Engleski kutak: Improve your English — Chat II (English only)

[inflame]

It's correct. I just checked in the dictionary.
Didn't say it wasn't. Just said that I don't hear that very often.

I'm not native speaker; you should probably trust native speakers above anyone else.

[forst]

I mentioned that a have new idea about improving our English skills.

These days I have been thinking how we can be more involved into English language.
I heard a lot of times before that someone need to surround him/herself with English if he or she wants to be better English speaker.

Many times I tried to persuade my friends and colleagues to speak with me in English, and guess what I speak with only two guys, my brother and one of my friends. People usually say that they are shy, they are embarrassed to talk in English or that they don't have interest for that (in Croatian they say "Ne da mi se, nemam volje " ).

When I am in front of my laptop I don't need any additional sources for learning English, but when I drive a car, when I wait for a train, or when I walk I cannot type, I cannot send textual messages, so I found it very handy to use that "unusable" times to send voice messages.

This way of learning you can adapt to your pace, to your free time, because voice messages are not real-time communication so you don't need to allocate specific time for talking with someone. When you have a time you listen to and answer to messages, when I have a time I listen to and send messages.

So idea is to create skype groups. We can join to groups and talk with each others. This thread should be a base, skype groups should be just an additional source of learning.

I think we can benefit a lot from voice messages (voice communication). We all can easily use forums and similar mediums for typing in English but I think we don't have a lot of opportunities to really speak, to use our mouth for conversation.
EDIT: If you don't want to use voice messages, you can use just textual messages, no problem.

With only a few members, 5 or 6 of them per group we can have good surrounding with English language.

I think this idea is great. What do you think about this?

If you think this could be very great way of learning please send me a PM so I can join you to one of these skype groups:
1. IYEIEP! Linux
2. IYEIEP! Politics
3. IYEIEP! Health

@linuks
thank you for correcting me, and I think you will join to the 1. IYEIEP! Linux group .

PS. Do you know what IYEIEP! means?

[Dilberth]

forst kaže:

I really don't know if this is correct but I'm for sure that I asked American English native speaker how I should say when I want to express "da se upravo vozim kući s posla" -yes I used Croatian because that native English speaker can understand a lot of Croatian, and she anwered with "commute", though not sure if she used "I commute" or "I'm commuting"

Point is that the Americans in conversation rarely associate commuting with driving or riding a car. You commute on train, people riding on train every day to work are the "commuters". People you see in the cars on the expressway going to work in the morning are drivers or riders.

Could it be that you left out more in your question? Perhaps you just said, "da se upravo vozim kući s posla", without making any reference how? Don't forget your American friend doesn't speak perfect Croation. In Croatian there is only one verb "voziti". Ti voziš (drive) auto, ti se voziš (ride) u autu, ti se voziš (commute) u vlaku na posao, ti se voziš (ride) u vlaku nekud u posjetu, ti voziš (ride) bicikl, itd.
Just like the Eskimos and the snow.

P.S.
Don't mess with your laptop while driving the car!

[forst]

Dilberth kaže:

Point is that the Americans in conversation rarely associate commuting with driving or riding a car. You commute on train, people riding on train every day to work are the "commuters". People you see in the cars on the expressway going to work in the morning are drivers or riders.

Could it be that you left out more in your question? Perhaps you just said, "da se upravo vozim kući s posla", without making any reference how? Don't forget your American friend doesn't speak perfect Croation. In Croatian there is only one verb "voziti". Ti voziš (drive) auto, ti se voziš (ride) u autu, ti se voziš (commute) u vlaku na posao, ti se voziš (ride) u vlaku nekud u posjetu, ti voziš (ride) bicikl, itd.
Just like the Eskimos and the snow.

P.S.
Don't mess with your laptop while driving the car!

I think that I asked for situations when I drive a car, but cannot say for sure -it was long ago.

Dilberth, with your good explanation you are the one who opened a can of worms now , you will not be able to get away from my questions. Just kidding, I have one question only.
How can I say "Vozim svoga sina kući." I cannot say "I drive my son home", right? I can say "I drive a car", but I suppose that is not correct to say "I drive my son"?
Or "Povesti ću te na posao (misli se na prevoženje kolege s vlastitim autom) in English?
I know I can say "I can take you with me", but... What would native English speaker say for:
"Vozim svoga sina kući" and
"Povesti ću te na posao".
In both sentences I mean on a car driver taking someone in his car.

I'm not sure if you are a serious regarding me using laptop in my car.
Maybe you think that I use my laptop while I drive, no I don't do it (but I need to admit I did it one or two times ).
I use my smartphone, I put it in front of me, just above the wheel.
I have the good focus on everything what happens in front of my car.
And I just need to shortly press a button to start recording and in the same way shortly for stopping the recording.
It is like someone using navigation in his car. Do you agree?

[Dilberth]

forst kaže:

I think that I asked for situations when I drive a car, but cannot say for sure -it was long ago.

Dilberth, with your good explanation you are the one who opened a can of worms now , you will not be able to get away from my questions. Just kidding, I have one question only.
How can I say "Vozim svoga sina kući." I cannot say "I drive my son home", right? I can say "I drive a car", but I suppose that is not correct to say "I drive my son"?
Or "Povesti ću te na posao (misli se na prevoženje kolege s vlastitim autom) in English?
I know I can say "I can take you with me", but... What would native English speaker say for:
"Vozim svoga sina kući" and
"Povesti ću te na posao".
In both sentences I mean on a car driver taking someone in his car.

I'm not sure if you are a serious regarding me using laptop in my car.
Maybe you think that I use my laptop while I drive, no I don't do it (but I need to admit I did it one or two times ).
I use my smartphone, I put it in front of me, just above the wheel.
I have the good focus on everything what happens in front of my car.
And I just need to shortly press a button to start recording and in the same way shortly for stopping the recording.
It is like someone using navigation in his car. Do you agree?

Perhaps this will be easiest way to explain. If you are telling someone, you are routinely driving your son home every day, you can say, I drive my son home very day, but if you are doing it today only, you are driving your son home today. Driving the son vs driving a car maybe confusing but it shouldn't be. In Croatian we say the same thing, vozim sina i vozim auto.
You can tell your friend, I'll drive you to work, I'll take you to work, I'll give you a ride to work, either way is OK.

Smart phone GPS is great for travel or just getting around the town. Not sure about smart phone as a partner in conversation.

[forst]

Dilberth kaže:

Perhaps this will be easiest way to explain. If you are telling someone, you are routinely driving your son home every day, you can say, I drive my son home very day, but if you are doing it today only, you are driving your son home today. Driving the son vs driving a car maybe confusing but it shouldn't be. In Croatian we say the same thing, vozim sina i vozim auto.
You can tell your friend, I'll drive you to work, I'll take you to work, I'll give you a ride to work, either way is OK.

Smart phone GPS is great for travel or just getting around the town. Not sure about smart phone as a partner in conversation.

I hope you are not police officer and you will not recognize me somewhere on the road.

thanks for explanation.

[Rakkatakka]

Dilberth kaže:

Point is that the Americans in conversation rarely associate commuting with driving or riding a car. You commute on train, people riding on train every day to work are the "commuters". People you see in the cars on the expressway going to work in the morning are drivers or riders.

This isn't really true. First of all, most Americans use personal vehicles (cars) and do not usually travel to work via train. Their trains are in terrible shape. Secondly, commuting is the name of the act of travelling to a place different from the place you live in a daily basis, usually because of work.

It is true that you wouldn't exchange the verb to drive in "I'm driving home" with commuting, and the OP probably mixed up the information he heard from a native speaker, but it's not true that people who drive cars are not commuters. Commuters doesn't imply a specific vehicle, but rather the act of travelling for work every day. Similarly, even someone who travels every day from say, Velika Gorica to Zagreb is a commuter, no matter if by bus, by train or by car.

[Dilberth]

Rakkatakka kaže:

This isn't really true. First of all, most Americans use personal vehicles (cars) and do not usually travel to work via train. Their trains are in terrible shape. Secondly, commuting is the name of the act of travelling to a place different from the place you live in a daily basis, usually because of work.

It is true that you wouldn't exchange the verb to drive in "I'm driving home" with commuting, and the OP probably mixed up the information he heard from a native speaker, but it's not true that people who drive cars are not commuters. Commuters doesn't imply a specific vehicle, but rather the act of travelling for work every day. Similarly, even someone who travels every day from say, Velika Gorica to Zagreb is a commuter, no matter if by bus, by train or by car.

That is true. Definition for traveling daily from home to work is commuting, that's true, but in general conversation, the word "commuters" is used for those traveling by train.

It's not true that "their trains are in terrible shape", all depends where, which city you are talking about. The commuter trains around Chicago for example, are doing great!

[Rakkatakka]

Dilberth kaže:

That is true. Definition for traveling daily from home to work is commuting, that's true, but in general conversation, the word "commuters" is used for those traveling by train.

Maybe in specific areas, but definitely not in English in general. Not sure what you mean by "general conversation".

NOUN
A person who travels some distance to work on a regular basis.
‘a fault on the line caused widespread delays for commuters’

source: Oxford Dictionary

Definition of commuter

1 : a person who commutes (as between a suburb and a city)
2 : a small airline that carries passengers relatively short distances on a regular schedule

source: Merriam Webster

Their trains are in pretty bad shape in general. In comparison to European trains such as those in Germany or France or even Asian ones (Japan), it's a very clear fact. Not many Americans travel by train, especially not long-distance (that's why they take planes everywhere; that's pretty developed). Trains are usually used for short distances between towns, but I feel like those are mostly local underground networks. Sorry if what I meant confused you.

Also, the west is very poorly connected since not many railroads were even built after the 1800s, when the Gold Rush used mainly trains for transportation in rural areas, which were mostly in the east. [photo]

Rail transportation in the United States consists primarily of freight shipments, while passenger service, once a large and vital part of the nation's passenger transportation network, plays a limited role as compared to transportation patterns in many other countries.

source: Wikipedia (for the sake of the argument)

[Dilberth]

Rakkatakka kaže:

Maybe in specific areas, but definitely not in English in general. Not sure what you mean by "general conversation".

NOUN
A person who travels some distance to work on a regular basis.
‘a fault on the line caused widespread delays for commuters’
source: Oxford Dictionary

Quote:
Definition of commuter

1 : a person who commutes (as between a suburb and a city)
2 : a small airline that carries passengers relatively short distances on a regular schedule.

In "specific area" like USA is that way, maybe some place else is different.
The examples you have posted say a "line". A line in this case means train line. There is no "commuter line" on the streets.

Rakkatakka kaže:

Their trains are in pretty bad shape in general. In comparison to European trains such as those in Germany or France or even Asian ones (Japan), it's a very clear fact. Not many Americans travel by train, especially not long-distance (that's why they take planes everywhere; that's pretty developed). Trains are usually used for short distances between towns, but I feel like those are mostly local underground networks. Sorry if what I meant confused you.

I'm not comparing apples with oranges. What shape the German or Japanese commuter trains are in, I have no idea and I don't care. The METRA Chicago comuter trains I'm familiar with and they are excellent!

Rakkatakka kaže:

Also, the west is very poorly connected since not many railroads were even built after the 1800s, when the Gold Rush used mainly trains for transportation in rural areas, which were mostly in the east. [photo]

source: Wikipedia (for the sake of the argument)

[Rakkatakka]

Dilberth kaže:

That's a very poor counterargument.

[Dilberth]

Rakkatakka kaže:

That's a very poor counterargument.

It wasn't meant to be an argument.

[forst]

forst kaže:

I mentioned that a have new idea about improving our English skills.

These days I have been thinking how we can be more involved into English language.
I heard a lot of times before that someone need to surround him/herself with English if he or she wants to be better English speaker.

Many times I tried to persuade my friends and colleagues to speak with me in English, and guess what I speak with only two guys, my brother and one of my friends. People usually say that they are shy, they are embarrassed to talk in English or that they don't have interest for that (in Croatian they say "Ne da mi se, nemam volje " ).

When I am in front of my laptop I don't need any additional sources for learning English, but when I drive a car, when I wait for a train, or when I walk I cannot type, I cannot send textual messages, so I found it very handy to use that "unusable" times to send voice messages.

This way of learning you can adapt to your pace, to your free time, because voice messages are not real-time communication so you don't need to allocate specific time for talking with someone. When you have a time you listen to and answer to messages, when I have a time I listen to and send messages.

So idea is to create skype groups. We can join to groups and talk with each others. This thread should be a base, skype groups should be just an additional source of learning.

I think we can benefit a lot from voice messages (voice communication). We all can easily use forums and similar mediums for typing in English but I think we don't have a lot of opportunities to really speak, to use our mouth for conversation.
EDIT: If you don't want to use voice messages, you can use just textual messages, no problem.

With only a few members, 5 or 6 of them per group we can have good surrounding with English language.

I think this idea is great. What do you think about this?

If you think this could be very great way of learning please send me a PM so I can join you to one of these skype groups:
1. IYEIEP! Linux
2. IYEIEP! Politics
3. IYEIEP! Health

@linuks
thank you for correcting me, and I think you will join to the 1. IYEIEP! Linux group .

PS. Do you know what IYEIEP! means?

No one wants to join me on skype and exchange voice or textual messages?

Ok I will add one more group. Maybe this one will be successful
4. IYEIEP! General

[Transcendent]

Dilberth kaže:

It wasn't meant to be an argument.

What was it meant to be? Please explain.

inflame kaže:

@ Transcendent

Do you ever feel like this

coz that sums it up pretty much.

Bethany's pronoun is "she", Emerson's "zie", Rabbit's ve/vem/vie, DX's is "they".


I feel exactly as Ian and when he said "But there is only one of him. Her. Them" that pretty much sums up my confusion.

Rakkatakka kaže:

They usually won't say that they have "no gender or sexuality", but that they identify as other. To be safe, in English the pronouns "they/them" are used to indicate neutral referral, as in the case of not knowing someone's gender – in this case, they are used as if singular. Otherwise, you can just ask the person.

I think it is best to ask the person, but how do you know "they" belong to LGBTQIA. It would be awkward to ask each person you meet that question.


Gender neutral singular pronauns:
hes, hiser, hem, ons, e, heer, he’er, hesh, se, heesh, herim, co, tey, per, na, en, herm, em, hir, and shey.


What about "thon" ? It's in the Merriam Webster dictionary.

So what have you learned today?

This sentence is all over the web for the reason that the letters "ough" is differently pronounced in nine different ways.

“A rough-coated, dough-faced, thoughtful ploughman strode through the streets of Scarborough; after falling into a slough, he coughed and hiccoughed.”

Who can work out how?

[Rakkatakka]

Transcendent kaže:

I think it is best to ask the person, but how do you know "they" belong to LGBTQIA. It would be awkward to ask each person you meet that question.

Obviously it's best to ask them. I would never ask everyone I meet, but in case someone does identify as another gender or something similar, they will probably just tell you if you're using the wrong pronouns. The point is not to misuse them once you know what they are. I don't think you should worry too much about it.

[antilles]

honestly, a load of b/shit.
glad, spaniards and french rejected it. goes to show there're still people who care. about their language, at least.

[Transcendent]

Rakkatakka kaže:

Obviously it's best to ask them. I would never ask everyone I meet, but in case someone does identify as another gender or something similar, they will probably just tell you if you're using the wrong pronouns. The point is not to misuse them once you know what they are. I don't think you should worry too much about it.

I guess you're right. This phenomenon of genders is still new and got more popular with the advance of feminism and grater women rights and protection laws.
I think society is changing for the better. But it'll have its consequences.
For example, a Christian teacher misgendered one of his students by saying "well done girls" and school took a disciplinary action against him. I think he was sacked.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-disciplinar/

Even though he said it was an honest mistake he lost the teaching job.

antilles kaže:

honestly, a load of b/shit.
glad, spaniards and french rejected it. goes to show there're still people who care. about their language, at least.

Do you know more about this rejection in terms of general layman information. What was their justification for rejecting the pronouns which may lead to restricting people rights to equality and gender self determination.

[Transcendent]

So what have you learned today?


The present continuous tense is used among other things to express actions in present and future time.

For example:
I am learning English now.
I am taking the English class at 1 o'clock tomorrow afternoon.


But how to use the PCT to describe events in the past or to link to events in the past?

[inflame]

isn't the answer to that simple? - you can't, u don't, u won't.

for events in past there is another time. Present Perfect Continuous

every time is used for something. only issue is to remember for what it's used.
this one is for ACTIONS THAT STARTED IN THE PAST AND CONTINUE IN THE PRESENT

[Transcendent]

inflame kaže:

isn't the answer to that simple? - you can't, u don't, u won't.

for events in past there is another time. Present Perfect Continuous

every time is used for something. only issue is to remember for what it's used.
this one is for ACTIONS THAT STARTED IN THE PAST AND CONTINUE IN THE PRESENT

The answer is simple if you strictly stick with the English grammar. But since we want to improve our English from basic to advanced features we can use anything to add to our knowledge.

For example, I have read that we can use the PCT to talk about the past. But no one gave an example how to do it. So the best I can come up with is something like this:

"Then years ago my boss called me into his office and said "You have work hard and I am increasing your wage by 15% ".

So in this case the PCT is used and it describes something that happened ten years ago.

Any other example of using the PCT to talk about the past?