Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

If you speak proper English does that mean that people who arent as good as you are at speaking English speak improper English ?? English is a noun which describes a certain language. How can a language be good ? Answer - it cant. You either speak English well or you dont speak it well. Saying proper English doesnt help because what is proper in some ...


1

English determiners can be tricky. For instance it's not OK to say "in specific situation." You need "in the following specific situation" or "in a specific situation." But to answer your question, it's fine to speak about a general meteorological truth without a determiner: Strong winds destroy homes. Or even Strong wind destroys homes. If ...


1

The first is the enduring present tense. The implication is that he's been using your car for a while, and that he will continue to do so. The second is the present perfect progressive tense, which indicates an unspecified interval of past time for an action ongoing during that interval, an action that continues up to right now. There's no implication for ...


4

He uses my car for one hour every day. This indicates the normal state of affairs. There is no indication that the situation is likely to end. It may have been going on for years. He has been using my car for one hour every day. This indicates a temporary state of affairs. We assume that there will be a definite finish. We also get the sense that ...


1

Is it polite to respond with an "OK" to my "Thank you"? (That's how a native English speaker replied to me today.) Well, I wouldn't respond that way, but there are people who do. Don't take offense. Is it acceptable in an informal situation to respond with "You welcome" (without "are") or even with "Welcome"? Responding, "You are welcome" ...


0

Electrical engineers will regularly use the letter 'u' as the greek letter 'μ' (mu) to replace 'micro' as in: uOhm (microohm) or uA (microampere).


2

"Xmas" is the only word I know of, where a Greek symbol can replace some (but not all) English letters and still be understood by the majority of readers. Something like "arXve" would not be correctly decoded by most people. I am familiar with many entire English words that have been abbreviated by Greek letters in the areas of math and science. Some are ...


3

The sentence He did not study music before he became famous is correct, but it is not written in the past perfect. You used the past simple. You used 'did' because the sentence is a negation. Small guide on the difference between the past simple, present perfect and past perfect: The past simple is used when something is over and done with, i.e. it has ...


0

There are some English words that can be replaced by Greek symbols (letters): for example: Pi I don't know of any English words containing mixed English/Greek alphabets.


0

Rarely, native english speakers do respond to "thank you" with "ok". When they do it's likely they're indicating that the "thank you" was inappropreate. If I slap your face and your responce is "thank you", my reply of "ok" may mean I think you're an idiot for thanking me for slapping you. Particularly if I'm rolling my eyes at the time. Ok is very ...


1

I respond with "anytime" or "happy to" sometimes. I use "you are welcome" and "no problem" mostly.


1

1) I wouldn't use "Ok" as an answer to "Thank you". It's not something you would say. It's not rude like swearing, but it would seem distracted, as if the person didn't actually hear what you were saying. 2) You can say "You're welcome". Younger people might also respond, "No problem!" or "Sure!"


2

If you want to shorten "You are welcome", use "You're welcome". "You welcome" isn't grammatically correct. You could also use "No problem" instead. "You're welcome" or "no problem" is what I would use after someone had thanked me for explaining something to them. Responding with "OK" sounds a little odd to me, though I don't think it's impolite.


0

The woman is feeling incompetent. She knows the baby needs cleaning and changing (because he pooped), but she's saying she doesn't know the right way of doing it. When she says, "He's got extra bits," she means that the baby, being male, has a penis and testicles, and she's squeamish (uncomfortable) and unsure of how to go about it. We know what needs ...


-1

She is saying, 'He's got extra bits.' She means she is unfamiliar with her (male) child's anatomy... His closing line is, 'I'm sorry.' He's apologising for laughing at her.


0

@Maldin's answer is very nice. I'll just chime in to answer your question, which one is preferable and why. I'll warn you though, this is pretty subjective. He's at lunch is good because it rolls off the tongue without having to think about it a lot, and it works in all cases -- he went to a restaurant; he went to the deli for take-out; he's having a ...


0

OP, be aware that "is much in the news at the moment.." is a completely common phrase in English. It's absolutely commonplace that commentators talk in a very messy manner, on TV and videos. In particularly, it's utterly common that they mess-up (often in ahumorous way) idiomatic phrases. IF the reader said it incorrectly (so, omitting or ...


1

If he went somewhere to eat lunch, then he went TO lunch. If he went somewhere to get lunch and bring it back, then he went FOR lunch. But you use the past simple for an action which happend at a definite time in the past (the time is stated, already known or implied). In this particular situation "he has gone to lunch". You should use present perfect - ...


6

It's not really an inconsistency because the first comment is speaking of a specific ghost; the latter refers to ghosts in general. Ex: "I thought I saw a shark. I'm pretty sure they don't live in lakes, though." "There's a homeless man sleeping under a garbage pile. Well, that's where they sleep in the winter."


2

I think it may be logical, if slightly less grammatical, for a ghost to declare that it got survived (e.g. "I was survived by my wife" is entirely valid, the use of got seems questionable). But, realistically, the statement "I got survived" made without a subject is an incorrect statement.


6

"Survive" is often used as an intransitive verb, so in your case you would say "I survived." To use it as a transitive verb you would say "I survived the accident." "Survive" can be used in another way as a transitive verb, as a slightly euphemistic term for outliving a family member. For example: She survived her husband by 30 years, and passed away at ...


14

We survived; we escaped; we celebrated ...these are Active Voice. we were saved; we were hunted down; we were followed ...these are Passive Voice. Some passives have the form: we got saved, we got rescued; we got given tea and biscuits. For got passive, see: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/get-passive


1

I survived would be a better way to say it. It is because you survived and at at the end of the day, it is your survival that counts. You are not mentioning anybody else's contribution in that survival. It is your survival. However, if you still wish to go for passive voice, you may say, I got saved. You may have been saved by chance, co-incidence or God. ...


2

"To get survived" doesn't exist at all in English. You can only say "to survive". You can " get drunk" or "get fired" or "get married" etc. But you can't "get died" or "get born", for example.


3

Been is the past participle of Be so I've never been is as grammatical as I'm not. The object is omitted as it is understood from context. Q: "Are you in France now?" A: "No, I'm not, and I've never been." Q: "Are you tall?" A: "No, I'm not, and I've never been." In the most technical sense, I'm not sure whether omitting the object of a to be verb can be ...



Top 50 recent answers are included