Irish visa to study in foreign countries such as China, Made Easy

The pursuit of courses at foreign universities, and the excitement of shooting, the more noticeable the receipt of a visa is expired. China and Ireland have a student visa options, and studying in another country. And to follow certain criteria must be met in order to obtain a visa rules.
Ireland on a student visa, but not very strict visa office to be created or controlled by the need to provide various documents to the consulate. In Ireland with registration number, you are going to discuss students of the University confession evidence regarding the reaction. They also provided them during their stay in this country would be able to maintain their own evidence to show details of their bank account is required.
to deliver an important part of the whole visa process TOEFL or English proficiency of the required elements of a certificate. As a student visa in Ireland, Spain, Spain as part of a student visa and submit evidence to the Committee on the communication testing and approval is not required.
pursue in most countries, students proceeded to a number of hours per week on a particular course, you must prove. Some differences of individual students may be able to the consulate and the approval of individual countries in the student visa is available here. For example, China is not going to a student visa to many different countries and even a few days requires students to obtain visas.
Chinese Consulate in your country for higher studies and for students to visit China and other requirements should be designed in consultation. It’s all on a wide range of information difficult to achieve, as it is the type of visa requirements for someone to take to meet white. Course duration depends on the requirements and other technical ever, it is advisable to visit the services of a study trip to China, which start the consulate before you.
As part of a visa to China, where people granted in this country before a student visa and whose flight display is a need for a round-trip preparation. Some countries have achieved in a foreign country after the visa is available. These rules and regulations in order to continue their education in these countries to justify its provisional and to the students to facilitate nation. Since the influx of large numbers of students, so that the difficult route and the safety and other risks, many coaches are needed. students to understand these issues, visa authorities and request the necessary documents need to be able to fully cooperate.

The excitement of admissions into a foreign university and pursuing a course there is further accentuated by the receipt of visa smoothly. Visa is required by the students to study in various countries as well as in China and Ireland. There are rules that are to be followed and certain criteria that need to be fulfilled to get the visas.

The student visa requirements for Ireland are not very stringent but the students have to take care to arrange the different documents that are asked by the visa office or the consulate. Along with the application fee, the students seeking admissions in various universities of Ireland have to submit the proof of their admissions in form of the correspondence from the respective universities. They are also required to furnish the details of their bank accounts showing proof that they would be able to sustain themselves in the country during their stay.

A very important part of the whole application process and an essential ingredient of the visa requirements is the TOEFL score or pass certificate of the English language proficiency test. Similar to the student visa requirements for Ireland, there is a need to submit the test marks and the admission proofs from the colleges of Spain as part of the student visa requirements for Spain.

In most of the countries, the students are required to submit the proof of the number of hours of classes per week in the particular courses that they are pursuing. A few differences might be found in the student visa requirements for individual countries which the students can get clarified from the respective consulates. For example, the student visa requirements for China requires that the student get a visa even for a single day of visit which is not so with many other countries.

The other requirements for students visiting China for higher studies are to be furnished in consultation with the Chinese consulate in the respective countries. They would guide people in knowing the type of visa that fits their requirements as it is difficult for everyone to be aware of the wide range of criteria to be fulfilled. Since the courses can vary in duration and the other technical requirements, it is wiser to visit and take the services of the consulate before one embarks on the journey to study in China.

As part of the student visa requirements for china, people are required to show their flight tickets as well as the return tickets before they are granted the student visa in the country. Some countries also provide the visa only after reaching the location in the foreign land. Such rules and regulations have been designed in order to make it easy for the countries to allow prospective and deserving students to pursue their education in these countries. With influx of large number of students, it becomes really difficult to keep a track and for security measures and other hazards, a lot of monitoring is required. Students should be able 

UK overtakes USA in student popularity

Can we believe the current hype about studying at a UK university or college? Is it really the most popular place to study in a world of increasing choice and unprecedented student mobility? According to research published in newspapers as respected as The Guardian, The Independent and the Times Higher Education the answer is a resounding YES! A survey of more than 11,000 international students from 143 countries indicates that the number one position of the USA as the world's most popular study destination is under serious threat for the first time.
95% of those responding to the survey rated the UK as an “attractive” or “very attractive” place to study, compared with 93% for the USA. With over 330,000 international students already enrolled at UK institutions, it’s likely that number will increase over the coming academic years as more students discover the benefits of UK graduate education.
So why is the UK becoming one of the most attractive study destinations for international students? According to current and former international students, the reasons are varied and touch on a unique combination of both studying and living in the UK. Nigar Baimova, from Azerbaijan and an alumna of Leeds University, offers some explanation: “While getting academic credits are really important, don’t forget to remember the type of experience you want to have while studying in the UK.  Realistically, time spent being immersed in the culture, travelling and building relationships with locals will greatly outweigh the time you spend hitting the books.  The experience in the UK will definitely help you grow.”
The academic and living environments in the UK offer a number of advantages for international students, not least the sheer variety of colleges and universities offering graduate programs.

With more than 160 institutions currently awarding Masters or PhD degrees, international students are faced with an unparalleled choice depending on their own personal preferences.
With more than 160 institutions currently awarding Masters or PhD degrees, international students are faced with an unparalleled choice depending on their own personal preferences. City universities, such as those located in Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, London or Manchester, exist in an urban setting, offering the student the opportunity to enjoy the resources of both the city and the university; campus institutions, such as East Anglia, Essex, Keele, Sussex and Warwick tend to be more self-contained, purpose-built and convenient.
Sunil Bundoo, from Mauritius, graduated from the University of Warwick with a Masters degree in economics. Sunil’s reasons for selecting Warwick, having read his bachelors degree in Australia, match those of many students choosing the UK: “Aside from the academic concerns of picking a high quality, research related Masters program, I wanted to live at a campus university so that I had a community around me.  I shared a flat with seven other students – a completely new experience and one that I really enjoyed. We all had the same interests, many of the same pressures and managed to help each other through the whole year.”
Many other international students select either a UK Masters or PhD program based on the quality of the teaching and research on offer and the learning methods that characterize the UK approach. Leonardo Stanley, a former Chevening Scholarship winner and Masters graduate from Queen Mary in London, chose the UK because of the high quality academic content of his program: “From a professional point of view, my stay in the UK provided endless opportunities. As an economist, having had the chance to attend courses with brilliant students from different countries and having been taught by professors with vast experience and high professional stature has enabled me to improve my knowledge of Latin American problems.” 
 Sri Lankan Vikram Nataraj and Masters graduate of the London School of Economics echoes these comments: “The opportunity to study at the graduate level in a program focused on research-driven content was very important for me.

..."I also preferred the learning style in the UK, with small lectures coupled with student-led tutorials and seminars. I was able to have time with economists who were at the cutting-edge of their field"...
I also preferred the learning style in the UK, with small lectures coupled with student-led tutorials and seminars. I was able to have time with economists who were at the cutting-edge of their field, developing policies for central banks and other organizations offering me their research insight.”
A further element adding to the appeal of studying in the UK is the length of time it takes to complete either a UK Masters or PhD program. Most Masters offered in the UK are one year or less, while PhD programs are generally completed after three years of study. For those international students investing their own funds to meet their tuition and living costs, the attraction is obvious: finishing a Masters degree in half the time it takes for students to complete the same degree in the USA, Canada or in many European countries greatly reduces all of the related costs and means that entry to the world of work is a year earlier. With UK graduate degrees being regarded as of exactly the same academic standard and quality as their longer counterparts in other countries, this is certainly one of the most attractive features of studying in the UK.
But there is perhaps another, more significant, factor behind the increasing popularity of the UK as a study destination for international students. With the pressure of long-term skills shortages impacting on a number of sectors in the UK labour market, there is now a much stronger relationship between those students graduating from Masters and PhD programs and the world of work in the UK. Developments in Scotland and, more recently, in the rest of the UK have enabled more international students than ever before, to remain in the UK and work after graduation.
Launched by the Scottish Executive in 2004, the Fresh Talent initiative has already tempted 5,700 international students to stay in Scotland after graduation, many of whom have secured highly skilled positions in sectors as diverse as oil and gas production, finance, fine art preservation and biotechnology. Carrie Ann Anderson is one such student – a Masters graduate from the St Andrews University in Museum and Gallery Studies says: “I think the Fresh Talent initiative has helped level off the job situation for people coming from abroad. Some employers don’t want to be involved in obtaining a work permit but I have been lucky however because my area is a ‘shortage subject’ so there are more work opportunities and people are more likely to accept me.”
With a similar scheme – the International Graduates Scheme (IGS) - now being introduced throughout the UK, the opportunity to work after a Masters of PhD program has never looked more likely. Although the labour market continues to be competitive in the UK and particularly in London, an increasing number of students are securing employment, whether based on their performance in their graduate degree, the specific subject matter they have studied or under the terms of one of the UK Government’s new initiatives. The advantages for graduates are clear – the opportunity to gain vital work experience and earn a graduate-level salary add an attractive element to the overall pull of UK Masters and PhD degrees.
With a well-established university system and a reputation for quality and innovation, it’s easy to see why so many international students are putting the UK in first place as their study destination. Coupled with an exciting social and cultural life, shorter graduate programs and new opportunities for graduate employment, is there a better place to study for your Masters or PhD degree?

Dr Suvi Larjavaara said although the results may be reassuring, they are not conclusive
Conflicting advice: The use of mobile phones has long been at the centre of health controversy.
The debate over exactly how dangerous mobile phones are to users took a fresh twist today with the publication of a fresh report.
Researchers from the University of Tampere in Finland have directly contradicted recent findings from the World Health Organisation.
The Finnish report says mobile phones are unlikely to cause cancer because brain tumours are not clustered within the radiation range emitted from most devices, a new report finds.
However the WHO warned for the first time that mobile phones may cause cancer and have urged users to limit their use.
The warning came following Interphone's research from 13 countries that found that even just using a phone for 15 minutes a day could substantially increase the risk of a brain tumour.
And that according to their researchers they say it could take 15 to 20 years for primary cancers to develop.
Researchers in Finland however contradicted that report and found people who spent the most time on mobiles were no more likely to experience tumours located within five centimetres of the phone, where '90 percent of the radiation' is emitted.
Their results back up an earlier study at the University of Manchester who found that there has been no change in the rates of the disease - despite 70 million phones being used in the UK.
Today's findings from the University of Tampere in Finland were revealed as the World Health Organization announced that, upon review of available scientific evidence, mobile phones should be classified as 'possibly carcinogenic.'
Study author Dr Suvi Larjavaara said although the results may be reassuring, they are certainly not conclusive.
She said cancer could take a long time to develop and only five per cent of the people included in the study had been using mobile phones for at least 10 years.
Larjavaara acknowledged that these latest findings contradict the WHO's latest announcement, which placed mobile in the same cancer risk category as coffee and chloroform.
Overall, the evidence remains conflicted.
Last year, a study including 13,000 mobile users over 10 years found no clear answer on whether the handsets cause brain tumors. However, another study from last February suggested that using a mobile phone can change brain cell activity.
Use of mobile phones has increased hugely since their introduction in the  mid-1980s. About five billion mobile phones are currently in use worldwide.
One issue that arises when studying the risks of phone use is that people often don't recall how much time they spend on the phone.
Larjavaara and colleagues decided to look at the location of tumours, reasoning that an excess of tumours close to the phones would implicate the devices.
Ninety per cent of the radiation released from phones is absorbed by the brain tissue located within five centimetres of the handset.
Researchers mapped the exact location of 888 brain tumors diagnosed between 2000 and 2004 relative to where people would hold their mobile while talking. They found no correlation between the two.
The study was published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
However, another scientist who has also performed studies on long-term mobile phone users advised caution about the results.
Dr Elisabeth Cardis from the CREAL-Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, said the definition of exposure 'is overly simplistic, in my opinion.'
She said previous studies have found that the most exposed area is generally located around the ear.
'I expect there is substantial misclassification of exposure in the analyses published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, and hence it is not possible to draw conclusions about the presence or absence of a risk,' she concluded.

Researchers have found that digital games and TV shows are informing the games that children play in school playgrounds. Photograph: John Powell/Alamy
Deprived of Facebook and Wiis and shunted out into the bright light and fresh air of the playground, today's children do not, it seems, stare morosely at the concrete or send texts until the bell is rung.
According to research, children's play in the 21st century (pdf) is in rude, inventive and occasionally perplexing health.
Traditional games such as tag and the evergreen – and often scatological – Ipi–dipi-dation are still popular but children are also incorporating cultural figures including Beyoncé and Simon Cowell into their play.
children at playAfter spending more than two years watching children play, researchers from the universities of London, East London and Sheffield concluded that popular media are informing, rather than destroying, playground life.
Children not only act out the twisted psychodramas of Britain's Got Talent and the Jeremy Kyle Show and stage scaled-down versions of High School Musical and Harry Potter, but also use their computer games as a basis for acted-out war and fantasy games.
Prof Jackie Marsh of the University of Sheffield said the research demonstrated how children have responded to the new media age. "Today's children have to manage an increasingly complex world of technology and information and the project has shown how these aspects of their lives are crucially important for their social, emotional and cultural development," she said. "The playground provides an important space for children to engage with how their culture is changing in a digital age."
The study, which received £600,000 funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, also found that, far from merely aping what they had seen online or on the TV screen, children pick, choose, combine and reinvent to come up with new games and scenarios.
One child involved in the research described a favourite game that could have been seen in any playground since the 1960s: "Some people play Dr Who by choosing characters from the show and then improvising. They travel to different places in the police box, fight villains and save the world."
The findings of the study – Children's Playground Games and Songs in the New Media Age – will be unveiled on Tuesday at the British Library by former children's laureate Michael Rosen.
The project is accompanied by a British Library website chronicling the last century of children's games and rhymes, and a documentary film, Ipi-dipi-dation: My Generation, produced by Grethe Mitchell of the University of East London as part of the research.
The film, which mixes interviews with boys and girls aged 6-11 with footage of children at play, is billed as "a fascinating insight into the world of the playground as seen by the children themselves".
The leader of the project, Andrew Burn of the Institute of Education, said the work showed that pretend play was still flourishing.
"Children have always enjoyed enacting scenarios from their home or school lives, as well as fantasy stories involving witches, zombies, princesses, martial arts warriors and other figures," he said.

Study shows alarming decline in UK competitiveness

n Mosaic law, it is decreed that cases should be heard by a tribunal of three judges. Why three judges? Because, as is written in the Talmud, “You should not judge alone, for there is none qualified to judge alone, only the One.”
This requirement for three judges often holds true today. Three judges normally sit on cases heard in the Court of Appeal and in the Supreme Court.
There also happen to be three “judges” who adjudicate on global economic competitiveness. Each judge comes with a slightly different perspective, with their own sense of what is most important in determining what is essentially a subjective question.
But, as a new report from the Centre for Policy Studies shows, what is so depressing for the UK is that these three judges – highly reputed international bodies -- have passed a unanimous verdict (see table below) that the UK is guilty, guilty of hurtling down the league tables of economic competitiveness since 1997.
Take the Global Competitiveness Report, published by the World Economic Forum (WEF). There the UK has fallen from 7th to 12th in the rankings. We have been overtaken by developed nations such as Sweden, Germany, Japan and the Netherlands.
Yes, the WEF highlights some strengths in the UK economy today: the efficiency of its labour market (ranked 8th), the size of its market (6th), and the adeptness of business in harnessing new technologies.
But these positives are undermined by a dreadful record in government macro-economic management: ranked 72nd of 139 on wastefulness of government spending; 89th for the burden of government regulation; 95th for the ‘effects and extent’ of taxation; 108th for government debt; and 117th for the government budget balance.
The second judge on our “panel” is the World Competitiveness Yearbook published by the Institute for Management Development. They say that the UK has fallen from 9th to 22nd (out of 59), being overtaken by Taiwan, Qatar, Malaysia and Israel.
This is in part due to our recent poor ‘Economic Performance’, although the UK is still 14th overall on this criteria (down from 7th in 2007).
More significantly, the UK suffers from relatively poor “Government efficiency” (26th) and “Business efficiency” (28th) – a reflection of both the unproductive nature of the government sector, and the burden of regulation on business.
The third member of the “tribunal” is the Index of World Economic Freedom published by the Heritage Foundation. It says that the UK moved from 5th to 16th between 1997 and 2011 (overtaken by countries including Bahrain, Chile, Mauritius and Estonia).
This index marks the UK amongst the world’s freest nations in terms of Investment Freedom (2nd), Financial Freedom (4th) and Business Freedom (8th). These high positions are undermined, however, by a lack of Fiscal (169th), Government (156th) and Monetary Freedoms (93th), as a result of the high budget deficit, the burden of taxes and high levels of government spending.
Common threads run through all these judgements. On the plus side, the UK is an established, mature market, which is easy to invest in, which is creative and which is open for business. But, far more worrying are the negatives: over the past 14 years the UK has become hampered by excessive regulation, higher and higher taxes and appalling management of the public finances.
These are dragging the country’s future down.
Politicians all over the world are now looking to economic growth to get their economies out of the dreadful economic and fiscal predicament that they face. And, in a time of overall low global growth, the key is international competitiveness.
In the UK, David Cameron’s Government is trying to reverse the appalling decline in government finances by eliminating the budget deficit over the course of this Parliament. It is also making business investment more attractive by lowering corporation tax. But much more needs to be done. Despite the Coalition’s efforts, public debt – in real terms – will still be 24 percent higher in 2015/16 than it was in 2009/10.
So, as our Founder Margaret Thatcher used to say, more, much more needs to be done. In order to return the UK to its competitive position achieved in the late 1990s, the Coalition will need to implement far-reaching reforms to open up public services to competitive pressures, to deregulate enterprise and to lower the tax burden. Our fall down the league tables shows that these are steps we cannot afford not to take.

Strategic engagement with Iran

Frustrated by the absence of substantive progress during the latest round of P5+1 talks in Geneva, some Iran analysts would have U.S. policy plunge once again into the murky territory of regime change. Some hope that a military attack might bring about this goal. Others, taking what seems to be the high road, argue that the U.S. should back a people's democratic revolution. This second idea is deeply alluring. After all, it accords with our most cherished ideas while also offering a solution that serves U.S. national interests. What advocate of democracy would not want Iran's Green Movement to prevail? In one fell swoop, its victory would bring to the table legitimate Iranian leaders who keenly defend Iran's right to peaceful nuclear power, but who would also provide a far more constructive negotiating partner for the U.S. and its allies. 
The problem, however, is that democratic reform in Iran is a long-term proposition. As a result, it cannot serve as the basis for an effective U.S.-Iran policy. If the Obama White House were to rest its efforts to dissuade Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons on regime change, it would end up with an Iran policy as incoherent as those of the administrations that preceded it.

That incoherence is rooted in the reluctance of both Republican and Democratic administrations to make a decisive choice between making war or talking peace. Given the costs of both it is hardly surprising that our leaders have been unwilling or unable to mobilize political and bureaucratic support for either option. Instead, they have split the difference by using a mix of punitive measures and tepid incentives to in one way or another "contain" Iran -- thus avoiding the domestic discomfort that would inevitably accompany a more strategically cogent policy. 
To his credit, President Obama tried to overcome this legacy of policy confusion. He did so by reinvigorating a "two track" approach that imposed increasing costs while holding out the prospect of benefits that Tehran might gain in the event that it came clean on its nuclear program. But this policy has been long on the tactics of sanctions and other punitive measures, and short on a cogent strategic vision on the ultimate relationship with Iran that U.S. leaders -- and the public -- would endorse.
If, as administration officials insist, sanctions are a "means rather than an end," we need to define that end far more clearly. If it is stopping Iran's nuclear program, then let's be clear: sanctions may be slowing that program down, but by themselves they will not compel Iran's leaders to comply with the International Atomic Energy Commission or the UN Security Council. To get the attention of Iran's current leaders, we must decide whether the goal of sanctions (or for that matter, engagement) is to set the stage for war or for sustained peace negotiations.
On this elemental question, the White House's Iran policy is not all together clear. Hesitant to prematurely reveal its negotiating hand, and determined to show at home and abroad that it is tough, the Obama administration has hesitated to spell out a detailed package of economic, geo-strategic or diplomatic benefits that Iran might attain by seriously addressing the amply documented concerns of the International Atomic Energy Commission the UN Security Council.
Tehran's actions and words have not helped matters. Its dismissal of Obama's two "Nowruz" messages, President Ahmadinejad's verbal attacks on the legitimacy of the "Zionist enemy," Tehran's support for Hezbollah and Hamas -- not to mention the regime's repression of the Green Movement -- have all undercut support within and outside the administration for engagement.
As support for engagement wanes in Washington, calls for regime change are reverberating in the U.S. Congress and out national media. The idea that we can slay the Iranian nuclear dragon by destroying its autocratic heart will probably become a leitmotif of the House and quite possibly the Senate in 2011. 
How to accomplish this is the question. Secretary of Defense Gates has publicly asserted that a military attack on Iran would "bring together a divided nation" and make Iran's weapons program "deeper and more covert." This sober observation echoes conclusions set out in a joint report of the Unites States Institute of Peace and the Stimson Center, namely that a U.S. attack on Iran would "destabilize the entire Middle East in ways that could do grave damage to U.S. strategic, economic and political interests." Drawing on the insights of a diverse group including James Dobbins, Dov Zakheim and Admiral William Fallon, this report argues that an attack would not only cement Iran's determination to get the bomb, it would also accelerate the effort of ultra-hardliners to impose total control, thus shutting the door to any hopes of even modest political reform.
Political reform will eventually come to Iran, but in manner far more prolonged and partial than that imagined by advocates of a full-scale democratic revolution. This kind of dramatic scenario may pluck a tour heart strings, but it has not been the animating vision of Iran's reformists. The latter speak for a 25-million urban middle class of Iranians, many whom share one goal: to compel the state to stop forcing religious dogma on the population.
In the wake of the controversy over the June 2009 presidential election and the mass protests that followed, this drive for reform within the system gave way to a more radical vision of the system within some circles of the Green Movement. But battered by a repressive regime and deeply divided, the movement's leaders have yet to define a common strategic vision of what they want to achieve. Moreover, they must still or forge durable alliances with key elite groups such as the urban commercial bazaar and the official clergy, or with popular sectors among the urban and rural lower classes. This is not an impossible project, but it will require a grass roots process of networking, communication and alliance building that will take years to unfold.
There is very little the U.S. can or should do to affect this prolonged dynamic. The more we embrace Iran's democratic activists, the more we suffocate them. Iran's reformists want the international community to stand up for their human rights; they do not want to be pawns of a U.S.-Iranian conflict. In a land where concerns about national sovereignty and religious identity cut across the regime-opposition divide, the quest for democracy will be discredited if it is seen as anything but homegrown.
There is one thing, however, that the U.S. can do promote political decompression in Iran, and that is to make détente with the Islamic Republic a top priority. Sustained U.S.-Iranian engagement would undercut the "threat" that ultra hardliners regularly invoke to legitimate their efforts to pummel or isolate their critics. The latter include prominent conservatives, many of whom are eager to deflect the efforts of Revolutionary Guard to undermine the autonomy of clerical institutions, private sector businesses, and the parliament. Fighting for their very political and economic survival, these conservative leaders are likely to push for a process of internal political accommodation that could open up some doors for reformists. While they face many hurdles, one thing is sure: an escalation of U.S.-Iranian tensions (much less a war!) will only harm the efforts of those Iranian leaders who favor internal dialogue to make their voices heard.
In the coming decade, Iran's politics will be defined by a slow, agonizing struggle waged through rather than against the institutions of the Islamic Republic. If we indulge in the seductive dream of a sudden democratic revolution -- whether delivered by bombs from above or by popular resistance from below -- we will destroy the seeds of a political change in Iran. But we if we push for a process of engagement that moves Iran and the U.S. from conflict to diplomatic coexistence, we can help nurture Iran's own capacity to change and transform from within.
Let us hope that 2011 will be the year, not for war, but for a revitalized diplomatic initiative to resolve the crisis over Iran's nuclear program. If we do not pursue a bolder engagement strategy, the U.S. and its allies will ultimately have no choice but to contain a nuclear Iran. Secretary of State Clinton's recent BBC interview, in which she stated U.S. conditional acceptance of Iran's enrichment rights, provides one step in the right direction. The Obama administration must move forward, despite the obstacles at home and abroad.
Daniel Brumberg is a special advisor to the U.S. Institute of Peace. Barry Blechman is co-founder of the Stimson Center. They are the co-authors of "Engagement, Coercion, and Iran's Nuclear Challenge," a collaborate report published by the Stimson Center and the U.S. Institute of Peace. This report is the product of a year-long examination by more than 50 experts of the Iranian nuclear problem.


The first reference to "coffee" in the English language, in the form chaoua, dates to 1598. In English and other European languages, coffee derives from the Ottoman Turkish kahve, via the Italian caffè. The Turkish word in turn was borrowed from the Arabic: قهوة‎, qahwah. Arab lexicographers maintain that qahwah originally referred to a type of wine, and gave its etymology, in turn, to the verb qahiya, signifying "to have no appetite", since this beverage was thought to dull one's hunger. Several alternative etymologies exist that hold that the Arab form may disguise a loanword from an Ethiopian or African source, suggesting Kaffa, the highland in southwestern Ethiopia as one, since the plant is indigenous to that area. However, the term used in that region for the berry and plant is bunn, the native name in Shoa being būn.


Illustration of a single branch of a plant. Broad, ribbed leaves are accented by small white flowers at the base of the stalk. On the edge of the drawing are cutaway diagrams of parts of the plant.
Illustration of Coffea arabica plant and seeds
Several species of shrub of the genus Coffea produce the berries from which coffee is extracted. The two main species commercially cultivated are Coffea canephora (predominantly a form known as 'robusta') and C. arabica. C. arabica, the most highly regarded species, is native to the southwestern highlands of Ethiopia and the Boma Plateau in southeastern Sudan and possibly Mount Marsabit in northern Kenya.C. canephora is native to western and central subsaharan Africa, from Guinea to the Uganda and southern Sudan. Less popular species are C. liberica, excelsa, stenophylla, mauritiana, and racemosa.
All coffee plants are classified in the large family Rubiaceae. They are evergreen shrubs or small trees that may grow 5 m (15 ft) tall when unpruned. The leaves are dark green and glossy, usually 10–15 cm (4–6 in) long and 6 cm (2.4 in) wide. The flowers are axillary, and clusters of
fragrant white flowers bloom simultaneously and are followed by oval berries of about 1.5 cm (0.6 in). Green when immature, they ripen to yellow, then crimson, before turning black on drying. Each berry usually contains two seeds, but 5–10% of the berries have only one; these are called peaberries. Berries ripen in seven to nine months. Coffea arabica is predominantly self-pollinating, and as a result the seedlings are generally uniform and vary little from their parents. In contrast, Coffea canephora, C. excelsa, and C. liberica are self-incompatible and require outcrossing. This means that useful forms and hybrids must be propagated vegetativelyCuttings, grafting, and budding are the usual methods of vegetative propagation. On the other hand, there is great scope for experimentation in search of potential new strains.