as a result of cerebral palsy. -->The NDIA has consistently argued it won't fund supports that could be funded by another govt service Health Dept – even if no other dept offers the support. --> For people with disabilities, this is a landmark case for the interpretation of health supports as it opens a range of further appeals that can improve the standard of living of many individuals with disabilities
-->Senator Rex Patrick launched proceedings in the AAT in September 2020, after his FOI requests relating to national cabinet meeting documents were denied. -->The Dept of the PM & Cabinet rejected Patrick’s requests on the basis that the docs were official records of the cabinet, therefore exempt under the Freedom of Information Act. --> Justice White, presiding over the AAT, ruled that the National Cabinet ≠ a committee or a sub-committee of the Cabinet (federal cabinet), hence the documents Patrick requested aren’t protected by the FOI Act. --> This ruling of the AAT shows how they are able to keep the executive accountable
Indefinite articles are the words 'a' and 'an.' Each of these articles is used to refer to a noun, but the noun being referred to is not a specific person, place, object, or idea. It can be any noun from a group of nouns.
--> A policy that involves offshore processing in a place & then removal of the IMAs to a declared country under s198A of the Migration Act 1958. --> s198A of Migration Act allows the Minister to order the removal of asylum seekers, by meeting a test, one of it being meets human rights standards in provding protection --> The HCA held that the Gillard Govt's proposal to send unwanted asylum seekers to Malaysia was illegal. This was illegal under s198A of the MigrationAct as Malaysia was not bound to protect human rights as it was not a signatory to any conventions or had domestic law protecting human rights of refugees.
-->The Court held that the Contract & expenditure by the CMW under the Contract was invalid & unlawful because the making of the payments was beyond the executive power of the Commonwealth of Australia, as the CMW govt relied on s61 of the constitution. --> Further, the Court held that the CMW of AUS doesn't have executive power to enter into contracts & spend public money on programs, without legislative authority.
--> In 2020, a Senate Estimates Committee conducted an investigation and hearing into Services Australia's "Robodebt" scheme, whereby it issued invalid debt notices to many welfare recipients from 2016-19. --> This program was found to be unlawful and, in response to much public pressure, the government paid $720m worth of compensation to the welfare recipients in question. --> Due to this committee report, the Govt was held accountable as public pressure resulted in them paying $720m in compensation
In 2017 Australian post chairman John Stanhope was called to appear at An estimates hearing to justify, Australia post boss Ahmed Fahours salary of 6.3 million. Senate estimates were able to review and scrutinise government business, Fahour resigned and the prime minister Malcom Turnbull responded by starting a full review of financial payments in executive department
resigned due to inability to support new Morrison govt due to leadership spill
resigned from the coalition due to disagreements with their beliefs on covid
accepted an anonymous donation for legal fees which became a conflict of interest and breached the Ministerial Code of Conduct. Due to this, Porter resigned from the Frontbench (as Minister for Industry & Science) to the Backbench.
used taxpayer money for travel expenses when she went to Gold Coast to buy an apartment.
sports rort affair --> gave money to marginal electorate seats in order to receive support.
A pronoun is a word that can be used in place of a noun, typically after the noun itself has already been stated.
Unlike demonstrative pronouns, which point out specific items, indefinite pronouns are used for non-specific things. This is the largest group of pronouns. All, some, any, several, anyone, nobody, each, both, few, either, none, one, and no one are the most common.
--> After an unknown witness came forward to an international tribunal regarding the bugging of rooms of officials in Timor Leste, ASIS charged the individual with revealing privileged information. --> In 2020, the ACT Supreme Court ruled most parts of the trial of ‘Witness K’ would be conducted w/o media presence – essentially, in secret. --> This aspect of secret trials undermines the core principles of natural justice, creating a distrust in the judicial system.
Relative pronouns are used to add more information to a sentence. Which, that, who (including whom and whose), and where are all relative pronouns.
The closest Australia has had come to impeaching a justice was in 1986 with Justice Lionel Murphy, which was not fully investigated due to the Justice’s nature of being terminally ill and shortly after passing away. Murphy had been convicted of "perverting the course of justice" in 1985, however, on appeal the conviction was overturned.
Interrogative pronouns are used in questions. Although they are classified as pronouns, it is not easy to see how they replace nouns. Who, which, what, where, and how are all interrogative pronouns.
--> In 2012, Michael T won a case in the VIC Supreme court after proving google had defamed him by putting photos of gangs and criminals next to his email. --> In an appeal by Google(2016), the Appellate court of VIC found in favour of Google & stated the case had no prospect of proving defamation, google ≠ publisher. --> Later on in the year, Michael appealed this ruling of the Appellate court, granted by the HCA. --> The HCA overruled the decision of the Appellate court saying, it was not up to the that court to decide whether it was defamation, but rather the job of a jury.
--> Federal circuit judge Salvatore Vasta repeatedly interrupted Mr Yeates and ordered him to pay $100,000 to his ex-wife without any basis. --> Mr Yeates, discontent with the procedural unfairness given, appealed it to family court where the judge ruled that amount was too excessive and baseless. --> This shows how the internal method of appeals can allow injustice to be corrected, and for accountability to occur
Demonstrative pronouns are used to demonstrate (or indicate). This, that, these, and those are all demonstrative pronouns.
--> WA’s mandatory sentencing laws, where the state parliament viewed that the courts were not being harsh when convicting criminals. --> Hence, the parliament imposed mandatory sentencing meaning that the courts must sentence a person to a specific amount of time in jail – regardless of the fact that the judge agrees with it or not. --> This shows Parliament restricting the judicial discretion of judges, meaning that they are more closely bound to the law when coming to a ruling.
--> In 2017, the McGlade litigants argued that all people of the native title group should sign Indigenous Land Use Agreements. --> The court had to consider whether the ILUA was valid even though not all individuals had signed it. --> The Federal Court ruled that it was not valid under the native title act. --> In response to this, the Turnbull govt, passed the NTA Amendment Act to override the ruling of the FCA to provide clarification on the authorisation of an ILUA.
--> The SDA (1984) has been amended to include 40/55 suggestions in the Respect@Work Report released in 2020. --> This holds the judiciary accountable because it makes judges (along with other public servants) criminally liable for sexual harassment in the workplace. --> Previously, Judges, MP’s & other servants were excluded from this providing immunity.
An adjective is a word that's used to describe a specific noun and to provide more detail to the listener.
Superlative adjectives demonstrate a higher level of comparison between entities.
which used Section 51 (xx) - the corporations power - as a head of power to hereby impede upon the ability of unions to operate for "constitutional corporations". However, the HC ruled in the CP's favour, upholding this as a valid head of power hence changing the constitutional meaning of s51,,ss20
changed s51,,ss2 of constitution to be exclusive in nature and not concurrent
Expresses a comparison between two entities or groups of entities in quality or degree.
A noun is defined as a person, place, thing or idea. Proper nouns always begin with a capital letter. Common nouns, which are general words, such as 'cars,' are not capitalized.
Compound nouns are words where two nouns have been stuck together to make a new noun. Compound nouns should be written as one word, without a hyphen.
A noun which refers to a group of things/people.
Countable nouns are nouns that can be counted, even if the number might be extraordinarily high.
Uncountable nouns are nouns that come in a state or quantity which is impossible to count; liquids are uncountable, as are things which act
like liquids.
Proper nouns are the names of specific people or places. They should always begin with a capital letter.
