J'ai une expression écrite à faire dont le sujet est le suivant :
"Takeaway Food is becoming more and more popular. Account for this evolution in contemporary society."
J'ai donc traité le sujet du mieux que je pouvais, néanmoins, je n'ai que très peu confiance en mes talents de traducteur, et c'est pourquoi je vous soumets ma rédaction. Elle est, je vous l'accorde, un peu longue, mais je vous serais sincèrement reconnaissant de la lire.
Vous y trouverez certaine fois des mots entre crochet [...] il s'agit là d'une interrogation que je me pose et dont je souhaiterais avoir une réponse.
Je suis bien entendu ouvert à toute suggestion, correction et reformulation.
Voici mon travail :
These last years were marked in France by number of new phenomena and concepts. Among them the obesity, the americanization of the lifestyles with as main example the disproportionate increase of the number of fast food. Indeed, takeaway food is becoming more and more popular. The fast food knew an important development and adapted itself to our current lifestyle; and it is not without risk on our health; but there is probably a happy medium between the whole consumption and the total belittlement.
Fast food is the term given to food that can be prepared and served very quickly. More generally, Fast food is a mode of catering which purpose is to make spare time to the customer by allowing him to take quickly the ordered dishes, and it [ici je veux dire "et ce", est-ce correct ?], for a price generally lesser than in the traditional restaurant. This sentence summarizes very widely the advantages we give to this type of consumption. Besides, it is possible to find fast food really everywhere, whatever [est-ce la bonne traduction de quelque soit/quel que soit (je ne sais même pas le bon orthographe en français...)] the city where we are: it's always possible to find a Chinese restaurant, a pizzeria, a Greek restaurant or still a McDonald’s. Moreover, we associate mostly the brand McDo in Fast food. And as such, the served dishes are most of the time hamburgers or sandwiches, accompanied with French fries and sodas. The paradox of the fast food is that it has bad image but knows a real success. Children, teen, businessmen or still grandparents, all go regularly to this type of restaurant. All this [ici je souhaitais dire « Tout cela », mais je suis ouvert aux autres propositions d’expression] hide a real commercial technique.
Although it is now well established, this fidelity in fast food, and more particularly to McDonald's company was not effortlessly made. So the film Fast food Nation, being interested in the phenomenon of development of customer loyalty of the customers, explains to us how McDonald's took for model the marketing tactics of Walt Disney, so giving birth to advertising icons such as Ronald McDonald and his associated characters. He also mentions the appearance of toys in famous ' Happy Meals ' of McDonald to illustrate his argumentation. The idea, behind the adoption of the child as first marketing target, is to attract not only the children, but also their parents and the grandparents, and, in a more important way still, to start a process of development of customer loyalty [ici = fidélisation] from the childhood, a loyalty [ici=loyauté, je suis donc à la recherche d'un synonyme anglais...] to the brand which would persist during the adulthood thanks to the nostalgia associated just like McDonald's. These films, following the example of the anti-globalization organizations, denounce the dangers this consumption of junk food can involve [entrainer ?].
The reasons not for eating fast food are almost also numerous as the number of fast food chain. Indeed, these last ones, and more specially hamburgers' restaurants, are the object of criticisms, in particular by associations of defence of the gastronomic heritage and of the anti-globalization associations, which accuse them of having a cooking of junk food, tendencies to the maximum profit and of having appeal to the low salaries. In the point of view of the environment, these companies use almost systematically not degradable plastic single-use disposable place settings. As we can see, arguments are very easily findable and, for the greater part, are proved. In this way, a recent study showed that the presence of a fast food unless 150 metres of a school increases by 5,2 % the risk of seeing a child becoming obese. Sandwiches which propose these types of restaurant are too rich most of the time in sugars and in fats, increasing the risk of obesity and cancers due to the heart. The film Super Size Me illustrates this kind of consumption: the film's journalist decides to feed exclusively at McDonald’s during a month. In the term of this last one he will have taken 11 kg, damaged his liver and increased his rate of cholesterol of 0, 65 g/L of blood.
The time dedicated to the meals' preparation decreases more and more whereas the consumption of fast food shoots up. I think, indeed, the real danger live in the fact that we spend fewer and fewer time around our dining table, while the meals are really moments privileged to communicate. We can explain it by the fact that pressing people do not want to lose of time around a table, but it [là je voulais écrire "et cela", mais je sais pas trop comment...] to the detriment of the communication and of the health. Although to consume fast food doesn't mean consuming light, do not panic, it is not very probable that the weekly exit in Mc Do of the corner which will make you become obese. It is simply necessary to think of limiting the consumption of this kind of products.
Recently, this mode of catering evolves by offering a healthier menu with, for example, the development of counters to salads and pressing fruit juices, while satisfying our sedentary lifestyle. The quality, required by the consumers, thus makes a return in strength, as well as the progress of chains of up-market sandwich shop, proposing a more natural food.
I think it is possible to find a compromise. Indeed, rather than to keep of food bad habits under pretext the break and lunch is too short, it's better to settle on dishes less charged in calories and fats. Rather than to take a big portion of French fries to accompany your favourite sandwich, I think that it is necessary to prefer a green salad sprayed with a net of vinaigrette.
Well-eating [ici je veux dire "bien manger"] does not mean spending its morning in furnaces to prepare a reserve of Tupperware for week. I consider it's useless to go without fast food if we want to once in the week. For other days, it is just necessary to try to vary our feeding by going to restaurants to subject different. It is possible to have lunch outside without exceeding necessarily the threshold of calories recommended by the doctors while pleasing.
More than a alimentation, fast food is a way of life : that of [=celui de ?] pressing people who don't want to lose time around a table. Fast food attracts unmistakably young people as well as the children, but we shouldn't lose sight that this type of food reflects the not desirable current tendency. The current tendency not desirable to decrease the contributions [glucidiques ?] and the contributions in fibers for the benefit of proteins and especially fats. So "Fast food" is often synonymic of " Néfaste food " when it is not occasional … Why not to take courses of cooking to any [=cours de cuisine à plusieurs ?] ? It is nice, useful and we can then taste our dishes…
Si, vous en êtes arrivé jusqu'ici c'est que vous avez survécu à mes innombrables fautes :p
Pourquoi ne pas me les faire partager ?
PS : Pardon pour la compactitude du pavé, mais les tabulations ne passent pas. (Il s'agit bien d'une rédaction en trois parties avec intro et conclusion)