It's purest pedantry to interpret the sentence in that way. Everyone knows "I didn't see nothing" means "I saw nothing". For most people, there is no special emphasis; they just have negative concord in their speech.LifeDeath wrote:At 01:11 he says that "I didn't see nothing" means "I saw anything". Of course two negatives can eliminate each other making the sentence be positive, but I always thought that it kind of emphasizes a negation, and the given sentence just means "I didn't see anything" (later he corrected it so)
It's a thing. In colloquial American English, you find a lot of interchange between past tense forms and past participles. Sometimes it's the participle being used as simple past (e.g. "I seen it") and sometimes, as here, it's the reverse.LifeDeath wrote:Later he showspresents "have went" as a mistake. But even sincethough I try to watch things and read in English a lot I never have come across this, just wanted to see your opinion whether this really exists or not.
You're going to make me listen to another terrible amateur grammar video aren't you? Very well.LifeDeath wrote:I noticed a lot of dissatisfied people in the comments writing stuff like he should have used "been" instead of "gone" (when he was talking about "have went"), so is "gone" really incorrect there?
But how are you supposed to know which of the new things you pick up are actually useful and which are just bullshit (like most of his presentation is)? Anyone can set themselves up as an authority on the Internet and how are you, as a non-native learner, going to sort the bullshit artists from the real experts?LifeDeath wrote:Yeah dude I know that some of them can be not as good as I'd like them to be though still useful. ItAnyway, it's much better than watching lessons of non-natives. Whoever makes a video lesson, it would be useful to me even if the information was kind of invented. I can still pick up something new from each of them, thus improving my knoweledge.
LifeDeath wrote:At 01:11 he says that "I didn't see nothing" means "I saw anything". Of course two negatives can eliminate each other making the sentence be positive, but I always thought that it kind of emphasizes a negation, and the given sentence just means "I didn't see anything" (later he corrected it so)
Later he shows "have went" as a mistake. But even since I try to watch and read in English a lot I never have come across this, just wanted to see your opinion whether this really exists or not.
.I noticed a lot of dissatisfied people in the comments writing stuff like he should have used "been" instead of "gone"
Yes, it does. It does sound a bit odd to say "the neighbor" instead of "your neighbor", but it's acceptable colloquially.LifeDeath wrote:Does this line sound correct?
"What does the neighbor do weekends?"
No. Either "on weekends" or "on the weekend" but never *"on weekend".LifeDeath wrote:Or maybe I should say "on weekend"?
LifeDeath wrote:It confuses me since we don't use anything before "weekends". But I feel the need to use anysome preposition, it really wants. Like "on weekends" or "during weekends".
It's like to saying "Will you go me, or I go alone?".
Really? Where did you look?LifeDeath wrote:I noticed that you used words like "prescriptivist pedant", "descriptivist", "pedantry". Though I've been trying to understans their meanings, I've actually found nothing. So can you please explain those to me?
LifeDeath wrote:So guys I wanted to ask you about the verb "hurt", though I don't really even know whether it's a verb or an adjective. How should I use it?
For example, if my friend has a headache, he is sitting and suffering, holding his head, his eyes closed. How would I answer him:
"Does it really hurt that strong?" or "Is it hurt that strong?" ?
Or if, for example, I scratched my arm by, for instance, a flower's thorn, how should I say?
"Oh God, this hurts" or "Oh God, this is hurt"?
And after some time I would say:
"My hand hurted" or "my hand was/(got?) hurt"?
For me, only the first of these two is idiomatic. Should expresses obligation whereas need expresses, well, need. "I shouldn't have done it" is more or less equivalent to "I ought not to have done it" (but I personally hardly ever use "ought" in the negative). "I needn't have done it" equates to "There was no need for me to do it". It's like saying that it doesn't matter whether I did it or not. That's why the second sentence isn't idiomatic to me, because by urging you not to tell anyone the speaker is saying that it does matter. There was an obligation not to tell anyone, and for obligation we prefer should or ought.LifeDeath wrote:What is the difference between "shouldn't have" and 'needn't have"? I guess they both emphasize a kind of regretful that something was never done, or vice-versa.
"Oh I shouldn't have told you about that, so please don't tell anybody else"
"Oh I needn't have told you about that, so please don't tell anybody else"
LifeDeath wrote:Thank you!
So just for interesting I checked out one site with expression "was been", which I thought would never be used, but to my surprise, I found some usages.
Can "be" really be used in the passive voice? Tell me please when should I use so.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest