I HAD to do it!
- Thread starter Kuato
- Start date
- Status
Hello, finmile,
Yes, your English is vastly better than the kind of stuff I see on a daily basis here in America. Your practice text read beautifully. One or two small matters:
1) "My English was first time in real use at university" I'd write "My English was in real use for the first time at [the] university." (I know that the British idiom is "at university," and if you prefer that, that's fine.)
2) "One more point about English I'd like to add is, that all computer programs are usually in English." I'd drop the comma after "is." See also No. 5.
3) "I understood that BITOG is a fun and useful place where I could practice also my English." I'd write "I could also practice my English."
4) ". . . the misspelling in all my previous posts in this thread were done . . ." If you want the plural verb "were," then the subject ought to be plural, "misspellings."
5) "I'm also prepared for the fact, that the word order . . ." No need for that comma after "fact."
Summing up, I'd say that only points 1 and 3 might suggest that the writer is not a native English speaker. You're doing extraordinarily well with a difficult language. (I've spoken and written English for decades, and I'm still learning fine distinctions.) Finnish is not a Germanic language or a Romance one; you've moved into a whole new world! Good work!
Yes, your English is vastly better than the kind of stuff I see on a daily basis here in America. Your practice text read beautifully. One or two small matters:
1) "My English was first time in real use at university" I'd write "My English was in real use for the first time at [the] university." (I know that the British idiom is "at university," and if you prefer that, that's fine.)
2) "One more point about English I'd like to add is, that all computer programs are usually in English." I'd drop the comma after "is." See also No. 5.
3) "I understood that BITOG is a fun and useful place where I could practice also my English." I'd write "I could also practice my English."
4) ". . . the misspelling in all my previous posts in this thread were done . . ." If you want the plural verb "were," then the subject ought to be plural, "misspellings."
5) "I'm also prepared for the fact, that the word order . . ." No need for that comma after "fact."
Summing up, I'd say that only points 1 and 3 might suggest that the writer is not a native English speaker. You're doing extraordinarily well with a difficult language. (I've spoken and written English for decades, and I'm still learning fine distinctions.) Finnish is not a Germanic language or a Romance one; you've moved into a whole new world! Good work!
Oh, and one more item: "And that's why I always target for the best possible English in my posts." I'd write "shoot for the best possible English." You could say "target the best possible English," but I believe "shoot for" sounds more idiomatic.
Of interest to finmile.
About 30 years ago, in the Canadian town where I used to live, the population was largly,and historically Finnish.
There was a sawmill in town, and the working language for that mill was Finnish!
I'm not sure how 'legal' it was, but apparently if you could not speak or understand Finnish. NO job for you!
I did not want to comment on this thread, as I am dyslexic.
For several years I was held back in remedial English classes
(with very little benefit) and as a result, not only is my spelling poor, but I missed out on learning grammer, and some of the neuances of the English language.
Having partners that have been native German and Danish hasn't helped either ;-)
About 30 years ago, in the Canadian town where I used to live, the population was largly,and historically Finnish.
There was a sawmill in town, and the working language for that mill was Finnish!
I'm not sure how 'legal' it was, but apparently if you could not speak or understand Finnish. NO job for you!
I did not want to comment on this thread, as I am dyslexic.
For several years I was held back in remedial English classes
(with very little benefit) and as a result, not only is my spelling poor, but I missed out on learning grammer, and some of the neuances of the English language.
Having partners that have been native German and Danish hasn't helped either ;-)
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Oh, and one more item: "And that's why I always target for the best possible English in my posts." I'd write "shoot for the best possible English." You could say "target the best possible English," but I believe "shoot for" sounds more idiomatic.
I also considered to use "aim for", but wasn't sure if it would be ok say so.
Oh, and one more item: "And that's why I always target for the best possible English in my posts." I'd write "shoot for the best possible English." You could say "target the best possible English," but I believe "shoot for" sounds more idiomatic.
I also considered to use "aim for", but wasn't sure if it would be ok say so.
Originally Posted By: finmile
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Oh, and one more item: "And that's why I always target for the best possible English in my posts." I'd write "shoot for the best possible English." You could say "target the best possible English," but I believe "shoot for" sounds more idiomatic.
I also considered to use "aim for", but wasn't sure if it would be ok say so.
Absolutely; that sounds great.
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Oh, and one more item: "And that's why I always target for the best possible English in my posts." I'd write "shoot for the best possible English." You could say "target the best possible English," but I believe "shoot for" sounds more idiomatic.
I also considered to use "aim for", but wasn't sure if it would be ok say so.
Absolutely; that sounds great.
Expat. I'm sure in North America you can find all possible nationalities. Also some Finns.
If I would have been the head of the sawmill, the job interview would have been as follows:
1) Get some booze
2) Go to sauna
3) Learn some Finnish swear words
4) Get some more booze
=> If we would still get along with each other the next day, the job would be yours
If I would have been the head of the sawmill, the job interview would have been as follows:
1) Get some booze
2) Go to sauna
3) Learn some Finnish swear words
4) Get some more booze
=> If we would still get along with each other the next day, the job would be yours
Thank you for your feedback Benzadmiral. I really appreciate it.
1) I was tempted to write “at the university”, but I was struggling with the following two dilemmas:
i) I didn’t mention any specific university, so I figured that I can’t write “at the university”
ii) The word university was mentioned for the first time. This indicated to me that “at a university” should have been used
But “at a university” didn’t sound right either, so I ended up writing just “at university” without an article (a/the) before the actual word.
I googled this problem a bit and found the following explanations. Seems that I was lucky to get it right...
- In the U.K. they would say, "at university."
- In the U.S. we would say, "at the university" if it is a specific university, or "at/in college" if we are not talking about a specific university.
http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/at-the-university-in-the-environment.248385/
2), 5) You caught me. I tried to play with the commas a little bit in the text and used rules that applies in Finnish. Apparently the rules for comma are not the same in English.
3) I think I could have caught this one if I would have slept overnight and read my text again with fresh eyes.
4) Yes, I get your point and it is obvious now as you pointed it out. But this seems to be a type of error I would easily do again.
All in all, not a bad result. Some inevitable mishaps here and there, but nothing catastrophic.
I’m grateful I had this opportunity to have my English reviewed. And the result is really encouraging. I guess this shows also how powerful tool internet really is. My practice text above wouldn't have been so good without an online dictionary and Google.
To be fair, I must say that my spoken English is not nearly as good as my written English. I have strong Finnish accent and the pronunciation is usually all over the place. But people always understand what I'm saying, and that's all that matters
At point 1) I used a British idiom by accident. Usually I mix the American English and non-American/British English without worries by choosing a word that sounds best to my ear.
Here are my preferences for some words:
- I think American English is better with: Truck, hood, trunk, liter, gasoline (vs. lorry, bonnet, boot, litre, petrol)
- I think non-American English is better with: Aluminium, colour, behaviour, brake disc (vs. aluminum, color, behavior, brake rotor)
- On par: Gearbox vs. transmission
- What I don't understand is: You have an internal combustion engine in your car. But still the oil you use in it is "motor oil", not "engine oil"...?
1) I was tempted to write “at the university”, but I was struggling with the following two dilemmas:
i) I didn’t mention any specific university, so I figured that I can’t write “at the university”
ii) The word university was mentioned for the first time. This indicated to me that “at a university” should have been used
But “at a university” didn’t sound right either, so I ended up writing just “at university” without an article (a/the) before the actual word.
I googled this problem a bit and found the following explanations. Seems that I was lucky to get it right...
- In the U.K. they would say, "at university."
- In the U.S. we would say, "at the university" if it is a specific university, or "at/in college" if we are not talking about a specific university.
http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/at-the-university-in-the-environment.248385/
2), 5) You caught me. I tried to play with the commas a little bit in the text and used rules that applies in Finnish. Apparently the rules for comma are not the same in English.
3) I think I could have caught this one if I would have slept overnight and read my text again with fresh eyes.
4) Yes, I get your point and it is obvious now as you pointed it out. But this seems to be a type of error I would easily do again.
All in all, not a bad result. Some inevitable mishaps here and there, but nothing catastrophic.
I’m grateful I had this opportunity to have my English reviewed. And the result is really encouraging. I guess this shows also how powerful tool internet really is. My practice text above wouldn't have been so good without an online dictionary and Google.
To be fair, I must say that my spoken English is not nearly as good as my written English. I have strong Finnish accent and the pronunciation is usually all over the place. But people always understand what I'm saying, and that's all that matters
At point 1) I used a British idiom by accident. Usually I mix the American English and non-American/British English without worries by choosing a word that sounds best to my ear.
Here are my preferences for some words:
- I think American English is better with: Truck, hood, trunk, liter, gasoline (vs. lorry, bonnet, boot, litre, petrol)
- I think non-American English is better with: Aluminium, colour, behaviour, brake disc (vs. aluminum, color, behavior, brake rotor)
- On par: Gearbox vs. transmission
- What I don't understand is: You have an internal combustion engine in your car. But still the oil you use in it is "motor oil", not "engine oil"...?
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
You're doing extraordinarily well with a difficult language. (I've spoken and written English for decades, and I'm still learning fine distinctions.) Finnish is not a Germanic language or a Romance one; you've moved into a whole new world! Good work!
My special thanks go to North America for providing all the great TV shows, movies, music, YouTube channels, BITOG, etc.
There's not a single day without "a dose" of English
You're doing extraordinarily well with a difficult language. (I've spoken and written English for decades, and I'm still learning fine distinctions.) Finnish is not a Germanic language or a Romance one; you've moved into a whole new world! Good work!
My special thanks go to North America for providing all the great TV shows, movies, music, YouTube channels, BITOG, etc.
There's not a single day without "a dose" of English
Originally Posted By: finmile
Thank you for your feedback Benzadmiral. I really appreciate it. . . .
- What I don't understand is: You have an internal combustion engine in your car. But still the oil you use in it is "motor oil", not "engine oil"...?
I've always been a little puzzled about that myself. We do say "engine oil" sometimes. I think my Buick owner's manual uses "engine oil."
I suspect that, in the early days of mechanization, an "engine" was thought of as something BIG, like a railway or industrial engine. In contrast, a "motor," as used in an auto, was a smaller unit -- and "motor" was, and maybe still is, the British term for an automobile, i.e., "motorcar," "I motored down to London," etc. We still refer to "electric motors" powering something small, like windshield wipers or powered seats; we don't say "electric engine," and we don't say "railway motor" or "steam motor."
So my theory is that the distinction came from the size of the engine/ motor under discussion; and the use of "motor" influenced "motor oil."
Thank you for your feedback Benzadmiral. I really appreciate it. . . .
- What I don't understand is: You have an internal combustion engine in your car. But still the oil you use in it is "motor oil", not "engine oil"...?
I've always been a little puzzled about that myself. We do say "engine oil" sometimes. I think my Buick owner's manual uses "engine oil."
I suspect that, in the early days of mechanization, an "engine" was thought of as something BIG, like a railway or industrial engine. In contrast, a "motor," as used in an auto, was a smaller unit -- and "motor" was, and maybe still is, the British term for an automobile, i.e., "motorcar," "I motored down to London," etc. We still refer to "electric motors" powering something small, like windshield wipers or powered seats; we don't say "electric engine," and we don't say "railway motor" or "steam motor."
So my theory is that the distinction came from the size of the engine/ motor under discussion; and the use of "motor" influenced "motor oil."
- Status
