Forgot your password?Close
قىزىقراق بىرنەرسە ئىچكۈم بار.
Ошибка ошибкой, но по-моему люди так говорят. Предлагаю добавить (правильный) вариант.
ۋۇي، خاتالىشىپتىمەن... رەھمەت سىلىگە!
Можно было бы покороче, но спасибо за объяснение.
Странно, но для меня разница между "на что-то не обратить внимание" и "не обратить внимание на что-то" чисто стилистическая. Готов вам поверить, но хотелось бы получить, как минимум, ещё одно мнение.
В вашем мнение, здесь порядок слов так важен?
شۇنداق، رەھمەت سىزگە.
Yes, it's an Uyghur male name.
It's pronounced E-met ("met" is pronounced as "met", and the first E is pronounced just like the "e" in "met").
To the best of my knowledge, "underage" is a single word.
But there should be a comma after "lot".
Slightly more poetic, but quite acceptable, IMO.
No, it doesn't match the French. I'll unlink.
I marvel at...?
По-моему, не совсем. Если я его "повёл", то это не значит, что я его привёл (может быть он сбежал в пол-пути). Но "amener" имеет оттенок совершенства. Если сказать "je l'ai amené", то это значит, что человек всё-таки пришёл.
"Would" is okay here - the tone is just a bit more demanding. "Will" seems more neutral, as if the speaker is genuinely asking the other side if they are planning to wake up.
А как быть, если человек откажется? Может быть, "привёл"?
Речь идёт о собаке потому что автор этих предложений (т.е., я) писал именно про собаку.
"ни пошёл" или "не пошёл"?
Насчёт он/она, если речь идёт про собаку, то по-русски это будет "она", а по-французски "il" (правда, "elle" тоже возможно, но зависит от пола). Думаю, что это из тех редких случаев, где такой перевод позволяется.
I'll disown this and let you take care of it (as I haven't studied German in 4+ years now).
I think this is fine with or without the exclamation mark. The sentence has no translations, so it can be either.
It's okay. Different native speakers of different backgrounds/ages will naturally have different opinions on usages that are not particularly well-defined. While "What a bore!" may often be said as an exclamation, it does not need to be, and one can certainly say/write it without an exclamation point. This conveys a sort of nonchalance/resignation that the phrase with the exclamation would not, and could not, convey.
*Sigh*... What a bore.
Yes, they should. But this is not an exclamative sentence. "What a bore!" is an exclamative sentence. "What a bore." is not.
Neither are the other two you marked. You can say any of these without exclamation.
*I'll call you
This sentence is OK.
Я бы поменял позицию слов (у моей передней двери показался кот), как здесь не конкретный кот (a cat вместо the cat). Если измените, то можете и заодно соединить с уйгурской версией. Там тоже кот не конкретный :-)
This is certainly acceptable in speech. Now, you could make the argument that in proper, written English one should use the singular. However, I looked this up and it seems like the jury's not completely in consensus on that one either...
See Usage Note: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/neither
So, at the worst, we could put a "spoken" or an "informal" tag on this, but I'm not really sure that that's necessary.
Yes, typo. Thank you.
Can "to awake" be used as a transitive in this way?
I would use "to wake" here.
> since there's no regulatory body for english
Thank the heavens!
This has been discussed before, and I believe it was acknowledged that both forms are acceptable. You can see that "regardless what" is also in usage:
Yes, but even if a delivery truck driver said "I go to the church on Sundays", I would still understand it as "I go to Church on Sunday". An extra clarifier would be needed if it weren't *very* clear from the context.
I would add to that and say that, if you live in a small town where there's only one church (which is fairly common), then "go to the church" basically becomes synonymous with "go to Church".
I believe that they're the same. However, this sentence can also have a second meaning - i.e., when you are talking about a specific church.
So, 259857 always implies 2658081 but 2658081 does not always imply 259857.
Actually, to add to that: "from the store" means that she *usually* buys milk from the store during "this" time period (e.g., this week, this month), and not that she's buying it right now at this moment.
Yes, but it underlines the fact that she is *inside* the store. You might say this if you are standing outside the store and someone asks you where your daughter is.
"from the store" emphasizes the source of the milk, i.e., that she doesn't have it delivered by a milkman.
"at the store" has the same meaning as "in the store" but does not emphasize the inside element. You can say this even if you are far away from the store, e.g., on the other side of the city.
I've no problem with "Google+". I don't think that there are established conventions for something like this.
*on Google Plus
This is usually what you say to two (usually young) people of (usually) opposite genders who display their mutual affection in such a strong (usually physical) way that it may make people around them uncomfortable and would probably be better done in a private setting (e.g., in a hotel room), where they could engage in such (usually sexual) activity undisturbed.
Hope that helps :-)