mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Profile: georgew
User Name: georgew
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: Male
Joined: Saturday, August 13, 2016
Last Visit: Monday, September 21, 2020 11:30:45 PM
Number of Posts: 261
[0.03% of all post / 0.17 posts per day]
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: A sound
Posted: Monday, September 21, 2020 11:30:10 PM
Joe Kim wrote:
It is a pop getting out of a bottle sound.

Does this sound ok?

No. "It is a bottle-popping sound" or something similar would be more natural.

Topic: all of the pets
Posted: Monday, September 21, 2020 11:11:13 PM
azz wrote:
a. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets his housemate had, so he moved.
b. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets, so he moved.
c. Tom couldn't stand all the pets, so he moved.

Could these be used if Tom could stand all of the pets individually, but it was the fact that all of them were together that was unbearable for him? He liked each pet individually, but it was the combination that got on his nerves!

Many thanks.

"All of the pets" would most commonly be understood to mean all of them together. They lose individuality in this usage. "Each" would solve this problem.

Topic: piss off
Posted: Saturday, September 19, 2020 2:44:08 PM
As FD and thar have said we don’t use “I am pissed” to mean angry here.

Not so in AE. The expression commonly has that meaning in AE with or without "off".

Topic: "once in a blue moon" and "rarely"
Posted: Sunday, September 13, 2020 11:59:34 PM
raymondaliasapollyon wrote:
Is the following correct?

Rarely he works at night. (No inversion)

Yes, it's correct. More importantly, it's understandable and conveys a clear meaning.

Topic: Put in the work.
Posted: Saturday, September 12, 2020 9:15:24 PM
Ashraful Haque Ashraf wrote:
I've looked up 'put in the work' but all the results are about 'put in work' without the article. Is using 'the' wrong here?
I want to say the following:
"You will reach your dream if you put in the work."

The article is optional in your example.

Topic: Work in/at this school
Posted: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 11:42:23 AM
sb70012 wrote:
How about in American English?

Was Tautophile using a different language?

Topic: Met vs has met vs had met
Posted: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 11:31:17 AM
Indra Jit Rai wrote:
I am just confused which one is correct?

1-He ‘met’ me yesterday.

2-He ‘has met’ me yesterday.

3-He ‘had met’ me yesterday.

#1 is grammatically correct and common.

#3 is grammatically correct but uncommon.

#2 is not correct.

Topic: A film director who was raising funds
Posted: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 4:58:16 PM
Boris66 wrote:
Have I made any mistakes?

I suggest:

A film director who was raising funds for his new film had in the end decided to donate all the money to a charity as a gesture of solidarity with the people who had lost their jobs due to the coronavirus.
Topic: being
Posted: Sunday, September 6, 2020 1:15:13 AM
Jigneshbharati wrote:
Thanks. Why the past continuous is used and not the simple past in the original?

I think you meant "Why is the past continuous used and not the simple past in the original?"

If you're unable to properly structure a question in simple English, you're wasting your time asking such lofty esoteric grammar questions.

Topic: longer ago than
Posted: Saturday, August 29, 2020 11:40:46 PM
navi wrote:
1) It happened too long ago for me to remember.
2) It happened so long ago that I don't remember.
3) It happened longer ago than I remember.

What is the meaning of the sentences?

I see two possibilities:

a) I don't remember how long ago it happened.
b) I don't remember the event itself because it happened so long ago.


Your two interpretations are correct. However, #3 is grammatically awkward and should not be used IMHO.