If you had only one lecturer, and it was a speech by him, you need to say, “one of my lecturer’s speeches”.
If you had more than one lecturer, you need to say, “one of my lecturers’ speeches”, or better, “a speech by one of my lecturers”.
“…helped me to get All India Rank 123 in GATE” (whatever GATE is).
“It is a long-standing tradition that visitors remove their clothes before entering the temple.”
I can’t understand that sentence. You’ll need to explain it.
Using the word “pursued” makes it unclear whether you ever received the degree or not.
If I could pinpoint a few big problems in your writing, based on these sentences, they would be these:
You seem to pay absolutely no attention to punctuation, capitalization and spacing.
You make the most typical mistake of people from the Indian subcontinent, which is that you write as if you’ve swallowed a dictionary. If someone helped, don’t say he facilitated. If you got something, or received it, you don’t need to say you pursued it. If something is a long tradition, you don’t need to say it’s prevalent. You don’t need to use all of the biggest words you know when simple ones will do. This trait of Indian English is very often satirized in cartoons and TV shows in the West.
It’s impossible to know what register he’s trying to write in, because he ping-pongs between slang (B.tech) and stratospherically formal language. Since he’s making the typical Indian error of wearing all the jewelry he owns at the same time (i.e., using all the most formal words he can), then it’s appropriate to adjust his register as well as his vocabulary.
It appears he’s trying to write for ordinary communication, and therefore clear, ordinary words are more appropriate than the ones he’s using.
I don’t see it as ping-ponging. He is using one style of English in one sentence and another style in another, unconnected, as far as we know, sentence. Many people do that. Don’t you?
Does “I pursued a career in banking” sound as if the speaker never entered that career?
People do that, but that’s not what he’s doing. Otherwise he wouldn’t use slang and overblown language in the same sentence. It’s clear he doesn’t actually have control over what register of English he uses. I deal with this day in and day out, so I know what’s going on.
You’re talking about beginnings, and I’m talking about ends.
Someone who pursues a career in banking enters the banking business. The verb tells us nothing of how long he remained in that career.
Someone who has pursued a master of science degree has entered the program, but the verb tells us nothing about whether he graduated.
A dog can pursue a squirrel, and he might catch it.
A dog can pursue a truck, but it’s unlikely he’ll catch it.
“Pursued” collocates well with “studies”. It just doesn’t indicate whether the studies ended.
The fact that the definition doesn’t say anything about beginnings or endings is simply evidence that the verb “pursue” has no relation to an ending. Obviously, if you pursue something you have begun it, but there’s nothing in the definition that indicates an ending.
Your three example sentences simply prove my point, because they do not indicate that any of those people completed a formal program in those subjects. They sound like temporary study or like ongoing, never-ending study.
So your advice would be: if you want to express that you finished your studies, don’t use “persue” without adding a qualifier somewhere. In all other cases, “persue”, when talking about studies, is fine. Is that right?
I have deliberately written those sentences to improve my vocabulary, So i used these words “prevalent”,“facilitated” and “pursued” in the sentences.
i want to know “does the above sentences contain any grammatical mistakes?”
One more point i want to let you know all those sentences are different and there is no relationship between any sentences.
For the fourth sentence, i read in the " Google Story " book and it contains this sentence “Sergey pursued a variety of subjects that intrigued him at Stanford.” So I wrote the fourth sentence on the basis of that line.
I haven’t understood the fourth sentence explanation.
Could you please give me one more time explanation of all the sentences which i have written in the previous message?