I am a chinese from Malaysia.
we study English as second language from primary school till University.
But my English writing is still not very good.
I am a degree holder in Mechanical Engineering.
I want to be able to write English as good as the authors of Times Magazine,
I mean, use that as benchmarking.

So, can you tell me how to achieve this target?
Can you introduce me What books can help me?

I am a chinese from Malaysia.
we study English as second language from primary school till University.
But my English writing is still not very good.
I am a degree holder in Mechanical Engineering.
I want to be able to write English as good as the authors of Times Magazine,
I mean, use that as benchmarking.

So, can you tell me how to achieve this target?
Can you introduce me What books can help me?
Good luck with that one. Authors of the times wish they could write as good as the authors of the times. Go talk to Lauren Tursellino . She is a published Author who can help guide you if she is willing . She use to help people on her myspace page understand literature and her and her friends had some pretty good bull shit parties to boot. Her myspace page is "Gerty McDowell " She don't frequent her page much anymore , but you might find some other writers on her page that can direct you in a very good direction. Call her publisher and demand her book while you are at it if you could my friend . I need that book .

anyone can suggest a very good book(s) to teach us writing good English, and speaking good English too.

A language student should look into two areas:

1. the language they are studying
2. basic principles of good writing and communication as such

For 1:
Go to a good bookstore and to a library and inquire about English study materials for people whose native language is Chinese (Chinese is your native language, right?).
There are textbooks and other study materials for English specifically designed for the student's native language.
Check out the materials available and see if any of it suits you.

If the option is available and you can afford it, take a course for adult or advanced learners of English. English is widely taught, so this shouldn't be a problem; but it can get a bit expensive.
It should also be possible to get an evaluation interview at such a facility. So someone who is fluent in English will evaluate your current proficiency in English and make some specific suggestions what you can do to improve.


For 2:
A book like this is helpful:
http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Writing-Developing-Research-Academic/dp/0844293547/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1302681896&sr=1-1
This one isn't available on Amazon anymore, but a library might have it. Check out the table of contents in the Amazon preview to get an idea of what this is about.

Again, the libraries and bookstores are your friends. Ask them about books on writing that are like the one I mention above.

english ain't all they a learnin':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LALgWz0xc0

I want to be able to write English as good as the authors of Times Magazine, I mean, use that as benchmarking.You're getting good advice from the other members so I don't have much to add. However, I am a professional writer and editor so I have to warn you that most people, even native speakers, even well-educated speakers, will never be able to write as well as the writers (not "authors"--an author writes books, not articles) of Time magazine (not "the Times," that is a newspaper).

But I do have a couple of recommendations.

Do more reading. You won't learn how to write well by transcribing the spoken language. Written language is more formal, so that's what you want to learn from. I'm sure you know that written Chinese is much more formal than the spoken language.

I have considerable experience teaching English to speakers of Chinese and I can speak a little Mandarin, so I can identify some of the difficulties you will have.Chinese does not have adverbs, so you tend to use adjectives as adverbs and vice-versa. For example, you do not "write English as good as the writers..." You "write English as well" as they do. Of course this is confusing because sometimes we use "well" as an adjective meaning "not sick," but you have lots of words like that in Chinese. Study our language's inflections. Chinese does not use inflections so this is truly a foreign concept to you. You do not use the quality of Time magazine "as benchmarking," you use it "as a benchmark." Master our definite and indefinite articles: the, a, an. These are almost completely meaningless words, sort of like de in spoken Mandarin; they are just markers to help you parse a sentence. But if you use them incorrectly it's a sure sign that you're a foreign speaker. For example, not "we study English as second language," but "we study English as a second language. This is one of the most difficult features to learn in any language. Even for us when learning Spanish, which also has articles, because they do not use them in exactly the same way we do. Our syntax must be mastered: putting the words in the right order and using the right connectors. For example, "Can you introduce me What books can help me?" sounds exactly like a Chinese sentence; I can almost put it together in my head, except that I don't know the word for "introduce." You have to say it differently: "Can you introduce me to the books that can help me?" "Can you tell me what books can help me?" There are no general rules for syntax, there are many micro-rules for specific situations, and no one has ever written them down. You have the same thing in Chinese: why does wo ai ren mean "I love people" but wo de ai ren means "my girlfriend/boyfriend"? Learn the rules for using capital letters. The word "Chinese" is always capitalized, even in the middle of a sentence. All words for nationalities and ethnic groups are: French, Russian, Cantonese, Eskimo, Polynesian. The first word of every sentence must be captalized also. "We study English..." not "we study English..."As I said, I have considerable experience working with Chinese people, so ask more questions and I will probably have more answers.

Thanks Fraggle, you are professional!

I will try to get some English essay writing guidance kind of books from my library to start learning how to write a better English.

One of the things that people often don't learn when learning a new language is the simple speaking of a child. I've found, for example, that common language usage is extensively used in comic books and fairy tales, which are written for children. Get a hold of some of Grimm's Fairy Tales (in English, unless you want to learn German, then get the original version) and a few comic books, and read through those. It is written with common slang and other usages people learn early on, but don't usually use for university writing.

One of the things that people often don't learn when learning a new language is the simple speaking of a child. I've found, for example, that common language usage is extensively used in comic books and fairy tales, which are written for children. Get a hold of some of Grimm's Fairy Tales (in English, unless you want to learn German, then get the original version) and a few comic books, and read through those. It is written with common slang and other usages people learn early on, but don't usually use for university writing.

I agree, can I read it on internet?

I will try to get some English essay writing guidance kind of books from my library to start learning how to write a better English."I will try to get some books from my library with guidance on English essay writing, in order to start learning how to write English better."

Don't leave out all the prepositions. You don't have prepositions in Chinese but you can't speak or write English without them.

anyone can suggest a very good book(s) to teach us writing good English, and speaking good English too.
Try reading English novels, then you will start to get a feeling for what sounds proper. How about the Hobbit?

Strunk and White's "Elements of Style".

http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style-Fourth-William-Strunk/dp/020530902X

Excellent book for learning all the small intricacies.

Strunk and White's "Elements of Style". Excellent book for learning all the small intricacies.I think that's too advanced for his level. He needs to work on some of the basic elements of the language, not the "small intricacies." There's certainly nothing wrong with having a copy around, but it's probably not what he needs most right now.

Reading is always good, but students need more interactive training. Saint needs to write sentences in his own words, and have the errors pointed out, explained and corrected--which is what I've been doing. Reading an entire book with no errors probably won't be as helpful.

Children can learn languages by example, but it's much harder for an adult to do it that way. As I've noted before, language-learning ability decreases drastically with age, so it takes more work.

However, I'll make the same comment about The Hobbit that I made about Elements of Style. (By the way, as long as this is a writing lesson for Saint's benefit, the title of a book should always be in italics, not "quotation marks." Back in my day it was acceptable to use underlining because our old typewriters didn't have italics. But now that we all have word processors, that's not done any more.) It's a great book, one of the most beloved of the 1960s and later years. I absolutely recommend it to Saint or anyone else, regardless of their reason for reading it. It's certainly worthwhile to immerse yourself in English, so you will be more able to compose your thoughts in English.

Saint, are you able to think in English words, or do you think in Chinese and translate in real time?

Saint, are you able to think in English words, or do you think in Chinese and translate in real time?

I was just about to ask the same question. ;)

I was wondering too if Rosetta Stone English would be of any help...

I was just about to ask the same question. ;)

I was wondering too if Rosetta Stone English would be of any help...

It is hard for me to answer this question.
Subconsciously, I think most of the time I thought in Chinese before English was spoken out, there was a mechanism in my mind did the translation between brain and mouth.

I was wondering too if Rosetta Stone English would be of any help.I don't know very much about Rosetta Stone. But considering that Saint has a very large vocabulary, knows all the basic rules of grammar, and understands everything we say, I think it would probably be too elementary for him. Rosetta Stone is for beginners and Strunk & White is for people who are almost experts. He's somewhere between those two extremes.
It is hard for me to answer this question.This sentence is perfect!
Subconsciously, I think most of the time I thought in Chinese before English was spoken out, there was a mechanism in my mind did the translation between brain and mouth."Subconsciously, most of the time I think in Chinese." It's awkward to use the verb "think/thought" twice--not exactly wrong, but difficult to make it not seem redundant. Also note that this sentence is better in the present tense. You're talking about something that still happens all the time, not something that used to happen in the past. "A mechanism in my mind translates the Chinese in my brain into the English that comes out of my mouth." Sometimes it's clearer to divide a long sentence into two pieces. Then you can rearrange the words and add a few more words. I have this same problem, so I always review my writing and divide three sentences into six. And again, you're talking about something that is currently happening, so the sentence should be recast in the present tense.

Now to answer, first I need to ask more questions. How much of your everyday speech is in English? I think you once implied that English is widely spoken in Malaysia so it's easy to get lots of practice; is this correct? I have only known one person who has been there, but he went once a year to give lectures in English and everyone he worked with spoke it fluently.

The reason I'm asking this is that the key to learning to think in a foreign language is simply to speak it and hear it as often as possible. If you have friends and colleagues who speak English, ask them to speak English with you instead of Chinese, at least as often as they're willing to do it. Perhaps they can benefit from the practice too! Maybe you could organize a group that gets together for 30 minutes every day and must speak only English during that time--or even just 15 minutes. Immersing your brain in an English-only environment will help it develop new synapses that process English as a primary language rather than secondary.

Remember, I said that 40 years ago I asked my Chinese girlfriend to speak only Mandarin with me at home every day. Now understand that this did not increase my vocabulary, at least not by a large amount. What it did was transform Mandarin from a little project into an tool for communication. The words that I know now pop into my head automatically, instead of an English-Chinese dictionary that I try to use very quickly. I've been told that I speak Chinese like a four year-old child. I don't know a lot of words but I use them correctly with the right cadence and good speed, and my grammar is always correct. If you think in one language and translate into another, no matter how fast, what you say will always come out sounding like a translation--because it is! Translation is a distinct skill, and it is very difficult to do well. It's better to speak correctly, even at the simplified level of a child, because that gives you something to build on. Make your sentences short; don't try to pack too many thoughts into one sentence. Speak as though you're speaking to a child; make it as easy for him to understand as possible. Children get lost in long sentences.

Another good way to train yourself to think in a foreign language is to speak it to yourself. Now I know you don't want to walk around the office talking to yourself because people will think you're crazy. ;) But when no one is listening, that's the time for it. You should be able to do it at home because your wife and family will support your effort to improve your command of English--maybe they would like to practice with you! When an idea comes into your head, just say it out loud, in English.

You'll start to discover the many, many ways in which an English thought is not exactly the same as a Chinese thought. The two languages emphasize different things, ignore different things, and take different things for granted. For example, in English it's very important to make clear whether you're talking about one dog or many dogs. In Chinese it doesn't matter most of the time, and when it does, you just say yi tiao gou, san tiao gou or hen duo gou (one dog, three dog, many dog). In English you have to make clear whether you ate breakfast in the past, eat breakfast in the present, or will eat breakfast in the future. In Chinese you don't, and on the rare occasions when you need it you just say, zuo tian wo chi fan, jin tian wo chi fan, or ming tian wo chi fan (yesterday I eat, today I eat, tomorrow I eat). On the other hand, some things that we never think about in English are important in Chinese. "He is my brother." In Chinese you have to say ta shi wo de ge ge or wo de di di (my older brother or my younger brother--in a Confucian culture age difference is extremely important).

This illustrates a point that I always stress: Learning to think in a second language gives you a new way of thinking. This is very useful and will automatically make you smarter!

My wife and I always tell people that one of the best things about having dogs is that you can now get away with talking to yourself. Just pretend you're talking to the dogs. They will love it and you will improve your English. Our dogs understand my Spanish and Mandarin, and her Italian and Hebrew. :)

Finally, a test: If you hear people speaking English in your dreams, that means that you are thinking in English. Your conscious mind is asleep and your unconscious mind can't translate.

How much of your everyday speech is in English? I think you once implied that English is widely spoken in Malaysia so it's easy to get lots of practice; is this correct?We use English everyday and everywhere, it is the second official language in Malaysia.
However, we do not use it perfectly correctly because our own mother tounge languages always influence the way we write and speak English. English had been localised with our own styles that you can call it as "broken English". Anyway, we ourselves what do we mean. To you, the American or British, you may misunderstood what we say. We do not care about grammer, for example, "he go, she like, yesterday I come here etc", and we always do direct translation, word by word from our mother tounges.

My wife and I always tell people that one of the best things about having dogs is that you can now get away with talking to yourself. Just pretend you're talking to the dogs. They will love it and you will improve your English. Our dogs understand my Spanish and Mandarin, and her Italian and Hebrewhaha, talking to dog can improve my English?
hard to believe that.

BTW, in this forum, most of the time I want to type fast and write bad English.

One thing weird about English is why I can not use Though and But in the same sentence, we can do it in Mandarin.

Though he is fat but he can run very fast.

My teacher said this sentence is wrong.
You should write:
1)Though he is fat, he can run very fast. OR
2)He is fat but he can run very fast.

In Chinese, Though must be followed by But.

I think it not wrong at all to say:
Though he is fat but he can run very fast.

I think it not wrong at all to say:
Though he is fat but he can run very fast.

You could say that in German, too, for example:

"Er ist zwar [though] dick, aber [but] er kann schnell laufen."


Conjunctions can be very specific to the individual language, and you just have to learn them as they are.

Note that what in one language is one conjunction, can have two different meanings and two different words in another language.

I speak several languages and I know that "though" is one of those words that can be difficult to translate.


Many people when they learn a foreign language tend to play "expert grammarians", presuming they know the foreign language better than the native speakers ... Really, this is a tendency one needs to overcome if one wishes to actually learn the foreign language.

haha, talking to dog can improve my English?
hard to believe that.

BTW, in this forum, most of the time I want to type fast and write bad English.

One thing weird about English is why I can not use Though and But in the same sentence, we can do it in Mandarin.

Though he is fat but he can run very fast.

My teacher said this sentence is wrong.
You should write:
1)Though he is fat, he can run very fast. OR
2)He is fat but he can run very fast.

In Chinese, Though must be followed by But.

I think it not wrong at all to say:
Though he is fat but he can run very fast.

'though' is to replace 'but'. also, someone decided what the all the rules were and not all of them make sense. you just have to memorize them.

[COLOR="Blue"]We use English everyday and everywhere, it is the second official language in Malaysia."We use English everywhere, every day. It is the second official language in Malaysia." Break complicated sentences into multiple shorter sentences. "Everyday" is an adjective, as in "this is an everyday shirt, but I need something special for the party."
However, we do not use it perfectly correctly because our own mother tounge languages always influence the way we write and speak English."However, we do not always speak it perfectly. Our mother tongue always influences the way we write and speak English." Again, break that sentence into smaller parts. There's no need to say both "perfectly" and "correctly" because they mean almost the same thing. "Tongue" and "language" mean the same thing so you shouldn't use them both.
English had been localised with our own styles that you can call it as "broken English"."English has been . . . ." because you're talking about the present time, not a situation that existed in the past but is no longer current. But you should change that sentence into something more straightforward: "We have developed our own local style of English." Notice that I put it into the active voice instead of the passive. We did it, it didn't just happen at random. This is a more direct way of writing and it maintains the reader's attention. The rest of the sentence needs cleaning up too. "That" is a relative pronoun that shows that "English" is still a component of the next clause, so "it" is redundant. You also don't need "can" because we actually do call it that. So the sentence now reads, " We have developed our own style of English, which you call broken English." "Broken English" is a rude thing to say, so in polite company we use the French word patois, pronounced pa-TWA, to mean "a dialect of a language, with non-standard rules, spoken by a community for whom it is a second language."
Anyway, we ourselves what do we mean.I think you meant to say "we know what we mean." Always read your own typing (we call this "proofreading") to find errors.
To you, the American or British, you may misunderstood what we say.You're still having trouble using prepositions correctly. "You" is the subject of the sentence so putting "to" in front of it is wrong. Since you know there are both Americans and Britons here you should use "and" instead of "or," and you've left those two adjectives hanging in the air without a noun. Finally, "misunderstood" is past tense and you have to use present tense after "may." So the sentence is "You American and British people may misunderstand what we say." Notice that the correct way is actually shorter and easier. ;)
We do not care about grammer, for example, "he go, she like, yesterday I come here etc"I understand that you speak that way among yourselves and I would not criticize it. However, you asked for advice on writing proper English for all of your friends here, most of whom speak English as their primary language. So I'm just trying to do what you asked, and teach you how to write like a native speaker. Oh, and you misspelled "grammar."
. . . . and we always do direct translation, word by word from our mother tounges.The expression is "word for word," you misspelled "tongues." I will assume that the plural "tongues" is correct, since some of you speak Chinese at home and other speak Malaysian. Is that true? Anyway, this sentence is, "We always do word-for-word translation directly from our mother tongues."
haha, talking to dog can improve my English? hard to believe that."Talking to a dog." Speaking English in an informal situation, in which you're expressing your feelings, rather than attending a meeting with your manager, ordering business supplies from another corporation, or explaining to a customer how your product works, will limit the number of words you use, so that small number of words will become more familiar to your brain. The next time you need one it will pop up automatically and you won't need to translate. You will also be able to slow down and think about using correct grammar, and that will get you into a good habit.

As I said, it would be even better to speak English at home with your wife. Does she speak it as well as you do?
BTW, in this forum, most of the time I want to type fast and write bad English.But this is the only place where I can see your writing and help you, so you should slow down and try to write correctly. You have a professional instructor here, who is willing to help you for free. Do you want to take advantage of this fabulous opportunity? ;)
One thing weird about English is why I can not use Though and But in the same sentence, we can do it in Mandarin.That's because "though" and "but" are both subordinating conjunctions. A subordinating conjunction introduces a subordinate clause. Every sentence has to have one primary clause, otherwise it has no focus. Chinese syntax bears a superficial resemblance to English syntax (in contrast to Japanese, for example) so we both feel fairly comfortable with the other's language, but they still have major differences. Chinese doesn't have the same kind of conjunctions as English. In fact, personally I don't even regard them as conjunctions. I think they behave more like verbs.
Someone decided what the all the rules were and not all of them make sense. you just have to memorize them.No one "decided" the rules. That happens in places like France, where an Academy makes rules, or Germany, where people like rules and allow their scholars or their rulers to tell them how to speak. English is more democratic. The people decide how we want our language to work, and if it isn't logical nobody cares.

I think it not wrong at all to say:
Though he is fat but he can run very fast.

Here you could use "although" or "even though".

"Although he is fat, he can run very fast."

"Even though he is fat, he can run very fast."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/although

The people decide how we want our language to work, and if it isn't logical nobody cares.

many native speakers speak or write with incorrect grammar which is not the standards of academia. people may not care in everyday speech or informal writing but they do care to uphold those official rules of the language as correct.

many native speakers speak or write with incorrect grammar which is not the standards of academia. people may not care in everyday speech or informal writing but they do care to uphold those official rules of the language as correct.Academia is always a generation behind actual use, but they always catch up.

Journalists actually have more influence than scholars, because they have more readers. They started writing stoopid shit like "Mr. Jones' hat" and even "Mr. Marquez' car" back in the 1980s, as a way to leave a little bit more free space for advertising. They stopped, but I still see a few people writing that way.

When a student is writing a thesis for his professor he'll use the MLA Stylebook. But the rest of the time people usually refer to the Associated Press Stylebook, or the in-house manual of a major newspaper.

Academia is always a generation behind actual use, but they always catch up.

Journalists actually have more influence than scholars, because they have more readers. They started writing stoopid shit like "Mr. Jones' hat" and even "Mr. Marquez' car" back in the 1980s, as a way to leave a little bit more free space for advertising. They stopped, but I still see a few people writing that way.

When a student is writing a thesis for his professor he'll use the MLA Stylebook. But the rest of the time people usually refer to the Associated Press Stylebook, or the in-house manual of a major newspaper.

i am not saying all the rules are worthless (many are necessary for clear communication) or that incorrect grammar is excusable as a rule either. it's just that some of the rules, like with any language, is arbitrary.

Academia is always a generation behind actual use, but they always catch up.

Foreigners often have better knowledge of English grammar and orthography.

A foreigner won't write "should of known better" or "I use to visit my grandmother every day when I was little".

But if you think examples like above are what academia should catch up with ... :rolleyes:

In chinese language, it is spoken as:
Suiran (Although) da hen fei dan-shi (but) ta pao hen kuai.

In Malay too,
Walaupun (Although) dia gemuk tetapi (but) dia boleh lari cepat.

Most languages permit Although + But, except English ???

In chinese language, it is spoken as:
Suiran (Although) da hen fei dan-shi (but) ta pao hen kuai.

In Malay too,
Walaupun (Although) dia gemuk tetapi (but) dia boleh lari cepat.

Most languages permit Although + But, except English ???

Dutch doesn't either.

"Hoewel (although) hij dik is kan hij erg hard rennen"

Another thing which is weird in English is about the plural and singular word.
For example, many fish or many fishes?
It seems that both are correct.

"I" and "me" also always confuse foreigners.
Most of the time we use them interchangably.

Another thing which is weird in English is about the plural and singular word.
For example, many fish or many fishes?
It seems that both are correct.

"I" and "me" also always confuse foreigners.
Most of the time we use them interchangably.

Fish is both singular and plural, if you are speaking of one kind (species) of fish. If there is more than one species of fish, you refer to them as fishes. (Example: Those fishes are composed of two species of salmon.)

"I" and "me" confuse even native English speakers, who often get their grammar wrong! People will understand you if you say "Give the ball to I"; which of course is grammatically incorrect. The english language only has vestigial remnants of case declension, being in the pronouns (and also with who/whom). If it is the object of a preposition (from, to, towards, out of, etc.) it takes the 'accusative' case (me, you, him/her/it; us, you, them). Other germanic origin languages (and the romance languages) have case for their nouns and adjectives. English got rid of that, but kept them for the pronouns only.

anyone can suggest a very good book(s) to teach us writing good English, and speaking good English too.

In graduate school, they recommend to us:

The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr.and E. B. White

http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style-Fourth-William-Strunk/dp/020530902X

I flipped through it once but I never used it.

In chinese language, it is spoken as: Suiran (Although) da hen fei dan-shi (but) ta pao hen kuai.A better translation for dan shi would be "nonetheless," which is an adverb rather than a conjunction.
Most languages permit Although + But, except English???You can't apply the rules of one language to another. For one thing, as I just noted above, words don't translate exactly. For another, as I have noted throughout this thread, all languages don't have the same parts of speech. English (and most of the Indo-European language family) has nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, articles, conjunctions, prepositions and interjections. Chinese doesn't have those same categories. What we translate as adjectives are really verbs. Kuai translates better as "to hurry," rather than "fast." Ta kuai translates easily as "he hurries," but instead we translate it as "he is fast" and pretend that there is an imaginary verb "is" in the sentence. Chinese has no articles. Chinese doesn't really have prepositions. Ta zai jia li translates quite nicely as "He occupies (the) house('s) interior," but instead we change it to "He is in the house," pretending that li is an adverb instead of a noun. Ni dao jia lai means "You approach house (and) come" but we change it to "You come to house (or "home)," pretending that dao is a preposition instead of a verb.

But Chinese has "measure words"-- tiao, zhang, ben, ge, wei, etc., that must be used properly and vary depending on the particular noun being counted or measured.

Every language has different rules. In Spanish you must say Yo no veo nada, "I don't see nothing," whereas in English a double negative is always an error.
Another thing which is weird in English is about the plural and singular word. For example, many fish or many fishes? It seems that both are correct.As Walter explained, "fish" is a very strange word, although we have a few others like that, such as "deer." Don't let it bother you. You have strange words too. Why do we say liang tiao ma for "two horses" instead of er tiao ma?
"I" and "me" also always confuse foreigners.Not people who speak other Indo-European languages. Most of them have nominative and accusative cases for pronouns, and many even have them for nouns. In Latin, canis is nominative for "dog," but canem is accusative. If "dog" is the object of the verb instead of the subject, it must be put in the accusative case, just like "me" instead of "I."
Most of the time we use them interchangably.Americans sometimes get confused and do that, such as "Me and my friend are going to the movies." But it's regarded as the language of the uneducated.
In graduate school, they recommend to us: The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr.and E. B. White.We already discussed that stylebook. I suggested that it is too advanced for Saint at this point, since he is still learning basic grammar and syntax.
I flipped through it once but I never used it.I have always been a good writer, even in high school. When I write professionally I occasionally check Strunk & White to make sure I'm right, but I always am.

A few things like the serial comma ("blood, sweat, and tears" instead of "blood, sweat and tears") are controversial. Apparently the Americans think the British enforce it and call it "the Oxford comma", and they think it's an Americanism and call it "the Harvard comma."

At some point, I stopped caring about the magic of writing great word combinations, instead, concentrating only on the baser communicative qualities of writing. Because of this, I have become a more understanding, and understood...being. The magic resides somewhere in that understanding. The rest is fluff and a slap of paint. Somewhere there, a great novel begins...and a waiting civilization continues, unimpeded.

We already discussed that stylebook.

Sorry I did not realise that until I read further into the thread

Fish is very strange as a noun.

It's a singular noun meaning species of fish, with plural fishes. "He named the fishes of the sea." "The new grouper was the most colorful fish found in these waters."
It's a noun for the animal that's singular and plural: "Look at the big fish." (singular or plural depending on content) "Look at all the big fish." (plural)
Like other English food terms ("pork", "beef", "flour", etc), it is a mass noun, where you don't specify how many, but rather how much. "Is 200 grams of fish enough?"


OK, so is there a technical name for the verb tense used to express the inferred motivation of another's unsuccessful attempt.

G points an old gun at B but gets frustrated when G cannot make the gun work.

B: "You tried to kill me." (does the past tense of try imply that the attempt failed?)
B: "I think you tried to kill me." (This seems to be stating the obvious, perhaps in an attempt to hear G's rationale.)
B: "It looks like you tried to kill me." (In Japanese, I'm told, you have to insert a helper verb to show that you are trying to infer the thoughts and motivations of another.)
B: "You failed to kill me." (or we could use a verb which tells us the attempt was made and failed)
B: "You have tried and failed to kill me." (This is probably too redundant to be good English.)
B: "You thought that you would kill me." (A very reasonable guess by B.)
B: "You thought that you could kill me." (A somewhat reasonable guess by B, although one may question how much thought G could have possibly put into a plan to use a untrustworthy weapon.)
B: "You were under the mistaken impression that you had the capability to kill me." (This is much too verbose for the situation, but possibly still good English grammar.)
B: "You were under the mistaken impression that you would be allowed to kill me." (This implied that an agent (God, Fate, B, B's minions, A's own allies, etc.) thwarted the murder attempt.)

Is the Chinese construction similar to any of these?

So, many types of fish OR many types of fishes?

So, many types of fish OR many types of fishes?

Many types of fish. You already have the plural in types.

Many types of fish. You already have the plural in types.
Not really:

Fish or fishes?
Though often used interchangeably, these words have different meanings. Fish is used either as singular noun or to describe a group of specimens from a single species. Fishes describes a group of different species.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish#Fish_or_fishes.3F

"Fish" is one of those odd words that's usually both singular and plural—like "deer" and (in Canada) "beer." So we can say:

We caught five fish.
... elision...
But we can use "fishes" when we are talking about different species:
The fishes of the Fraser River include salmon and sturgeon.
http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/english/2005/02/fish_or_fishes.html

Yes, it is one of those odd words.

I made him cry OR I made him cries?
Can you please help me carry the tables? OR
Could you please help me carry the tables?
Using "could" sounds more politely?

I love eating grapes OR
I love to eat grapes?

Both are correct?

I read that "shall" has been obsolete to indicate future tense, it has been generalised to use "will" for present future tense.

I had better go to school today OR
I have better go to school today ?

In my OXFORD Advanced Dictionary, it only shows "had better".

I read that "shall" has been obsolete to indicate future tense, it has been generalised to use "will" for present future tense.

I had better go to school today OR
I have better go to school today ?

In my OXFORD Advanced Dictionary, it only shows "had better".

Your Oxford is correct.

I love eating grapes OR
I love to eat grapes?

Both are correct?

Yes, but slightly different. I'm not a language expert but to me the difference is this:
"I love eating grapes" is something you might say when you are eating grapes.
"I love to eat grapes" is something you might say when you are not eating grapes at that moment.

Which and that are similar in usage?
The car which he drives belongs to his father.
The car that he drives belongs to his father.

nearby vs near by:

Every Sunday I attends a nearby church.

The beach is quite near by.
Do you live near by?

Is it good or bad to use abbreviation in writing?
Like vs, e.g., etc.

Or is it more preferably to write in full words of "for examples", "and so on".
(Can I start a sentence with OR ?)

Use abbreviations judiciously. Be certain you understand exactly what they mean. Frequently they are misused/abused by writers who don't fully understand their meaning.

i.e = "id est"; latin for "that is"

etc. = "et cetera"; latin for "and other-things"

et al. = "et alia"; latin for "and other-people"; (also "et aliae", "et alii"; feminine plural and masculine plural, if referring to a group of women, or a group of men)

e.g. = "exempli gratia"; latin for "for the sake of an example"

see: http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/abbreviations/f/ievseg.htm
http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/difficulties/egie.html
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/et+alii

I made him cry OR I made him cries?cry. Your clue is that "him" is in the accusative case and therefore cannot be the subject of a verb, so the verb "cry" does not have to be inflected for third-person singular.
Can you please help me carry the tables? OR Could you please help me carry the tables? Using "could" sounds more politely?"sounds more polite. Yes. "Can you" sounds more like an order, whereas "could you" sounds more like a question.
I love eating grapes OR I love to eat grapes? Both are correct?Yes, although as Enmos says, there is a subtle difference in meaning.
I read that "shall" has been obsolete to indicate future tense, it has been generalised to use "will" for present future tense.Yes. In formal speech the future tense is I shall, we shall, you will, he will, they will, but today most people always say "will."

Reversing "shall" and "will" puts the verb in the imperative mode, i.e., a command or a promise."I shall go to school tomorrow," just a statement. "I will go to school tomorrow," perhaps you have been sick and you are determined to resume normal life in the morning. "You will not commit adultery," an observation implying that I am familiar with your habits and your moral standards and I know you won't do it. "You shall not commit adultery," is the Seventh Commandment (or Sixth depending on the particular translation of the Bible), God telling you that you had better not do it or he will make you regret it for all eternity. "Immigrants will be free to come to America," merely a (not necessarily accurate) observation of how America and its people have historically treated immigrants. "Immigrants shall be free to come to America," a promise by a political candidate to allow immigrants to come here and do the work that our children refuse to do, or never learned how.
I had better go to school today OR I have better go to school today?Had.
In my OXFORD Advanced Dictionary, it only shows "had better".That phrase is an idiom, and you just have to memorize an idiom, rather than trying to understand how it came to be that way.
Which and that are similar in usage?Similar, but not identical.
The car which he drives belongs to his father. -- The car that he drives belongs to his father.In this case they mean the same thing. This is not always true, but I can't think of a good example right now. It's also permissible to say "The car he drives...," but you have to be very careful that omitting the conjunction does not change the meaning of the sentence, or just make it hard to understand.
Is it good or bad to use abbreviation in writing? Like vs, e.g., etc.It is perfectly fine and most of us write that way. Just remember to use the period(s), such as vs. instead of the way you wrote it. If you go to Great Britain you'll have to learn to leave the periods out: Mr Smith, Dr Jones, etc were all here. But in America we put them in.
Or is it more preferably to write in full words of "for examples", "and so on"."More preferable," and the "of" shouldn't be there. And it's "for example," not "examples." The only reason you would choose the full words is that you are writing dialog, actually quoting speech. No one says "e.g.", although people often say "i.e." You have to be careful to understand contemporary usage. Of course these are Latin abbreviations. If the abbreviation is English, such as Mr. for Mister, then it's okay to write it the short way, even in a direct quote.

The same is true for etc., even though it's Latin, because we actually say et cetera more often than "and so forth."

Make sure you understand the difference between i.e. and e.g., and that will make you smarter than most Americans. :) I.e. is Latin id est, which means "that is." If I say, "You're in America now, i.e., the United States, so stop using British slang," I mean that "America" and "United States" are equivalent. E.g is Latin exempli gratia, which means (not quite literally) "for example." So if I write (I wouldn't speak this way) "No matter where you go in America, e.g., New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, you will be welcome." I am not saying that New York, Chicago and Los Angeles are America. I'm giving them as examples of American places.
Can I start a sentence with OR ?If you're trying to learn proper English, you should not do that. But as you have surely noticed, in colloquial speech and writing we do it all the time. It's not truly a sentence, merely a dangling clause.

The spelling of English words is also a problem to foreign learner like me.
We read stuff from British and American writers.
Their spelling for some words are different.
For us, we mix up those spellings and do not use certain choice of spelling consistently.
For example,
mold, mould
recognise, recognize
maneuver, manoeuvre
color, colour

And many else.

“
I had better go to school today OR I have better go to school today?
”
Had.

this doesn't make sense, does it? since 'had' is past tense.

"Had better" is an idiom.

this doesn't make sense, does it? since 'had' is past tense.

I'd use "I'd".
And when one has many acceptable alternatives, no one alternative may be "best" or "better".
If the writer is trying to transport the reader to an old english moment, the reader may appreciate the candelabra, old english Scrooge/Marley shtick.

I ask him to put the plates on the table OR
I ask him put the plates on the table.

I ask him to put the plates on the table OR
I ask him put the plates on the table.

I ask him, "put the plates on the table..."

I ask him to put the plates on the table OR
I ask him put the plates on the table.
The first.


I ask him, "put the plates on the table..."
Surely if you're writing as a quote/ speech then it would be
I ask him, "Will/ would you put the plates on the table?"

Surely if you're writing as a quote/ speech then it would be I ask him, "Will/ would you put the plates on the table?"

He replied, exhausted, "Can I just drop the guy-dam plates on the table, or must I wait for the artistic license to expire!" He seemed overly-agitated for one not even remotely close to a table, at the time.

The spelling of English words is also a problem to foreign learner like me."is a problem for a foreign student like me." Don't forget the indefinite article.
We read stuff from British and American writers."by British and American writers."
Their spelling for some words are different."Their spelling of some words is different." Spelling is a singular noun (you didn't write "spellings") so it must take a singular verb.
For us, we mix up those spellings and do not use certain choice of spelling consistently.This sentence is awkward. This is an instance where, if you find just the right word, it becomes easier. "We are confused by the different spellings, so we do not choose one way consistently."
For example, mold, mould -- recognise, recognize -- maneuver, manoeuvre -- color, colour.First, you need to choose whether you want to conform to British or American rules. There are both British and American companies in Malaysia, so your choice probably depends on whom you work for. Adopt the standards of the documents your company publishes.

Once you make that choice, a few simple rules will solve most of these problems, but not all of them.American -ize, -ization: Specialization. British -ise, isation: Specialisation. American -or: Flavor. British -our: Flavour. American -er, Center. British -re, Centre. American period after abbreviations: Mrs. etc. British no period: Mrs etcOf course there are other individual differences that don't fall into any category. American mold, aluminum; British mould, aluminium. Usually but not always, the spelling with more letters is the British version.

We have an entire thread on the difference between American and British English. (http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2734174&postcount=1) In many cases we use different words, such as American wrench, truck vs. British spanner, lorry. You should read this one.
And many else."And many others" or "and many more."
this doesn't make sense, does it? [I had better go to school.] since 'had' is past tense.In this case the phrase is an idiom that has to be learned as is, with no explanation. It's a remnant of a more complex construction from a time when English grammar was more complicated. I suspect that "had" in this usage is the subjunctive mode rather than past tense. We now only use the subjunctive in one specific construction: "If I were king/president/smarter/etc."
I ask him to put the plates on the table OR I ask him put the plates on the table.After a request, command, etc., the requested verb has to be in the infinitive mode with "to." "I want you to come over here." "He'd like us to stop leaving work early." "God commands us not to kill each other." "The instructions directed me to heat the water before adding the noodles."

American -ize, -ization: Specialization. British -ise, isation: Specialisation.
I think the opposite is true.
American rules prefer to use -ise.

No, I don't think so.

I think the opposite is true. American rules prefer to use -ise.Saint, I've lived in America for my entire life. I'm a professional writer and editor, and I also teach English.

I think you can take my word for it: We write -ize, Britons write -ise.

I think the opposite is true.
American rules prefer to use -ise.

No, definitely the other way around, as others have noted.

Saint, I've lived in America for my entire life. I'm a professional writer and editor, and I also teach English.

I think you can take my word for it: We write -ize, Britons write -ise.

My Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary uses -ize instead of -ise.
And Reader's Digest, the famous American magazine, always use -ise.

I still think you are mistaken for this.

British English using -ize is known as Oxford spelling, and is used in publications of the Oxford University Press, most notably the Oxford English Dictionary

Other references, including Fowler's Modern English Usage, now give prominence to the -ise suffix over -ize.[61] The Cambridge University Press has long favoured -ise.[61] Perhaps as a reaction to the ascendancy of American spelling, the -ize spelling is now rarely used in the UK mass media and newspapers, to the extent that it is often incorrectly regarded as an Americanism.[57] The ratio between -ise and -ize stands at 3:2 in the British National Corpus.[62] The -ise form is standard in leading publications such as The Times, The Daily Telegraph and The Economist.
Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences#-ise.2C_-ize_.28-isation.2C_-ization.29).
In general we Brits use -ise, being (as noted in the second quote) under the impresion that -ize is American usage.

I can't believe that.
I have been reading Reader's Digest for >30 years,
the articles inside always use -ise and those American spelling.

Probably you are right.
I checked that the news in CNN website mostly use -ize.

I can't believe that. I have been reading Reader's Digest for >30 years, the articles inside always use -ise and those American spelling.You're reading the British edition! You can get it in Spanish too, if you want.

"those American spellings." "Those" is plural so it must be followed by a plural noun.

Advise or Advice?
Advise is used as verb, while advice is used as noun?
Correct?
This is what my 20 year-old dictionary says.

But in most current writings I read from magazine and newspaper,
advise has been used only as verb and also noun.

Please help clarify.

He is ten years old.
He is ten-year old.
He is ten-years old.
He is ten year old.


Which sentence is correct?

He is ten years old.
He is ten-year old.
He is ten-years old.
He is ten year old.


Which sentence is correct?

He is ten years old. One year, two years, three years, four years, etc.

He is a ten year old. Here, it is used as a noun, a "ten-year-old". Idiomatic differences, I guess.

Also, advise is the verb; advice is the noun. Pronounced differently, of course. In 'advise' the 's' is pronounced like a 'z'. In 'advice', the 'c' is pronounced like an 's'. Go figure.

Does contemporary modern English abolish advice and standardize it advise?

"Advice" is a noun.
"Advise" is a verb.

"Advice" is a noun.
"Advise" is a verb.

From the sentence it can tell you it is noun or verb, I think sometimes English is making things complicated, more difficult to learn, consume more memory power.
This is the weakness of English.

From the sentence it can tell you it is noun or verb, I think sometimes English is making things complicated, more difficult to learn, consume more memory power.
This is the weakness of English.

Fretting about a language's specifics consumes incomparably more power than learning them.

:shrug:

This is the awkwardness of English, you can't deny it.

Yes, I can.

I, too, would like to become a better writer of English, and Time magazine would be a good standard for brevity and clarity.

However, my need to write better English is for legal work. I am currently doing legal research and document preparation for a pro se litigant for $300 a week. I love the work since I did pro se legal work for over 15 years as a maximum-security prisoner. See, e.g., Pratt v. Sumner, 807 F.2d 817 (9th Cir. 1987)(holding that a complaint against prison officials for blocking law books sent by professors of law was not legally frivolous). However, the difficulty of legal writing is that it often has to talk about convoluted and qualified legal principles and their application to facts, and it is very easy to end up with some very abstract mush.

In view of that, I am going to slowly work through a book about legal writing and legal reasoning by an author named Neumann. He made a very good point that even college writing skill often earns a good grade without demanding truly tight reasoning or real clarity. In other words, college writing often just goes through the organization and form of a thesis paper without demanding a tight and persuasive argument.

The following is a revised example of part of a brief that I wrote:

"Although she has been declared mentally incompetent in an unrelated action for guardianship and conservatorship brought by her son several months after her new marriage, case law apparently holds that a person can have sufficient mental competency to marry even if that person was placed under guardianship for lacking sufficient mental capacity to conduct business affairs."

That writing is heavy with a long-winded recital of qualified facts.

I think that learning to write legal work well, with the brevity and clarity of Time magazine articles, would be a hell of an achievement.

Practise or practice?

Practise or practice?

Practise is British.
Practice is American English.

It's fairly easy to figure out the answers to these types of questions by using online dictionaries (such as http://www.dictionary.com).

Practise or practice?

Verb and noun.

Does contemporary modern English abolish advice and standardize it advise?No. They are two different words! Advice is the noun, something you give someone to help them. Advise is the verb, the act of giving someone advice. They are even pronounced differently. The C in advice is voiceless, like the S in "say." The S in advise is voiced, like the Z in "zero." They are obviously related, but they are two different words with different meanings and different pronunciation.
From the sentence it can tell you it is noun or verb, I think sometimes English is making things complicated, more difficult to learn, consume more memory power. This is the weakness of English.We all feel comfortable and natural with the characteristics of our own language, and feel uncomfortable and unnatural with someone else's. Chinese has its own idiosyncrasies too, which make it just as difficult to learn as English. It is very unusual among the world's languages for tone to be phonemic, as it is in Chinese, Vietnamese and a few other languages. To be told that ji means "chicken" and ji means "how many?" doesn't make sense to most people because they don't notice the difference in tones.

English is easier than most languages because it doesn't have hundreds of inflections, different endings on words to change the tense, number, sex, etc. We have a few like boy/boys and pour/poured, but that's nothing compared to the inflections in Russian. They would drive you crazy. Ya govoryu, I speak. Ty govorish, you (singular) speak. On govorit, he speaks. My govorim, we speak. Vy govoritye, you (plural) speak. Oni govoryat, they speak.
Practise or practice?In this case it's just British spelling vs. American spelling. But you can't depend on that to be a consistent difference. As we just discussed, "advise" and "advice" are two different words, pronounced differently, in both British and American English.

Formulas or formulae ?
Why winword spelling checker indicates formulae is wrong.

Formulas or formulae ?
Why winword spelling checker indicates formulae is wrong.

formulae is the Latin plural of formula. It is losing favor.

Other common Latin plurals that are acceptable include bacterium/bacteria (not bacteriums, though technically this would be OK); alumnus/alumni (not alumnuses, which no one uses). Note, most people (since they don't know Latin) seem to use alumni incorrectly, using it as a singular: "I am an alumni of that university" when they are either an alumnus (male) or alumna (female) of that university.

Formulas or formulae? Why winword spelling checker indicates formulae is wrong.As Walter notes, "formulae" is acceptable and your spell checker is oversimplified. But outside of a scientific treatise it would be regarded as pompous or pedantic. English has been steadily normalizing irregularities. Nobody says "foci" instead of "focuses" or "vortices" instead of "vortexes" anymore. Of course there is a small backlash, e.g., historically unfounded "snuck" instead of "sneaked" or "dove" instead of dived. And we all enjoy playing with inflections. "After making sure there was a fresh box of Kleenices in my car, I took the kids to the zoo and they loved the walrera and the hippopotamodes."
Note, most people (since they don't know Latin) seem to use alumni incorrectly, using it as a singular: "I am an alumni of that university" when they are either an alumnus (male) or alumna (female) of that university.These days "alum" is acceptable for either. But you have to be careful to put the accent on a-LUM, becaus the other kind of AL-um is aluminum potassium sulfate, K2SO4⋅Al2(SO4)3⋅24H2O.

can not or "cannot" ?
Now I notice that most writers use cannot instead of can not.

Either.

I prefer the contraction: can't

"Cannot" is preferred. That's what I enforce in most cases when I'm editing.

The exceptions are usually in sentences in which, if you were speaking aloud, you would accent the "not" instead of the "can."I can not understand why you won't let me go skydiving, Mother. My dog can not walk past that fence post without peeing on it.Some authorities point out another dichotomy. "Cannot" is absolute. It allows no possibility of exception.Horses cannot fly. We cannot send an astronaut to Jupiter.Whereas "can not" is more equivalent to "should not" or "ought not."I can not ever take a sip of beer because I'm a recovering alcoholic. You can not continue to let the dog chew on your shoes.

I just want to know the reason why do you allow to join can and not together?
If it is correct, why not we also allow the following combinations?
Donot
Didnot
Willnot
Shouldnot
?????

I just want to know the reason why do you allow to join can and not together?I just want to know the reason why you allow "can" and "not" to be joined together.
If it is correct, why not we also allow the following combinations?If it is correct, why do we not also allow the following combinations?
Donot -- Didnot -- Willnot -- Shouldnot -- ?????Languages are not designed by scientists. They evolve naturally, and this evolution is guided unconsciously by people who are not scholars. As a result, every language is full of illogical constructions. Why do we say in Spanish, Yo no tengo nada, literally "I do not have nothing"? In French, when we ask "What is that?" why do we say, Qu'est-ce que c'est que ça?, literally, "What is that which that is which that?"

Better yet, I should ask you why, in Chinese, we say Wo you liang ge jiao ta che for "I have two bicycles," instead of Wo you er ge jiao ta che?

If you want a language that was designed by a scholar and is therefore highly logical, you'll have to learn Esperanto. :)

I just want to know the reason why do you allow to join can and not together?
If it is correct, why not we also allow the following combinations?

Edited: "If it is correct, why do we not also allow the following combinations?"

Donot
Didnot
Willnot
Shouldnot
?????

The contractions are simpler and are what is commonly used, and so the non-contracted version did not catch on. Here are the common forms for the above:

Don't
Didn't
Wont
Shouldn't

Essentially, if you want to emphasize the "not", then you don't use the contraction.

That's a great goal...how to achieve it is another story. I don't believe it will be impossible for you, but I do believe it will probably take you a longer time than you expect and involve many frustrations along the way. Not sure if it'll help you any, but I've found "owl at Purdue" to be useful to my students, it's more based on research writing tho, so I might not be useful. Hmm...have you taken writing classes anywhere? or have access to higher level classes now?

Fraggle,

Two, in the sense of number - er
Two, in the sense of "two things" - liang

Thousand-ten thousands- qian-wan, means MUST.
e.g., ni qian-wan yao ji de, You must remember.
I am not sure why 1k+10k can mean MUST in chinese language. :D

Ten thousands years, OR
Ten thousand years?

In writing cheque/check, we should write:
1) Ten thousands dollars,
2) Ten-thousand dollars, OR
3) Ten thousand dollars?

Ten thousands years, OR
Ten thousand years?

In writing cheque/check, we should write:
1) Ten thousands dollars,
2) Ten-thousand dollars, OR
3) Ten thousand dollars?

Red is correct. Cheque is British version.

When do we use "thousands", "hundreds" ?

She died on 15th May 1980. Or
She dies on 15th May 1980.

I read that the verb "die" mostly used as present tense. Why?
It is an historical event about the death of a person, happened yesterday, why do we not use past tense?

Two, in the sense of number - er. Two, in the sense of "two things" - liang.Yes, I know that. But why is 2 unique? We don't have two different words for 3, 4, 5, etc.
Thousand-ten thousands- qian-wan, means MUST. e.g., ni qian-wan yao ji de, You must remember. I am not sure why 1k+10k can mean MUST in chinese language.When you find the answer to that, please tell me why "east-west" means "thing." :) Doesn't the word for "friend," peng-you, have an unusual and illogical origin also?
Ten thousands years, OR Ten thousand years?Never use a plural form when forming a number.
In writing cheque/check, we should write: 1) Ten thousands dollars, 2) Ten-thousand dollars, OR 3) Ten thousand dollars?As I already mentioned, 1) is wrong because it contains a plural.

Hyphens are more complicated to explain, especially because people don't always use them correctly. The correct form for 10,000 is "ten thousand," not "ten-thousand." There is no hyphen in any of these constructions:three hundred six thousand fifty thousand eight hundred thousand twelve million seven hundred million eighteen billion four hundred trillion sixty billion seven hundred twenty million etc...The only place where a hyphen is used in spelling out numbers is in the series 21-29, 31-39, ... 81-89, 91-99. Twenty-one, thirty-six, fifty-eight, ninety-nine. (Don't ask why we do this, it's just the way we do it. And as I mentioned, a lot of people do it wrong.)

This includes these numbers anywhere they occur.26,000 = twenty-six thousand 61,235,086,154 = sixty-one billion two hundred thirty-five million eighty-six thousand one hundred fifty-four.Perhaps you count the large numbers the British way, but even then there are no hyphens: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 = one thousand quadrillion, not one-thousand quadrillion. (In America we call this "one octillion" but that's a different topic.)

I should also mention another mistake that many Americans make with numbers. It's so common that it even shows up in important documents, but it's still wrong. 521 is read "five hundred twenty-one," not "five hundred and twenty-one." There should never be an and in the reading of a number.
When do we use "thousands", "hundreds"?The simple answer: not when counting. One thousand, two thousand, twenty thousand, six hundred eighty-seven thousand. You say "thousands" when you're using it as a noun, not a number.

"There were thousands of people at the President's funeral." "There are billions of galaxies in the universe." "There are hundreds of species of rodents." Notice the "of," that's your clue that this is not a number. It's no different from saying "dozens of flavors" (a dozen = 12) or "scores of years ago" (a score = 20) or "a gross of pencils" (a gross = 144).

Now don't go looking into old books! It used to be acceptable to say "three score and ten years" to mean 70, using "score" as if it were a number, but we don't write that way anymore.

On the other hand, we still sometimes use "dozen" as a number since it is so commonly used in business. "If you're going to the grocery store would you please buy two dozen eggs?"

If this is giving you a headache, be grateful that you're not learning French, where 95 is "four twenties fifteen," or German, where 542 is "five hundred two and forty."
She died on 15th May 1980. Or: She dies on 15th May 1980. I read that the verb "die" mostly used as present tense.Not in American English. We say "She died..." I've never seen it that way in British English either. I think you may be reading biographies or historical accounts, where writers sometimes put everything in the present tense to make the reader feel closer to the story.

"In 1762 John's loyal British father dies, so in 1776 he fights on the American side in their revolution. In 1792 he is elected to the Senate, in 1804 he is appointed to the Supreme Court, and in 1819 he dies and is celebrated as a hero and a statesman."

British supermarkets should withdraw German produce from their shelves to reduce the risk of an outbreak of a deadly strain of E. Coli, one of Britain's leading microbiologists has said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8555346/E.Coli-outbreak-clear-shops-of-German-food-to-cut-risk-says-leading-microbiologist.html


Produce or product?

Produce or product?In America we refer to all fresh fruits and vegetables as produce. It is a noun in the same category as food, water, air, meat, etc.: It does not require a definite article. "Our supermarket stocks canned goods, fresh meat and produce."

Also, it is pronounced differently from the verb. The accent goes on the first syllable: PROH-dooss, rather than pruh-DOOSS. In the standard British dialect I would imagine they say PROH-dyooss (if they use the word at all) since the verb is pro-DYOOSS.

We have discussed many words like this in this thread, in which the stress falls on a different syllable depending whether it's used as a noun or a verb. This is probably not easy for you to distinguish, since in Chinese stress is not very often used and in general all syllables have equal length and loudness.

We also use tone to indicate stress, which must be extremely confusing to a speaker of Chinese.

It sounds difficult to me, :D

Anyone can give some examples of using "onto"?
When is it on and onto mean the same?

Anyone can give some examples of using "onto"? When is it on and onto mean the same?"Onto" always signifies motion. You step onto an elevator, jump onto a moving train, drop your briefcase onto the floor, throw a beef bone onto the trash pile, slip and fall onto your desk.

In most of these cases you could also use "on," if you're sure it won't cause any misunderstanding. But the reverse is not true: in most sentences using "on," you could not substitute "onto." My dog is sleeping on the bed, the food is on the table, people drive their cars on the highway, today's lesson was on English vocabulary.

The same is true of "in" and "into."

You are a very good English teacher, thanks. :D

Is it correct to start a sentence with words such as "Maybe", "Probably" ?

For example,
Maybe he does not like me therefore he rejects my party invitation.

There is a lot of grammar books/software around for English-as-a-second language users. Practice and practice and keep practicing your grammar, read novel/fiction books to increase your library of vocabulary. This will help increase your standard of english.

Whereas, to cultivate your own writing style, this will take some time. What kind of writing style are u look at? There are people who always write in the 1st person/3rd person form. And there are people who writing in a very formal style-report style. Either that, or very flowery style.

Is it correct to start a sentence with words such as "Maybe", "Probably" ?

For example,
Maybe he does not like me therefore he rejects my party invitation.

You probably can. OR..
Probably not in this context.

:rolleyes:

Probably I will refuse to go to school tomorrow.

Maybe you should go and teach the teacher how to use 'maybe' at the start of a sentence.

You would probably learn to not start sentences with 'probably'.

Is it correct to start a sentence with words such as "Maybe", "Probably" ?"Maybe" is ok. "Probably" is not.
For example,
Maybe he does not like me therefore he rejects my party invitation.You keep mixing formal language with informal language. "Maybe he doesn't like me, so he rejected my party invitation."

"Therefore" is too formal. Also, keep track of your verb tenses. The rejection has already happened, so he rejected it. Also, you might as well say "doesn't" instead of "does not," which is more formal (at least in America).

People do use "probably" at the beginning of a sentence, but it's very informal language, and it's followed by a pause:

Probably, he doesn't like me...

This isn't good English but you will hear people say it sometimes. It's best for you not to copy this usage because you will not know when it would be acceptable.

Probably, he doesn't like me...

This isn't good English but you will hear people say it sometimes. It's best for you not to copy this usage because you will not know when it would be acceptable.

Interesting threads in that my grammar is my weakest point.

The only issue i have here is I cannot recall anyone saying or even reading "Probably, he doesn't like me..."

I have heard or would be likely to hear: "Maybe he does not like me" and to a lesser extent "Perhaps he does not like me."

Are you sure that is right?

Why the comma after probably?

"Probably, he doesn't like me"

Interesting threads in that my grammar is my weakest point.I'm a writer and editor so this is part of my daily life.
The only issue I have here is I cannot recall anyone saying or even reading "Probably, he doesn't like me..."I work in information technology and I notice that engineers (we like to call ourselves "software engineers" even though our methods have more in common with medieval guild craftsmen than with civil, mechanical, aeronautic or chemical engineers) speak that way sometimes.
I have heard or would be likely to hear: "Maybe he does not like me" . . . ."Maybe" is standard in vernacular speech, although in vernacular speech we're more likely to use the contraction "doesn't."
. . . .and to a lesser extent "Perhaps he does not like me."That's a little more formal.
Why the comma after probably? "Probably, he doesn't like me"Because it's not quite proper grammar to put "probably" before the subject of the sentence or clause. So I'm interpreting it as a short introductory clause, like "in my opinion" or "ever since I threw up in his car," both of which require a comma.