In this thread, we attempt to learn to read, write, and speak English, a language which would be very useful to know. It is widely spoken throughout the world.
Do you speak English? Are you fluent? What resources did you use to learn? Can you give some examples in this thread? Posts some useful links.
Let's help each other out and learn a new language.
>>5
You don't speak ANYTHING unless I say you can. Understand?
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-06 7:07
I'm afraid most non-native English speakers visiting 4chan's text boards are too far into their studies to be interested contributing to a thread like this, hence all the shitposting it attracts.
I'll do a serious post because of the enthusiasm displayed by OP.
Education in my country is good, but as a kid I always felt my comprehension of English was horrible compared to those around me. After console games started becoming more text heavy and required reading to progress, it didn't take too long before I'd "mastered" the language.
I usually don't like to describe myself as fluent because I find things are seriously lacking in the pronunciation department. Not quite sure how to go about fixing that without going abroad and living in an English-speaking country, would anyone happen to have a good web resource for pronunciation training?
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-06 9:28
Do you speak English?
A little, I can write it, but my pronunciation sucks since I learned by reading
Are you fluent?
Just in basic conversations
What resources did you use to learn?
Videogames, most of the good ones are only available in English, plus I love to watch movies with their OV
I should probably take a course at my university to actually learn the rules and all,
>>7
I improved my accent by working as a customer care representative for an American company. I guess I was one of those "indians" Americans get to hate when they call 1-800-DELL or whatever piece of shit company they decided to give money to.
Although you need to live in a poor country to get such a job. Nobody outsources those jobs to Sweden or Japan, they look for poor people who are willing to take shit from spoilt niggers and rednecks, all by the awesome net wage of 400 USD or so.
Needless to say, I improved it considerably, but I still don't sound American or English.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-12 17:23
>>11
Did you have to lie and say you were Ted in Texas or something? I always wonder when they say that kind of shit if they're telling the truth.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-12 21:24
>>7
Don't worry about accent-reduction. It's just not worth the months or potential years it might take to eliminate the most prominent features of your speech. It's not even guaranteed you'll be able to adhere to "standard pronunciation" at all.
Obviously there's heavy bias laid around "proper" pronunciation (largely Midwestern dialect for America) but so long as you have a strong understanding of the language itself, its syntax, grammar, etc. (which you definitely seem to), you shouldn't berate yourself over accent.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-12 21:25
Do you speak English?
Yes, American and, to an extent, British.
Are you fluent?
I'd like to think so.
What resources did you use to learn?
Environment and literature.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-13 2:43
My first language.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-13 2:43
Posting to see the post screen.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-13 2:51
i had onli be study englsh for 20 year it seem prety good?
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-13 15:07
What does "I hope you die" exactly mean?
Does it mean that somebody hopes that somebody else dies **in future**?
>>17
To be more specific, in the near future, or given context, while doing something. Because, y'know, we all die.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-13 17:46
I have the hypothesis about -ing. <verb>ing is a process. For example, "She's writing a novel" means that she is a process and the function (or purpose) of this process is to write a novel.
>>23
Not much. I can't think of an instance where they can't be used interchangeably.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-23 10:37
>>22
The reason for this is probably because English uses one verb for "to be". Several other languages make use of more than one to distinguish the difference.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-23 19:25
>>24
Well, you can't goal a gun, and you can't score an aim.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-23 20:30
>>23
"goal; intent, design. Aim, end, object all imply something that is the goal of one's efforts. Aim implies that toward which one makes a direct line, refusing to be diverted from it: a nobleness of aim; one's aim in life. End emphasizes the goal as a cause of efforts: the end for which one strives. Object emphasizes the goal as that toward which all efforts are directed: the object of years of study."
>browsing the french internet
>"4chan c'est super, c'est plein de contenu original fascinant."
>"m-mais c'est en anglais"
>go to 4chan
>don't understand shit
>go to 4chan
>understand greentext
>mfw I can only greentext
>mfw teacher asks for english essay and greentextan is not allowed
>mfw I have no face
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-29 18:04
>>29
>mfw the french still think their language is relevant outside "haute couture"
>mfw they refuse to learn proper foreign languages due to outdated nationalism
>mfw when this isn't an imageboard
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-07 19:35
"He's the real deal"
What's it mean?
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-07 22:49
>>31
Real deal, genuine article, real McCoy, etc. all mean that something is authentic, untampered with, or altogether genuine.
When someone says "he's the real deal", they're generally not talking about whether he's authentic and certainly not whether he's "untampered with". They're saying he's a serious player, a skilled person, or truly talented.
For example, a scouter for a high school baseball team might say of a new recruit "This kid is the real deal, we gotta have him on our team." Of course he's a real baseball recruit (everyone they're looking at is), what he's really getting at is that he thinks the kid's good at baseball.
When you're giving a definition on a highly idiomatic phrase like this, you can't just give the literal definition.
Here's a more general reference covering all aspects of the phrase. It would also be beneficial to have some context for where you heard it, but hopefully this is sufficient.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-08 9:16
>>33
Obviously the connotation varies with the subject (i.e. the difference here between "something" and "someone")
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-08 14:18
>>34
Thanks!
>where you heard it
Skyline (movie) 2010. 04:25
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-09 17:01
"When he saw me coming he took off in the opposite direction."
Is it mean that he starts to go towards to me?
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-09 18:57
>>37
Away from the speaker. He saw the speaker and started going the opposite direction from where the speaker is, to get away from them.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-10 12:33
"Police have appealed for witnesses to the accident."
I don't understand the last part of this sentence. I mean "to the accident". Why is there "to" instead of "of"? I can understand "the witnesses of the accident", but I don't understand "the witnesses to the accident".
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-10 14:24
>>39
It is possible to be both a witness "to" something ("He was (a) witness to the crime) or a witness "of" something. Both are essentially interchangeable but, personally, "to" owns a larger sense of indirectness. Being a witness "of" a crime potentially implicates you in the crime itself, depending on how you parse it.
My english status:
Reading: good
Listening: regular
Pronunciation: regular. I need to improve.
Conversation: so so ;/
Writing: bad :(
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-22 9:06
A question for natives. Why do you use 'have' for perfect? Intuitively, do you understand 'have' in 'I have eaten' as same as 'have' in 'I have a car'?
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-22 17:38
>>45
No, it is simply a part of our grammar. We understand them as different parts of speech. More specifically, we wait until the next word and then our brains automatically put it in the correct context.
Name:
!denX47.muQ2013-05-23 0:45
>>45
English is a Germanic language.
Go ask the Germans why they use haben for their perfect.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-23 23:31
Does anyone want to exchange languages?
I am native to English language and would love to learn German.
For from it. Probably, around intermediate/upper intermediate.
And I'm not used to speaking English, so my accent would be awful.
What resources did you use to learn?
I mostly learned it during highschool: we had quite awesome English teachers. Last two years we didn't speak in our native language(Russian) during the classes when it was not completely necessary.
I mostly just chat on reddit, 4chan, et al.
Can you give some examples in this thread?
If only. For words I usually use google's "define: term" search. For grammar, when I bothered to check it, I use google too.
For Russian speakers I can advise Multitran, e.g.:
It shows not only translation, but also context for the translation.
Name:
Russian2013-06-07 9:24
Which phrase is correct, "as effective as and as qualitative as possible" or "as effective and qualitative as possible"? Or both are wrong?
Also is it correct to start a question with "or" in English?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-07 11:52
>>53
Both are grammatical and share the exact same meaning.
The more "common" of the two in writing is the latter where the second "as" is omitted. It's simply redundant. But it isn't rare to hear the first sentence used in speaking when the second item (qualitativeness) is being emphasized.
And it is entirely possible to start a question with "or" but the different "rules" apply for beginning any sentence with a common contractions (and, but, or) in formal writing.
I think I am fluent but still I have feeling I am making some stupid grammar mistakes all the time. Most people say my English is better than average American, but it doesn't console me much, because I know average American's English is awful.
I would like to ask, did I put the commas on right places?
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-16 15:42
>>61
A comma can go before a subordinating conjunction (like you have before "but") but (<see) it isn't always necessary or correct.
The only "errors" in your post are with articles and preposition. "...did I put the commas on right places?" should be "in the right places" and "but still I have feeling" should be "but still I have a feeling", "average American's" should be "the average American's", etc.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-17 4:55
>>62
Okay thanks. The articles are another problem too, because my native language doesn't have anything similar.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 2:58
What is the difference between α (ah) и ʌ (uh)? For me, they seem to be identical.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 3:01
>и
Sorry, I meant 'and'.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 5:28
Do native speakers make the mistakes like missing -s in verbs before it/he/she? how often?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 5:30
>>66
Can you give an example of what you're referring to?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 5:39
>>67
For example, "She meet him", "do John like cats?", "He like it".
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 5:53
>>68
Oh, those. In teacher's language those are called "subject-verb agreement errors", and they're quite rare among native speakers.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 6:33
>>66
>-s in verbs before it/he/she
fuck. I confused 'before' with 'after'.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 9:29
>>69 those are called "subject-verb agreement errors", and they're quite rare among native speakers.
are they quite rare both in speaking and writing?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-17 10:54
>>71
More common in writing, but only as a typo. Some ebonics speakers will omit the -s naturally in speech though.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-18 5:01
What does "I wrote a book" mean? Is it correct to say like this?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-18 5:02
>>73 "I wrote a book"
Sorry, I meant "I write a book".
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-18 8:22
>>74
Someone who says "I write a book" intends to mean that they are currently in the process of writing or composing a book, likely in fulfillment of the questions "What is your job?" or "What do you do for work?".
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-18 9:04
>>75 currently in the process of writing or composing a book
Then what is the difference between "I write a book" and "I'm writing a book"?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-18 9:13
In the movie one man drinks coffee with one woman and says "I'm writing a book", but he was not writing it at that moment. Why didn't he say "I write a book"?
>>76
"I write a book" is what the person does. "I'm writing a book" is what they are doing (thought not necessarily NOW or at that moment, books obviously take a long time to write and they are just in the process of doing it).
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-18 16:26
>>77
I don't think "I write a book" is something most people would say. Most people would say "I'm writing a book" or "I write books". Same with a word like painting; most people would say "I paint pictures" or "I'm painting a picture", not "I paint a picture".
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-19 6:47
Hi there! I've been wondering for quite a while about usage of ordinal numerals with different articles. In schlool, we are taught to use them with the definite one only or without any depending on context. But from time to time, I still come accross the indefinite acrticle being used with ordinal numerals. For ex.:
"And it was at school I heard first of the Door in
the Wall - that I was to hear of A second time only a month before
his death." (The door in the wall by G. Wells)
"Such extensive use of these materials in aircraft construction was A first in the industry." (an article on SR-71)
So what the big difference does it make? Using "A" article here instead of "THE".
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-19 6:56
>>80
Thank you. This is the answer I wanted to get. Because I thought so too and wanted to make sure that I'm right.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-19 16:37
>>81
Imagine the difference between the sentences "I heard of it the second time" and "I heard of it a second time", and you can begin to see why indefinites are proper here.
Regarding the second of your examples, to say "it was a first in the industry" highlights the nascence of the creation among all others directly or indirectly related. To say "it was the first in the industry" is to show that is was chronologically first, that never before had these materials been so extensively used.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 1:41
>>83
I've got the point on the second example. Speaking of the first though... As a Russian I can't really imagine this kind of differences straight away. So I need some kind of reasoning to help me do just that. The only one I can come up with is that since no set order of "times" had been provided (or implied) beforehand, the one he mentiones is to be considered as an+other. Is that correct?
What is the most annoying mistake when you see the texts non-native speakers wrote?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 11:21
>>88
>What is the most annoying mistake when you see the texts non-native speakers wrote?
>What is the most annoying mistake when you see the texts non-native speakers HAVE WRITTEN?
"(translation of this word...) Would depend highly on context." or "(translation of this word...) Would highly depend on context." ?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 14:53
>>92
Either is acceptable. 200 years ago adverbial placement might have mattered (the adverb going before the verb) but the distinction hs largely been lost.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 18:11
(Out of eight people...)
Which one is a true prophet?
-or-
Which one is the true prophet?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 18:18
>94
"a prophet" doesn't make sense with "which", because "which" implies only one. You could say "Who among these is a true prophet" or "Who among these is the true prophet", but if you use "which", it has to be "the".
>95
Oh sorry, so if it's out of eight prophets, cowboys etc
Which one is a true (cowboy)? -would be correct?
and
Which one is the true cowboy? - also correct?
What's the difference between "a" and "the" in this case then?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 18:44
>>96
Using "which" with "a" sounds strange to me in general, but I might be overthinking it. I'll let someone else provide some input before I say something stupid.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 18:49
>>97
I think it'd be fine if it was something like "Which of you is a true prophet" or "Which of you is a true cowboy" but when you have one it implies a singular and so "the" would be more correct.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 21:05
Just different connotations:
"a true prophet" = a prophet that is legitimately a prophet
"the true prophet" = the ONLY legitimate prophet among a host of false prophets, one whose prophecies are true against all others
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-20 21:05
Just different connotations:
"a true prophet" = a prophet that is legitimately a prophet
"the true prophet" = the ONLY legitimate prophet among a host of false prophets, one whose prophecies are true against all others
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-21 4:47
>99
Thank you! I will consider it.
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-22 17:46
>A fiction writer tricking their reader into believing there was a level of sobriety in their process.
This is from a book.
Why "their" is used in this case, since we have a single writer wouldn't "a fiction writer tricking his reader..." be more appropriate?
Name:
Anonymous2013-10-22 18:00
>>102
Traditionally, i.e. prescriptively, yes, correct English necessitates the usage of a singular pronoun (his or her) in conjunction with a singular noun (a writer).
There does exist a singular "they" and here "their" is used as a gender-neutral possessive pronoun, when the gender of the subject is unknown or irrelevant.
This only works when the "too" is there ("it's obvious of who can't tell" sounds very wrong to me, and I imagine most other people as well). "Too obvious a troll" sounds correct as well, but it sounds more formal than the version with "of". I don't know if that helps as to why we do it, but that's how it is.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-01 12:45
>>110
"sth" (and "sb" for "somebody") is used in The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, which I use to learn English.
"Too obvious a troll" == "It's too obvious that you're a troll"?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-01 13:32
>>111
>"sth" (and "sb" for "somebody") is used in The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, which I use to learn English.
Right, that's what most sites said, but these are primarily limited to language resources. I've never seen anyone use them directly to other people (and I've spent a lot of time in places where people use a lot of abbreviations). It's up to you, though.
>"Too obvious a troll" == "It's too obvious that you're a troll"?
In terms of meaning, yes, but in terms of grammar, no. It's the same as "too obvious of a troll." I would instead change it into "(this) troll is too obvious."
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-01 14:04
>>112 Right, that's what most sites said, but these are primarily limited to language resources.
But this board is a language resource, isn't it? It's up to you, though.
I'm not going to use these abbreviations outside of language resources.
Would you change "too slow of a car" into "(this) car is too slow"?
>>113
All I mean is that 99% of people are not going to recognize "sth" immediately, and the ones that are are the ones that specialize in teaching English (which is not me, even if I am on a language learning board). Anyway, its' kind of irrelevant.
>Would you change "too slow of a car" into "(this) car is too slow"?
I'd say either that or "a car that is too slow". That definition seems a bit off from what you're talking about. "To be slow of car" or "to be obvious of troll" makes no sense, for example. Maybe the "too" makes it subjective (i.e., a feeling) and that makes it OK? I honestly don't know.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-01 18:04
>>114
Actually, now that I think about it, that doesn't work either, because you still need the article (a/the). "To be too slow of car" is still wrong.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-03 5:13
Is it true that "You look hot. ~ Yes, I've been running" equates to "You look hot. ~ Yes, I've just run" (or "You look hot. ~ Yes, I just ran" for American English)?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-03 13:02
>>116
In terms of meaning, yes, I get the same general impression from both. The version with -ing kind of implies that it lasted for some duration (while the other doesn't necessarily).
For example, if I sprinted across a parking lot into a supermarket, and someone said to me "you look hot", I might say "yeah, I just ran", but I wouldn't say "yeah, I've been running".
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-05 1:25
What does "I make no claim to be a paragon" mean?
"I make no claim because I want to be a paragon" or
"I make no claim, so I'm not a paragon"?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-05 7:49
His psychiatrist once told him that to get well he would have to do two things: get off dope (which he hadn't done) and to stop trying to help people (he still tried to help people).
Does "to get off dope" mean "to stop taking dope"?
>>118
"I make no claim to be a paragon" = "I do not claim to be a paragon" = "I am not a paragon and I do not say that I am a paragon"
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-05 11:22
Do I understand correctly that "claim to be" is equal to "claim that (somebody who has claimed it) is/are"?
e.g. "Tom claims to be an expert" = "Tom claims that he's an expert".
I'm asking because it's strange for me that you English speakers think that when somebody claims to be something, he/she implies exactly himself/herself, not somebody else.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-05 19:45
>>119
get off dope = stop taking dope (which usually means heroin but could mean marijuana)
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-05 20:00
>>122 they are the same because 'he's' = 'he is' and is is a form of ' to be'
tom claims (now) to be (all the time) an expert. vs tom claims (now) that he is (now) an expert. in this instance, he is an expert now in both sentences. but, if 'tom is known to be an expert' everyone knows he is an expert. 'tom knows he is an expert' means tom is confident. 'to be' is more substantial in some cases. it is hot (now) VS it is to be hot (later). as for what you find strange, yes, tom is the implied claimer, who else could be an expert in this sentence?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-05 22:10
>>122
Omission of information occurs in English. I'm not sure what you find strange about it.
Or, another way to write what I just wrote:
Omission of information occurs in English. Not really sure what you find strange about it.
Both of these are perfectly valid and normal (though you could make the argument that the second isn't 'proper', it's certainly used with great frequency), even though the second lacks an explicit subject.
It doesn't mean they say that they are about safety, right?
They're implying disabling (the ability to turn off javascript), not themselves.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-06 6:11
They're implying
By the way, should I use present simple in this case?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-06 8:31
>>126
That sentence sounds really awkward to me. I'm guessing the person who wrote it didn't read it after writing it. It should be "disabling the ability to turn off javascript is not about safety as they claim it is".
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-07 4:50
Can I say "I claim me to be ..."?
by analogy with "I want you to be patient".
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-07 9:39
>>129
It should be 'I claim myself to be ...'
But you could also just say 'I claim to be ...'
>>136
"do" is a common verb used for drugs. You "take" medicine, but you "do" drugs.
For example, if you were taking sleeping pills legitimately (in order to sleep), you generally do not say "I'm gonna go do some sleeping pills", you'd say "I'm going to go take some sleeping pills". But if you were a junkie and you like the feeling, you might indeed say "I'm going to go do some sleeping pills".
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-09 18:45
>>133
The first one does indeed sound a bit off to me, but I'm not sure why. It's definitely possible to say "I arrived at 8 o'clock and was eating BY 11 o'clock", though. Take that how you will.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-09 19:07
>>139
>"do" is a common verb used for drugs. You "take" medicine, but you "do" drugs.
It's interesting.
>go do
>go take
Are you sure there shouldn't be 'to' after 'go'?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-09 19:47
>>141
Saying "go to take" or "go to do" sounds awkward, but I'm not capable of explaining why. Like, if I were talking to my friend, and I wanted to ask him out for lunch, I'd say "do you wanna go eat", not "do you wanna go to eat". I tried looking for an explanation of this online, but I couldn't find any.
If I had to explain it, "go to" + v sounds more like you are going to go somewhere and then do something, while "go" + v sounds more fluid, like it isn't necessarily a sequence. But this is just my general impression of things, and it might not be correct.
Some people in the comments claim this is only an American thing, but I believe this is used in all forms of English. Maybe someone else knows more about it.
Why foreign people can master Japanese easily?
We Japanese hard to master English. of cource Japanese is big different grammer and pronuciation with English what global language.
Why foreign people can master Japanese easily?
We Japanese hard to master English. of cource Japanese is big different grammer and pronuciation with English what global language.
Why foreign people can master Japanese easily?
We Japanese hard to master English. of cource Japanese is big different grammer and pronuciation with English what global language.
English is harder to learn. Moon's pretty easy once you get enough kanji under your belt and have the tools to look up ones you don't.
Hello from Lang-8, by the way.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-16 2:05
>>148
君達の勉強法はちょっと・・・
楽しんで勉強してるならどんどん成長するよ。
just reeeeeeeelax and have fun with it, brah.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-16 2:57
>>148
English has many more random exceptions than Japanese. From my perspective, Japanese is more of a logic-based language, and learning it is a matter of adjusting to that logic. English is filled with all kinds of inconsistencies. Not to mention that many native English speakers use improper spelling and grammar. There are many rules that the vast majority of the English-speaking population are not aware of. Should you master English, you will most likely have a better knowledge of it than native speakers.
An interesting example of how English can be confusing is the GHOTI = FISH scenario (ゴートィ ＝ フィシュ).
Consider the English words
Tough (タッフ, looks like トウグフ/トウグホ) Tougufu/Touguho
Women (ウィメン, looks like ヲメン) Women
Nation (ネーシュン, looks like ナトィオン) Nation
touGH = taFfu
wOmen = uImen
naTIon = neeSHun
So therefore, GH + O + TI = F + I + SH.
Therefore, GHOTI is pronounced the same as FISH by that "logic".
However, any English speaker would pronounce GHOTI as ゴートィ, not as フィシュ. Just an example where English makes little sense.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-16 14:58
>>151
It's a nice idea, but that's fundamentally just a spelling issue. How do you read 小鳥遊? How about 煙草? Or 新潟? Japanese has its fair share of illogical orthography. English's myriad spelling inconsistencies still don't compare to the thousands characters with multiple possible readings in Japanese. The existence of ateji alone attests to this fact. Spelling and pronunciation are simply a matter of memorization. In fact,. this is actually just about the only thing the Japanese English education system focuses on - rote memorization. So most Japanese people are, relatively speaking, actually pretty good at recognizing individual words and reading/spelling them.
The problem is that they're never encouraged to use English, or to see English as a language that is actually used. They learn it similar to the way we learn Latin: primarily vocabulary memorization and interpretation of extant text. So when they try to make a sentence or understand something said by an English speaker, they lock up and worry about whether they're right or wrong, or how the word is being used, or any number of other things that prevent them from holding a conversation. This is one of the main reasons Japanese people struggle with English so much.
It's not that it's impossible for a Japanese native speaker to learn English. I have several Japanese friends whose English is quite good, but none of these friends became proficient through classes or studying for hours on end. They used English, and eventually got good at English. It's as simple as that.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-16 16:07
How do you pronounce 00s and 10s like in 2000/1900 or 2010/1910?
Oops, I noticed the simple truth, so I'm glad if you read this my un-interesting theme.
Even if we mistake by the grammar of a foreign language which we are studying , native speakers analyzes and corrects our mistake.
So, the Japanese in whom the feeling of repulsion was implanted by the boring English lesson of the "grammar serious consideration principle of education system of Japan" to English should get to know that it is ridiculous to join in Lang-8 actively and to aim at perfection by English learning.
Do you have personal opinion about my poor writing? :P
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-17 3:03
>>157
It sounds like you're trying extremely hard to make long, complex sentences, but it just comes out jumbled and confusing. Like the passive phrase "in whom the feeling of repulsion was implanted", that's nearly incomprehensible. Or the noun phrase "grammar serious consideration principle of education system of Japan".
Unless I'm misunderstanding your intent, it would be much better if you broke it up and avoided large noun phrases. For example,
"So I think it would be good if Japanese people learning English used Lang-8 to try and improve their English. Many of them have been bored to death by the strict grammar-oriented classes of the Japanese educational system, but language learning doesn't have to be this way."
This is a very loose translation (I am honestly not sure what you mean by "it is ridiculous to join Lang-8") but this kind of writing has a much better rhythm in English. Your original sentences still sound very Japanese.
anyway you wrote completely sentences here what I wanna write. :)
Thank you from the bottom of my heart!
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-17 5:12
>>154
I mean: 20s = twenties, 30s = thirties etc.
How is 00s and 10s pronounced in that case
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-17 6:18
>>160
We don't have any way of pronouncing it. Some people have made fun of this fact. A few people try to use "the naughts", but that sounds goofy. I'd just say "the two thousands" or "the two thousand tens", personally.
I noticed that sometimes native English speakers ask questions using only intonation without changing word order, e.g. "It‘s not balanced anymore?".
So, is there a rule when you should ask questions in that way and when in the normal way?
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-20 15:02
>Speak English?
Yes
>Fluent?
Yes
>How did you learn?
Television, internet, conversations. Was taught English in school since 4th grade, but the grammar lessons didn't really do much for me until high school.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-20 19:00
>>163
This is just my feeling on it, but it seems to me that it's only used for confirmation. You wouldn't just ask someone out of the blue "You're going to lunch today?" for example. That sounds like the other person doesn't usually go to lunch, and you found out that today, they ARE going to lunch, and you're confirming this fact.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-22 3:40
>>163
I noticed that sometimes native English speakers ask questions using only intonation without changing word order, e.g. "It‘s not balanced anymore?".
A lot of languages do that.
And what >>165 said sounds good. Intonation is used generally when your question is in response to a statement or an action someone made or took but there's no rule or anything.
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-27 2:27
Hi there! I was playing today "999" on NDS... scrolling text on and on. And then WTF!
"Junpei turned, and found himself FACE TO MASK WITH A MAN dressed all in black."
Just how come? Is a misprint or something?
I guess it should be like "Junpei turned, and found himself facing a man dressed all in black with a gas mask on."
Name:
Anonymous2013-11-27 6:30
Now I've got it! "Face to mask" is just a pun based of "face to face" expression.
It's me again. About the same game.
The sentence is "Junpei lifted a limp june from the floor, and carried her from the bathroom."
Why did they use indefinite articcle with "limp June". She is the only person with this codename in the game. What's the logic behind the use of this article here?
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-09 18:50
>>170
When referring to a noun that has an adjective sometimes the indefinite article is used for stylistic reasons ("A triumphant Napoleon poses for a portrait", "an unconscious John is carried out of the rubble by rescuers"). It's common when you're trying to describe a particular scene or describe something in general. I couldn't tell you the specific grammar rule that allows it though.
>>171
seems correct. I think using indefinite articles can give the writing a very distant or third-person feel. In this context, "the" would sound much more personal and involved than "a."
Most native speakers wouldn't see much a difference in using either. It's almost purely style.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-10 13:53
>>171 >>172
I see. Would it sound ok if "limp June" was without any article at all?
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-10 15:08
>>173
It doesn't sound right with no article. Unless her nickname is "limp June."
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-10 15:32
>>173
You might find that sort of thing in archaic English works but not in modern English.
Your English is very easy to understand. It sounds a bit odd, though.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-17 0:25
>>157
be concise. your writing is very...esoteric. it seems like youre trying to write very formally, but just over-complicating things.
>>163
english is very relaxed, and rules often have many counter-examples.
it seems to be a yes/no versus interrogative thing.
>>170
i think when verbs (lifted) act on a singular noun (june), you use the article (a).
if junepei was picking flowers, you would say:
junpei picked a flower OR junpei picked flowers
BUT, this just seems to be an indefinite article rule:
junpei picked the flower AND junpei picked the flowers
are both acceptible
definite articles do not seem to be affected.
also, john ate hot dogs and john ate the hot dogs both make perfect sense.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-17 0:25
>>157
be concise. your writing is very...esoteric. it seems like youre trying to write very formally, but just over-complicating things.
>>163
english is very relaxed, and rules often have many counter-examples.
it seems to be a yes/no versus interrogative thing.
>>170
i think when verbs (lifted) act on a singular noun (june), you use the article (a).
if junepei was picking flowers, you would say:
junpei picked a flower OR junpei picked flowers
BUT, this just seems to be an indefinite article rule:
junpei picked the flower AND junpei picked the flowers
are both acceptible
definite articles do not seem to be affected.
also, john ate hot dogs and john ate the hot dogs both make perfect sense.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-17 2:28
How are, for example, '0-9' and 'a-f' pronounced?
'0 through 9' and 'a through f'?
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-17 4:15
>>182
Or "a to f", "0 to 9". "through" works fine, though.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-17 4:17
>>181
The issue he had was not with using "the" on a plural or the position of a verb, it was with using "the" with a proper noun (June). It's a specific use and a rather uncommon one at that. You wouldn't say, for example "The Junpei picked the flower", that is nonsensical. But I think >>171 explained it fairly well.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-17 14:48
>>184
I think what is throwing >>170 off is that both using a and not using a are acceptable.
I think the author uses a to specify that June being limp is just a temporary condition, lifting limp June would imply that she is generally limp or her name is "limp June"
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-18 1:47
170 here ^_^'
I just haven't seen indefinite article used with personal names very often so it seemed a bit odd to me once it caught my attention. I had already known that the use of an adjective permits an indefinite article with uncountable nouns (It's stifling in here because of A terrible humidity). But for some strange reason I kept thinking articles to be incompatible with personal names, even those pereceded by adjectives.
I clearly understand the kind of description that >>171 provided examples for; never thought of it before though. However, I think it's >>185's reasoning that matches that pacticular use of indefinite article in the game.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-18 13:21
>>185
"The" would work just as well there, though. Someone else pointed out how using "a" can dehumanize a person and make them seem distant, which I guess adds to whatever emotion the scene is trying to portray.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-19 0:49
"Something or you have (?) disabled javascript"
What verb should I use in sentence like that, 'have' or 'has'?
Also what article did I have to use before 'sentence' in the previous question and before 'previous' in this question?
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-19 3:10
>>187
Both a and the could be used, but they portray different ideas.
>>188
>Something or you have (?) disabled javascript
This is the second person plural in the present perfect tense, use have. has is used to describe third person singular, he/she/it has disabled javascript.
What is confusing here, is that "something" is an it, i.e.: something has disabled javascript, this urges you to say has. but, to the computer, "something or you" is second person plural, and in this case you use have.
>Also what article did I have to use before 'sentence' in the previous question and before 'previous' in this question?
You would use an indefinite article (the) before "sentence," definite article (a or an) before "previous."
A refers to a general thing, like "a sentence like that," while the refers to a specific thing, like "the previous sentence."
>>191
Yes, sorry I contradict myself. Use definite articles to refer to something specific, indefinite to refer to something general.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-20 5:26
What's the difference between 'I am doing something' and 'I am to do something'? Is the second one mean a future action?
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-20 13:31
>>193
I am doing something = I am in the process of doing something right now.
I am to do something = There is something that I must do. It may or may not be in progress right now. It's not a phrase I hear very often though, generally it's "I have to/I'm supposed to do something". "I am to do something" is something an inferior says in regards to a superior's orders from my experience.
The story is about guy named Tim Sykes
"
Grittani scoured the internet and eventually came upon Syke's story. He spent a few months learning about Syke's theories and eventually started trading.
"
Why is it Syke's and not Sykes' in this case?
Wouldn't Syke's usage make the guy's name Tim Syke?
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-21 23:38
>>195
Yes, you're correct. The apostrophe rules for words that already end in "s" are somewhat complex, and it's just a mistake.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-21 23:46
>>196
Could you elaborate on those rules? I would not be sure what method to use with words ending with "s", especially names.
I never got a difference between "effective" and "efficient". Can anyone explain, what would be more suitable to use:
"cost-effective investment (endeavor, etc)"
or
"cost-efficient investment (endeavor, etc)"
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-23 17:59
>>201
"Efficiency" is more like getting the most out of the least effort/investment and with as little wasted time/money/effort as possible. "Effectiveness" is more like how much of an effect you can expect out of your effort/investment.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-31 6:39
Why should I say "I have a sister" even if I have only one sister? There is no other sisters of mine.
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-31 16:50
>>203
But there are many sisters in the world. The initial frame of reference is everything, and there can be any numbers of sisters in the world. You are specifying just one.
This is no different from saying "there is an alligator in the backyard" or "I have a car that I got from my grandmother".
Name:
Anonymous2013-12-31 19:49
>>201
Cost effective is the saying.
Just to add to what >>202 said,
Effective simply means the ability to do something. Effective does not imply anything about how money, time, our any other resource is used. This is where efficient confess in. Efficient is when something is done while using resources to the best of their abilities, no waste or as little waste as possible. Usually when something is termed efficient they are implying that it is effective also, but tools/processes can be efficient but not effective. For example, a person may be very efficient at washing windows and they can wash all of the windows on a building the best and the fastest, but if their job is doing taxes, they are not very effective.
>>203
I don't understand your question. If someone asks you if you have any siblings, and you have a sister, you would reply: "yes, I have a sister"
"Some workmen went to *the* church to repair the roof."
It's a sentence from the textbook I'm reading.
Does it mean that there are no other churches that are in need of repair (e.g. in workmen's city)?
Would it be a mistake to say "Some workmen went to *a* church to repair the roof" if there are two or more churches that are in need of repair (e.g. in workmen's city)?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-01 15:15
>>207
When speaking or writing as though speaking, it's common to omit articles. "Sorry, typo" is acceptable, for example. You could just as easily say "Sorry, that was a typo", but it's not necessary.
>>208
It sounds like the church has been mentioned before, and there is a specific church.
For example,
"In a town there were many churches. One of the churches had a leaky roof. Some workmen went to the church to repair the roof, but they found it was impossible to repair without materials from the neighboring town 3 miles away."
This is fine. In this case, we cannot change the "a" before "leaky roof" (because we are specifying the roof) and we also cannot change the "the" before "roof" or "church"(because we have already specified the roof and the church and it makes no sense to speak generally).
Now, if you were setting up a story, like so:
"Some workmen went to a church to repair the roof. It had needed repair work for some time, so the pastor was very glad to finally get the work done."
It makes more sense to use "a" before "church" because we are establishing the scene. We cannot use "the" before "church" unless there is only one church we could possibly be talking about. Perhaps the people in this town know there is only one church, in which case this makes sense. Otherwise, it sounds strange.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-01 23:11
>>207
Yes that would work. I could have said "sorry, that was a typo, what I meant to say was..." But when writing informally, especially in an internet discussion, we usually write in very shortened shorthand. As long as the post gets the point across, it's fine.
>>208
Read up on the usage of articles in English.
Using "the" would be a refer to a specific church. Either it is the only church in town, or the church had been mentioned before.
Using "a" is nonspecific. We wouldn't know which church they were working on.
Neither is correct or incorrect, they just mean different things.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 1:09
>>209 It makes more sense to use "a" before "church" because we are establishing the scene. We cannot use "the" before "church" unless there is only one church we could possibly be talking about. Perhaps the people in this town know there is only one church, in which case this makes sense. Otherwise, it sounds strange.
Thank you. BTW, why do you (native English speakers) say "the cinema" even if you don't mean a specific cinema?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 2:08
>>210 Either it is the only church in town, or the church had been mentioned before.
Yes, but it seems that we can shorten this to "there is only one of something". For example, "I joined a group of warriors. The group of warriors was very brave". The "a" in the first sentence means that there wasn't only one group of warriors. The second sentence (methinks) is just a shortened form of "The group of warriors that I joined was very brave". There is only one "group of warriors that I joined", so we must use "the".
Am I not right?
"In a town there were many churches. One of the churches had a leaky roof. Some workmen went to the church to repair the roof, but they found it was impossible to repair without materials from the neighboring town 3 miles away."
It's also a shortened form of "In a town there were many churches. One of the churches I mentioned before had a leaky roof. Some workmen went to the church I mentioned before to repair the roof I mentioned before, but they found it was impossible to repair without materials from the neighboring town of the town I mentioned before 3 miles away."
There are many towns, so we use "a".
There is only one group of "churches I mentioned before", so we use "the".
There are many leaky roofs in the world, so we use "a".
There is only one "church I mentioned before", so we use "the".
There is only one "roof I mentioned before", so we use "the".
There is only one "neighboring town of the town I mentioned before", so we use "the".
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 3:00
just wondering the word theater and theatre
I don't know what the different in using with that words.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 4:31
>>211 >>212
It is a reference to a specific cinema though, it is the one we went to to watch the film.
You don't really understand the use of the definite article. When you say "there is only one of something" what this means is that there is only one noun, in this case only one group of warriors. Really there are more than one though, so you used the qualifier "that I joined," this takes you from one of the many groups to your group. You are specifying which group was very brave: the group you joined. In the first version of the story you don't say "that I joined" but since you used "the," we know you are taking about a specific group, the only group you had talked about to that point was the one you joined, so we can infer you are implying that is the group that is brave.
"Is John Somebody in one of the groups of warriors you know?"--here I am asking out of all of the groups you know, is this one guy in any of them. I am not taking about one thing, but a specific set of things.
I know of a group of warriors--I know of a random group of warriors, and I don't know if this is the same group that you know of or not, and it doesn't matter.
I know of the group of warriors--we are taking about a specific group now. Maybe it is one you were taking about, "do you know about the brave warriors from /lang/?"
An explanation of the church story:
Let's talk about town X. In town X there is more than one church. One (only one) of the churches in town X has a leaky roof. Some workmen from town X decide to fix the roof of the leaky church. These workmen find that they do not have the correct materials in town X to fix the church's leaky roof. So the workmen from town X travel to town Y which is three miles away from town X to get the materials they need to fix the roof of the church in town X.
Fixing of your three comments at the end:
We are taking about a random town that we just found out about so we use "a"
We are taking about the specific church that has a lealy roof so we use "the"
We are taking about the specific town the workmen went to to get materials so we use "the"
I hope this clarified things >>213
Theater and theatre are the same thing. Just like liter and litre. They are just spelling differences between regions. Like color and colour, realize and realise etc. They mean the same thing and everyone still understands what you are taking about.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 4:44
>>212
>There are many towns, so we use "a".
we use a because we are just introducing this town.
>There is only one group of "churches I mentioned before", so we use "the".
We use the because we are referencing churches in the town.
>There are many leaky roofs in the world, so we use "a".
Yes, anything can have a leaky roof
>There is only one "church I mentioned before", so we use "the".
We use the because we are taking about the specific church you mentioned before.
>There is only one "roof I mentioned before", so we use "the".
We use the because we are talking about the specific leaky roof we are trying to fix so we use the.
>There is only one "neighboring town of the town I mentioned before", so we use "the".
We use the because we are taking about the specific town the workers went to.
The point is, there may be more than one of something, but we are taking about a specific one of those things.
Ok. Two cases.
1) I'm in a room and talking to a friend on the phone. The friend don't know that there's only one chair in the room. I want to start a conversation saying "I'm going to sit on (a/the) chair". What article should I use?
2) I'm in a room with my friend and he sees and knows that there's only one chair in the room. I want to start a conversation saying "I'm going to sit on (a/the) chair". What article should I use?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 6:50
The friend don't know
doesn't
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 7:13
>>214 It is a reference to a specific cinema though, it is the one we went to to watch the film.
I asked because http://i.imgur.com/V7jxJgu.png
I understand that it's just an exception, but I thought maybe there's explanation.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 14:35
>>217
What do you think you should use? Here is my opinion:
1) most likely "a chair," you are emphasizing that you are going to sit down rather than emphasizing that you are sitting in a special chair
2) probably "the chair." Here you are emphasizing that you are going to sit in the only chair.
>>219
It is useful to realize and to think about the fact that the definite articles and the indefinite articles mean different things.
I haven't been to a cinema in a while
vs
I haven't been to the cinema in a while
Each of these is grammatically correct, and each are used, but they mean different things. The first implies I haven't been to any cinema anywhere in a long time. The second implies we either use the same cinema, or we are talking about the one nearby. The never refers to something random, I may not be talking specifically about, say the NCG cinema in Grand Blanc, but I am talking about a certain one.
These sentences aren't as common as someone saying "I haven't gone to see a movie in a while" "I haven't gone to the theater in a while"
We (here, at least) don't really use the word cinema too often, we call them movie theaters are simply theaters. People don't watch too many plays here so there is no confusion as to what they mean.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 15:00
>>220
They're using the word "cinema" in the meaning of "movies". It's not common in American English but it's used elsewhere. It's not referring to a specific theater, but rather the idea of movies as a whole. This is no different from saying "I haven't been to the movies in a while". There is no need for us to be talking about a specific theater.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-02 16:36
>>221
So saying "I'm going to watch a cinema" makes sense? I always thought of cinema as either a theater or the film industry
http://rghost.net/51409224
The first guy said "How many more miles till they come, Gilbert?"
But his "how many" sounds like "howny". Do you really pronounce "how many" like that?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-04 19:32
Do you speak English?
Yes.
Are you fluent?
Yes.
What resources did you use to learn?
The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind
Unix man pages
Lost (seasons 1 through 4)
A couple of old radio shows about history and politics
>>224
On occasion, yes, but it's rather dialectal or slangish. Nonetheless, I think this particular pronunciation is exclusive to the portrayal of the character, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, as having a mental illness which effects his speech (among other things).
The clip is from the movie "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" by the bye.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-06 13:06
>>224 >>226
It's most likely because he's retarded, but it can sound like that some places
Greeting!
While watching Jigoku Shoujo I heard the protagonist girl say - "...However, you will have to deliver your end of the bargain" - in the 1st episode. In all the following episodes she was saying that same phrase with ON-preposition before "your" like "deliver ON your end of the bargain.
So I was wondering if both those variants are OK and grammatically correct? Google says both of them actually take place in speech. What do you think, anon?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-08 20:09
>>229
They do. Both are, though I would say "deliver on" is more natural. "Deliver your end of the bargain" has the connotation that you might actually be physically delivering something, where "Deliver on your end of the bargain" only means to uphold or ensure your commitment.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-09 1:30
>>230
Thanks so much! This one commends you for your helpfulness.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-10 7:36
"He stuck around till around dinnertime, talking about all the guys at Pencey that he hated their guts, and squeezing **this** big pimple on his chin."
Why's there 'this' instead of 'that'. I don't understand and am asking because it isn't narrator's pimple and it isn't near him.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-10 13:32
>>232
Casual dialect. The "correct" thing to write would be "squeezing A big pimple on his chin", but sometimes you will come across people using "this" (for something the listener is not expected to be familiar with) or "that" (for something the listener is expected to be familiar with) instead of "a".
"He was carrying this book around, you see" - He was carrying around a book, but the listener is not expected to be familiar with it
"He was carrying that book around, you see" - He was carrying around a book, and the listener is expected to be familiar with what book the speaker is talking about.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-12 0:36
I want to say "They tend to write stories about the battles that are very boring" where I mean that the stories are boring, not the battles. But how can I say it without misunderstanding?
Also is it right to make relative clauses this way? I mean constructions like "<object1> ... <object2> that <a clause in which the subject is object1>"?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-12 0:41
>>234
You could put "boring" right before battles. That would work fine. The sentence you wrote there seems fine, though, but it depends on what the readers' expectation is.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-12 1:18
>>235
>You could put "boring" right before battles.
Maybe you meant before 'stories'?
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-12 4:47
>>234
Grammatically accurate, but ambiguous. You'd be better off saying something like
"Their stories about battles tend to be very boring." Here there is no doubt that the stories, and not the battles, are boring.
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-12 5:01
>>236
Yes, whoops. "They tend to write boring stories about the battles".
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-12 19:52
>>189
What about 'she or he'? Is it plural or singular?
Especially recently, however, people just use "was".
Name:
Anonymous2014-01-13 0:23
>>239
first person singular: I
second person singular: you
third person singular: he/she/it
first person plural: we
second person plural: all of you or you guys or y'all/you all. basically multiple "yous"
third person plural: they
good site on conjugation: http://www.verbix.com/
tells you the different tenses/moods and what word to use in each case. you should also find a source to help you determine when to use each tense.
the previous question you had: either something or you (have or has) turned off Javascript. the correct word is have.
>>240 >>241
more people use was because grammar is taught less in school now. the key here is that the sentence is that this is a hypothetical case: if he was going to a parade he would look like he looks now
Name:
Anonymous2014-03-24 1:27
>>56
probably the words are 精氣神
Each of words means their own material for man's energetic life in Chinese medicine in or traditional concept of qigong
精 is a substance that composes a human body, related to adjusting man's growth, maturity, aging
氣 is a energy, that circulates through the body, is derived from food and air
神 is a state how 精 and 氣 mutually work. In a broad sense it represents man's health. In a narrow sense it means consciousness or thoughts which control 精 and 氣
Name:
Anonymous2014-03-24 2:15
I'm a bit of an expert considering it's my first and only language.
Name:
Anonymous2014-03-24 6:39
>>1
>Do you speak English?
Yes, I do, like every civilised person on this planet.
>Are you fluent?
Yes, I am, like every civilised person on this planet.
>What resources did you use to learn?
English was taught in school, like it is in every civilised country on the planet.
Beyond that, English is everywhere on TV, on the Internet and in business of all sorts.
>Can you give some examples in this thread?
No. If you don't read, write and speak English, you are a pleb.
English was my 4th language. If you're monolingual in general, you are uncivilised and barbaric -- especially if your one and only language isn't English.
Name:
Anonymous2014-03-25 13:26
>>245
>doesn't speak Greek, Latin and Mandarin
>civilised
>>253
Yeah, so what you dumb retard. I said people who ONLY speak in english. I'm not one of those.
Name:
Anonymous2014-04-01 16:52
>>255
You are in a foreign language board, where you can comunicate in any language, you only do it in ENGLISH.
>> I complain about how everyone speak only English
>> I only writte and comunicate with everyone in ENGLISH
tell me who is the retard here.
Name:
Anonymous2014-04-01 19:13
This thread is not doing a good job of convincing me that smart people speak English.