In Wonderland
Retired Staff
MOTM May '16; MOTM Sep '16; MOTM Nov '17
... all things come to an end
Join Date: Mar 13, 2015 20:00:11 GMT
Posts: 6,005
Likes: 9,368
Last Online: Nov 18, 2018 8:51:56 GMT
|
Post by In Wonderland on Jul 5, 2015 13:52:33 GMT
I would call it a "fake fjord", but it looks more like a river to me Hahaha, OK. I take "fake fjord" from you, though Geologically it's the same process that formed fjords (to a little more domestic scale) because they also come from former glaciers, but most of them happen to be the mouth of rivers too. Anyways, thank you for the information, I was curious to know what a full-breed Scandinavian would think of them You shouldn't take my words to seriously.. i got a C on this in school
|
|
Silent Soul
Member
Join Date: Mar 14, 2015 23:17:51 GMT
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 505
Last Online: Sept 15, 2023 12:27:43 GMT
|
Post by Silent Soul on Jul 7, 2015 15:09:04 GMT
I have to ask you something. You are british right? Is it true that in speaking english, it doesn't make a difference if you say "I will" or "I'm going to"?? My english teacher said that all the teachers in school torture you with the grammatical difference between "i will" and "i'm going to" but when you go to e.g. GB and you speak with somebody, they say bought, even though it isn't right grammaticaly. Is that true? I hope you will understand that. It's very hard to explain
|
|
sam
Administrator
MOTM October '18
i'll follow you wherever you lead
Join Date: Mar 11, 2015 22:19:26 GMT
Posts: 3,898
Likes: 7,256
Location: United Kingdom
Last Online: Aug 19, 2017 18:26:59 GMT
|
Post by sam on Jul 7, 2015 15:43:15 GMT
I have to ask you something. You are british right? Is it true that in speaking english, it doesn't make a difference if you say "I will" or "I'm going to"?? My english teacher said that all the teachers in school torture you with the grammatical difference between "i will" and "i'm going to" but when you go to e.g. GB and you speak with somebody, they say bought, even though it isn't right grammaticaly. Is that true? I hope you will understand that. It's very hard to explain Hey yeah I am To answer your question, I'm going is to say something that is planned or arranged, like I'm going to Bournemouth in the summer I will is something that you haven't planned yet and will do it in the future. People use these pretty much interchangeably though as they are so similar So dont worry too much about them and to be honest as they're so similar I'm not even sure if I can tell much of a difference (or even a difference at all! The above meanings are just what I think of it) the brought and bought thing is something that happens to me often but if you're buying something the correct way to say it would be bought
|
|
BogoGog24
Administrator
I'm off again in my world...
Join Date: Mar 14, 2015 12:38:58 GMT
Posts: 14,801
Likes: 39,273
Last Online: May 15, 2024 2:18:21 GMT
|
Post by BogoGog24 on Jul 7, 2015 17:37:42 GMT
I think it depends on context. Because if someone asked you what you're doing today you would not typically say "I will go to the movies," you would say "I'm going to go to the movies." But if someone said "Are you coming to the movies with us, or are you going shopping?" you could answer "I will go to the movies."
Bought and brought are 2 entirely different words. "Bought" is the past tense of buy. "I bought Avril's new CD at Target today." Brought is the past tense of bring. "I brought Avril's new CD to the party last night."
|
|
thyarchery
Member
MOTM July '17
Join Date: Mar 18, 2015 9:27:12 GMT
Posts: 961
Likes: 1,677
Last Online: Sept 19, 2018 14:00:40 GMT
|
Post by thyarchery on Jul 8, 2015 19:05:39 GMT
BogoGog24 sam, I think @silent Soul had a typing mistake and wrote "bought" instead of "both" which, I think, was his original intention.
|
|
BogoGog24
Administrator
I'm off again in my world...
Join Date: Mar 14, 2015 12:38:58 GMT
Posts: 14,801
Likes: 39,273
Last Online: May 15, 2024 2:18:21 GMT
|
Post by BogoGog24 on Jul 8, 2015 20:19:31 GMT
BogoGog24 sam, I think @silent Soul had a typing mistake and wrote "bought" instead of "both" which, I think, was his original intention. I thought the same thing but since Blizz responded to it, I thought I might as well chime in. In any case, sometimes I still see people in this forum mix those words up.
|
|
thyarchery
Member
MOTM July '17
Join Date: Mar 18, 2015 9:27:12 GMT
Posts: 961
Likes: 1,677
Last Online: Sept 19, 2018 14:00:40 GMT
|
Post by thyarchery on Jul 8, 2015 22:16:15 GMT
Now we are in grammar class mode, I have a question: is there any difference between learnt/learned and burnt/burned? Are they used for different things or they are just two accepted forms of writing the past/participle of their verbs?
|
|
Dillon
Retired Staff
MOTM Sept '15; SOTY '15 Winner; BA Donator
"He's probably a circus freak!"
Join Date: Mar 13, 2015 20:08:37 GMT
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 2,273
Location: United States
Last Online: May 14, 2024 23:58:19 GMT
|
Post by Dillon on Jul 8, 2015 22:47:54 GMT
Now we are in grammar class mode, I have a question: is there any difference between learnt/learned and burnt/burned? Are they used for different things or they are just two accepted forms of writing the past/participle of their verbs? Burned is the past tense of the infinitive "to burn;" basically it's a verb. Burnt is a past participle (an adjective made from a verb); basically it's an adjective. Examples: I am going to burn this piece of paper. Verb. Present Tense. I burned this piece of paper. Verb. Past Tense. This piece of paper is now burnt. Adjective. Past Participle. The same goes for learned and learnt. Except in the US, learnt is almost never used. But actually (and this goes for burned/burnt as well) learned and learnt can both be acceptable uses as past tense verbs and can both be acceptable uses as past participles. The form that you are most likely to see depends on the source. American almost always use burned burnt interchangeably, but almost never use learnt and only use learned. I think Brits more commonly use burnt and learnt; just like how Brits put U's in words like colour, while Americans would not put in a U. Long story short, yes, they are both two accepted forms of writing as past and participles of their verbs.
|
|
Uncle Bob
Administrator
Retired admin at avrillavigne.com
I hope someday to be the man my dog thinks I am.
Join Date: Mar 13, 2015 23:28:50 GMT
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 5,845
Last Online: May 14, 2024 9:29:07 GMT
|
Post by Uncle Bob on Jul 8, 2015 23:42:25 GMT
Now we are in grammar class mode, I have a question: is there any difference between learnt/learned and burnt/burned? Are they used for different things or they are just two accepted forms of writing the past/participle of their verbs? Burned is the past tense of the infinitive "to burn;" basically it's a verb. Burnt is a past participle (an adjective made from a verb); basically it's an adjective. Examples: I am going to burn this piece of paper. Verb. Present Tense. I burned this piece of paper. Verb. Past Tense. This piece of paper is now burnt. Adjective. Past Participle. The same goes for learned and learnt. Except in the US, learnt is almost never used. But actually (and this goes for burned/burnt as well) learned and learnt can both be acceptable uses as past tense verbs and can both be acceptable uses as past participles. The form that you are most likely to see depends on the source. American almost always use burned burnt interchangeably, but almost never use learnt and only use learned. I think Brits more commonly use burnt and learnt; just like how Brits put U's in words like colour, while Americans would not put in a U. Long story short, yes, they are both two accepted forms of writing as past and participles of their verbs. Good answer. In the us, learnt is generally considered to be bad grammar, though technically, it's not. It will be flagged by spell check. Best to always use learned. I will also point out learned can also be a two syllable adjective. As in, Stephen Hawkins is a learned scholar.
|
|
thyarchery
Member
MOTM July '17
Join Date: Mar 18, 2015 9:27:12 GMT
Posts: 961
Likes: 1,677
Last Online: Sept 19, 2018 14:00:40 GMT
|
Post by thyarchery on Jul 9, 2015 18:30:06 GMT
Burned is the past tense of the infinitive "to burn;" basically it's a verb. Burnt is a past participle (an adjective made from a verb); basically it's an adjective. Examples: I am going to burn this piece of paper. Verb. Present Tense. I burned this piece of paper. Verb. Past Tense. This piece of paper is now burnt. Adjective. Past Participle. The same goes for learned and learnt. Except in the US, learnt is almost never used. But actually (and this goes for burned/burnt as well) learned and learnt can both be acceptable uses as past tense verbs and can both be acceptable uses as past participles. The form that you are most likely to see depends on the source. American almost always use burned burnt interchangeably, but almost never use learnt and only use learned. I think Brits more commonly use burnt and learnt; just like how Brits put U's in words like colour, while Americans would not put in a U. Long story short, yes, they are both two accepted forms of writing as past and participles of their verbs. Good answer. In the us, learnt is generally considered to be bad grammar, though technically, it's not. It will be flagged by spell check. Best to always use learned. I will also point out learned can also be a two syllable adjective. As in, Stephen Hawkins is a learned scholar. Lol, never wondered it was an American English/ British English thing. At school our English textbooks had verbs charts that went like "present: learn; past: learnt; past participle: learnt" and same for burn. Now I realize that all the books were from British publishers. That's were I was going to, Uncle Bob. You can use "learned" as an adjective, but not "learnt", can you? As in Stephen Hawkins is a learnt scholar.
|
|
Uncle Bob
Administrator
Retired admin at avrillavigne.com
I hope someday to be the man my dog thinks I am.
Join Date: Mar 13, 2015 23:28:50 GMT
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 5,845
Last Online: May 14, 2024 9:29:07 GMT
|
Post by Uncle Bob on Jul 9, 2015 21:15:02 GMT
Lol, never wondered it was an American English/ British English thing. At school our English textbooks had verbs charts that went like "present: learn; past: learnt; past participle: learnt" and same for burn. Now I realize that all the books were from British publishers. That's were I was going to, Uncle Bob. You can use "learned" as an adjective, but not "learnt", can you? As in Stephen Hawkins is a learnt scholar. Correct. Not even in the UK, is Stephen Hawkins a learnt scholar. By the way, I was thinking of Stephen Hawkin g. There may be a very well educated Stephen Hawkin s someplace but, nobody has ever heard about him.
|
|
thyarchery
Member
MOTM July '17
Join Date: Mar 18, 2015 9:27:12 GMT
Posts: 961
Likes: 1,677
Last Online: Sept 19, 2018 14:00:40 GMT
|
Post by thyarchery on Jul 9, 2015 21:33:56 GMT
Lol, never wondered it was an American English/ British English thing. At school our English textbooks had verbs charts that went like "present: learn; past: learnt; past participle: learnt" and same for burn. Now I realize that all the books were from British publishers. That's were I was going to, Uncle Bob. You can use "learned" as an adjective, but not "learnt", can you? As in Stephen Hawkins is a learnt scholar. Correct. Not even in the UK, is Stephen Hawkins a learnt scholar. By the way, I was thinking of Stephen Hawkin g. There may be a very well educated Stephen Hawkin s someplace but, nobody has ever heard about him. Lol, the fact I just copied the sentence without even caring about the surname being spelt right or not as I ask about what's the right spelling for "learnt/learned"
|
|
Uncle Bob
Administrator
Retired admin at avrillavigne.com
I hope someday to be the man my dog thinks I am.
Join Date: Mar 13, 2015 23:28:50 GMT
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 5,845
Last Online: May 14, 2024 9:29:07 GMT
|
Post by Uncle Bob on Jul 9, 2015 22:11:14 GMT
Correct. Not even in the UK, is Stephen Hawkins a learnt scholar. By the way, I was thinking of Stephen Hawkin g. There may be a very well educated Stephen Hawkin s someplace but, nobody has ever heard about him. Lol, the fact I just copied the sentence without even caring about the surname being spelt right or not as I ask about what's the right spelling for "learnt/learned" Since you brought it up, spelt is another word that is not generally used in the US. Again, technically it is not wrong. Anyone that uses it it thought to be inarticulate.
|
|
thyarchery
Member
MOTM July '17
Join Date: Mar 18, 2015 9:27:12 GMT
Posts: 961
Likes: 1,677
Last Online: Sept 19, 2018 14:00:40 GMT
|
Post by thyarchery on Jul 9, 2015 22:46:22 GMT
Lol, the fact I just copied the sentence without even caring about the surname being spelt right or not as I ask about what's the right spelling for "learnt/learned" Since you brought it up, spelt is another word that is not generally used in the US. Again, technically it is not wrong. Anyone that uses it it thought to be inarticulate. Believe it or not, I studied all those verbs as irregular at school...any Brit over here can tell me if they're used that way in Britain?
|
|
sam
Administrator
MOTM October '18
i'll follow you wherever you lead
Join Date: Mar 11, 2015 22:19:26 GMT
Posts: 3,898
Likes: 7,256
Location: United Kingdom
Last Online: Aug 19, 2017 18:26:59 GMT
|
Post by sam on Jul 9, 2015 23:49:41 GMT
Since you brought it up, spelt is another word that is not generally used in the US. Again, technically it is not wrong. Anyone that uses it it thought to be inarticulate. Believe it or not, I studied all those verbs as irregular at school...any Brit over here can tell me if they're used that way in Britain? Yep. I use spelt all the time, and so do people I know.
|
|