translation-grammar technique vs non- translation-non-grammar technique

Discuss any questions in English. Practise your writing skills.

Модератор: zymbronia

Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#126

Сообщение Dragon27 »

Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:22 Do you mean "Amount of Energy required for reaching the speed of light" would increase indefinitely
No, I meant "your energy". The full energy. Or the kinetic part of it (full energy = rest energy + kinetic energy). Amount of energy required for reaching the speed of light is infinite (if the object isn't already moving at the speed of light). Does infinity increase or decrease? If you already have some positive kinetic energy (which is always positive, ofc), would it take less energy for you to reach infinity? Or it doesn't matter, and "∞-10" is the same as "∞-12"? I don't think that talking about increasing or decreasing of an infinite quantity makes any sense.
Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:22 I was starting to think that something new has been discovered over last forty years. Now I see that it is just a play of words.
What did you expect? It's just an outdated term (over 100 years, actually), not an overturned hypothesis/theory.
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#127

Сообщение Michelangelo »

would increase indefinitely
just a wrong word :)

of course it should have been "infinitely"

like before it was mass which had to increase infinitely, now as a neutrino has no mass, they turned their mind to the energy. Who knows whether a neutrino has its mass or no? How can we measure it?

Additionally, I think that the energy and mass are related.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#128

Сообщение Dragon27 »

Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:39 of course it should have been "infinitely"
I think it should have been "is infinite" (instead of "would increase indefinitely/infinitely").
Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:39 like before it was mass which had to increase infinitely, now as a neutrino has no mass, they turned their mind to the energy. Who knows whether a neutrino has its mass or no? How can we measure it?
There's several sorts of neutrinos. Or flavors, as they call them. And (according to our current theories) they're not (or not all of them) massless.
I'm not sure how we can measure neutrinos masses, but it's probably infeasible to measure them directly.
Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:39 Additionally, I think that the energy and mass are related.
Sure they are. Here's the formula again: E=√((mc^2)^2+(pc)^2)
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#129

Сообщение acapnotic »

Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:17 But then that would be the Real Writing Practice.
What is so real about it? Real writing is writing to a real person. I don't have to write to talk to myself.
Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 14:17 Anyways, "how conversation works" is clearly missing the "thinking" part somewhere in between the usual "You read, then you write in response" steps.
Not at all. I wrote that I run out of ideas if I write to myself. Ideas relate to thinking. Looks like the thinking part is absent in your own response.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#130

Сообщение Dragon27 »

acapnotic пишет: 07 фев 2020, 15:09 What is so real about it? Real writing is writing to a real person. I don't have to write to talk to myself.
Because it is devoid of the unnecessary reading part, duh. Just slap your flow of thought on the screen and be done with it.
Or you can talk to yourself, as you've just mentioned. But in writing.
acapnotic пишет: 07 фев 2020, 15:09 Not at all. I wrote that I run out of ideas if I write to myself. Ideas relate to thinking. Looks like the thinking part is absent in your own response.
I see, you just want to put the onus of thinking (up the ideas for the discussion) on your interlocutor. Without even giving the latter the courtesy of properly forming your ideas. Quite an inferior mode of writing if you ask me. Not sure why it is even worth practicing.
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#131

Сообщение Michelangelo »

Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 15:27 Not sure why it is even worth practicing.
Maybe because it is better than no practising?
You haven't shown much practice here, have you? Are you practising somewhere else?

I just can praise myself for having even this kind of practise and I have to thank you Acapnotic for supporting me in this effort or else I would not know how I could develop my writing at all.
I could agree that academic writing according to the proper format and topic could help develop something, if not thinking then maybe accuracy, but what is a reason in making academic writing if you are not passing any exams? Will it be interesting for you doing something which you are not going to use anywhere?
Here, though rubbish we are writing, we are just trying to write out what is at hand, and trying to find a topic which could be fine for use to dig into. Why should we just pick up a random topic from the textbook, which will be rather boring for us, and write on that topic about something which is not interesting or could be interesting only from grammar point of view?
Maybe I will regret later that I didn't do that now, but now I just cannot make me write on such topics and in accordance with rules. It is just unbearable to do it at the moment.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#132

Сообщение Dragon27 »

Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 15:44 Maybe I will regret later that I didn't do that now, but now I just cannot make me write on such topics and in accordance with rules. It is just unbearable to do it at the moment.
I'm not saying anything against non-academic writing (which is the only kind of writing I do myself), or writing without a particular topic in mind. Knock yourselves out. What I did find objectionalbe is certain misconceptions you've used in your reasoning about "high matters", and made an attempt at pointing these misconception out and at the same time providing corrections for them (a small and concise post and a far cry from a textbook). And I find it hard to believe that accepting these corrections is too much effort on the part of people who are churning out passages after passages of text (because they believe that "thinking" interferes with "writing" too much).
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#133

Сообщение Michelangelo »

Dragon27, I am not against texts from textbooks. I agree that it is better to use proper terms than improper ones.
With what I disagree is that I need to learn them by heart and remember in case I would use them once in a while. Why should I?
Moreover, you said that those were outdated meaning they weren't completely wrong but something has changed over years. But who knows that but you? Nobody. Or at least few people could attract their attention to our misuse of terminology about something which we studied dozens of years ago and now may easily misuse. It wasn't a scientific discussion, wasn't it? We were just letting our imagination fly without thinking much so that we could write quickly and not spend much time for elaborating correctness of our "academic" writing.

We agree that you are right, we disagree to waste time for memorising everything what we are going to describe in our fairy-tales here or elsewhere, because we don't know which theory or topic we will be touching next. Therefore, it is not feasible to learn so much unnecessary information. It is not only the theory or relativity - there could be a bunch of topics we could put our hand into. That is the problem. Not that we disagree with you, but we don't see any practical reason to know them by heart either in English or Russian.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#134

Сообщение Dragon27 »

Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 16:16 With what I disagree is that I need to learn them by heart and remember in case I would use them once in a while. Why should I?
Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 16:16 Moreover, you said that those were outdated meaning they weren't completely wrong but something has changed over years.
Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 16:16 it is not feasible to learn so much unnecessary information
As is usually the case in most forum discussions, we came back to the same points again (as if they haven't been answered).
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#135

Сообщение Michelangelo »

Dragon27, If they were answered, why cannot you agree that it is difficult to remember terminology which you don't ever use but here and there without thinking?

I understood, that you suggested that before writing we should have learned the terms, but for that we should have read some materials, thought over it for a certain amount of time, written down specific words with their definitions, memorised them, and then only written our messages, but it should have been enough - then we should have checked them by comparing with original sources or else we would have been doomed to make mistakes. It would have taken several days to write a short message. Why on earth we should have done that? To delight you eye by showing off with nice terminology? It is evil and weird, don't you think?
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#136

Сообщение Dragon27 »

This is not what I suggested. This is not what I implied. I literally said what I did and meant to do, but you still insist on misconstruing my intentions. Because you either want to keep practicing writing no matter what, or just don't try think through the replies.
I personally don't have the interest in walking along the same circle more than a few times.
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#137

Сообщение Michelangelo »

Dragon27, maybe I am disabled to understand you intention.
I thought you just wanted to participate in our fallacy for a while.
If you were serious, then I misunderstood your intentions completely :)
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#138

Сообщение Dragon27 »

Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 16:47 maybe I am disabled
You did complain about your lack of imagination, iirc. Or did you mean to say "unable"? (:
Michelangelo пишет: 07 фев 2020, 16:47 If you were serious, then I misunderstood your intentions completely :)
No, you're misconstruing them (and deliberately at that).
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#139

Сообщение acapnotic »

Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 15:27 I see, you just want to put the onus of thinking (up the ideas for the discussion) on your interlocutor.
Sometimes I use his ideas for my inspiration and other times he uses mine. We help each other not to run out of them. Have you never taken part in a discussion? Whether it's serious or just for fun, it always works like that. It's an exchange of ideas, be they serious or silly.
Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 15:27 Quite an inferior mode of writing if you ask me. Not sure why it is even worth practicing.
Writing is writing. If your goal is writing fluency, then the more you write the better. That's what matters. Any restriction, be it correct scientific terminology or the profundity of ideas, will only slow you down. You will simply write very little or nothing at all. Try starting a serious scientific discussion and see how much you will have to write there. My guess is, very little. It could be a good practice in thinking but not in writing. That's why it doesn't suit our needs.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#140

Сообщение Dragon27 »

acapnotic пишет: 07 фев 2020, 17:28 Sometimes I use his ideas for my inspiration and other times he uses mine. We help each other not to run out of them. Have you never taken part in a discussion? Whether it's serious or just for fun, it always works like that. It's an exchange of ideas, be they serious or silly.
You were talking about two hares. You don't seem to mind chasing them one by one by participating in the both parts of the discussion (the "back" part and the "forth" part). Thinking about the ideas you're receiving is a prerequisite to answering to them. And it doesn't require one to go study theoretical physics for ten years and come only when you've made some contribution to clarifying the issues of connecting the landscape of the string theory to the Standard Model. But the understandable refusal to go off the deep end doesn't justify pushing it to the other extreme. That's a strange attitude "therefore it is completely useless to even struggle to...". That's a defeatist approach.
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#141

Сообщение acapnotic »

Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 18:12 You were talking about two hares. You don't seem to mind chasing them one by one by participating in the both parts of the discussion (the "back" part and the "forth" part). Thinking about the ideas you're receiving is a prerequisite to answering to them.
No, the hare is only one. Reading and writing are two parts of the same process of chasing it. Yes, I think about ideas before replying to them but I don't label them as misconceptions or outdated. I don't care much if they are, and I know that Michelangelo doesn't care either, so we both feel free to write whatever comes to mind. If I disagree with an idea, I can argue against it, but I don't label it. That's important. This thread is not about whose ideas are better; it's about writing practice. It should be fun for all participants, not just for one at the expense of others. It's collaboration, not competition. It's not about who is right.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#142

Сообщение Dragon27 »

acapnotic пишет: 07 фев 2020, 20:18 No, the hare is only one.
There is no hare. The division of the activity into hares is subjective (in fact, in quantum field theory it's even frame-dependent!), so I see no problem with throwing one or two more cute little leverets into the mix. With the right frame of reference attitude, it shouldn't be put any more strain on the conversation.
acapnotic пишет: 07 фев 2020, 20:18 If I disagree with an idea, I can argue against it, but I don't label it. That's important. This thread is not about whose ideas are better; it's about writing practice.
Better? Should we not label certain ideas and beliefs as 'misconceptions', because it might sound belittling (to those ideas)? Should we refrain from calling certain terms outdated because it sounds judgmental? 'Outdated' is just a factual statement. It doesn't go anything farther than that.
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#143

Сообщение acapnotic »

Dragon27 пишет: 07 фев 2020, 20:47 With the right frame of reference attitude, it shouldn't be put any more strain on the conversation.
The right attitude to the wrong thing is obviously to avoid doing it. Chasing two hares is the wrong thing, so it's best avoided. I am not going to forbid anyone from learning anything. What is wrong, in my view, is making it a requirement. Let's see what you actually said in that post. "Hello, guys, I would like to join your conversation, but I see that you are talking nonsense here because your ideas are misconceptions and your terminology is outdated. So I suggest that you go learn the correct and up-to-date ones, and then we can have a nice chat."

The first reaction to that is, quite naturally, "Wait a minute. We are already having a nice chat and have had it for quite a while in three threads with many pages and dozens of posts. Since we haven't needed for that either modern terminology or correct scientific concepts, we don't see why we should need them now". That is a reasonable objection, isn't it? You promise us what we already have and expect us to do some work for it.

There is a good rule: "If it works, don't fix it". Because you may not understand all the details of how and why it works, and you may break it with your supposed fix.

These three threads have actually turned into a kind of writing club with, so far, two members. The relaxed atmosphere of this club is due to the tacit agreement between its members about the non-seriousness of our discussions. Whatever we write here is, by default, not serious. Simply because our goal is to improve our writing and we focus on it. All that helps it is good and all that hampers it is bad. Non-seriousness definitely helps because we can write whatever comes to mind and can digress from the topic however we like. This helps us write more and therefore gives us more practice.

Seriousness isn't forbidden as such, only it shouldn't be a requirement and shouldn't be expected. I believe this has a great liberating effect which helps unleash our writing. This is what your fix may break.

Besides, you are a newcomer to the club and shouldn't begin with requirements. If you had participated for a long time and helped a lot to keep the club running, then your suggestions would carry some weight because we would be unwilling to part with you, but now you are just a passer-by and will most likely remain one, judging by your activity on the forum, even if we agree to your suggestions.

If you want a serious scientific discussion, I can sympathize with your disappointment at what you see going on here. However, it's so for a reason, and I personally feel no urge to change it.
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#144

Сообщение Dragon27 »

acapnotic пишет: 08 фев 2020, 09:03 Let's see what you actually said in that post. "Hello, guys, I would like to join your conversation, but I see that you are talking nonsense here because your ideas are misconceptions and your terminology is outdated. So I suggest that you go learn the correct and up-to-date ones, and then we can have a nice chat."
Okay, let's have a look at the ground zero. I was under the impression that that's not how my post should have been interpreted. Instead of "This is wrong, go learn the subject first" the message was more like "This is wrong, and these are the corrections to make it right". My corrections were dismissed out of hand for reasons that I just couldn't take seriously, and I said as much. I saw what seemed to me like faulty logic and considered it fair game. And then the whole discussion started going in different directions which may or may not have been associated with the starting issue.
acapnotic пишет: 08 фев 2020, 09:03 There is a good rule: "If it works, don't fix it". Because you may not understand all the details of how and why it works, and you may break it with your supposed fix.
These are all reasonable objections, but I feel like they do not exactly apply to my actions. I didn't barge into the thread with the intention to take over the whole concept of the writing club, reorder all the silent rules to my own fancy and make everybody tow the line. That gives off the unsavory vibes of the shouldering responsibilities about the future of the club - certainly not something, that I ever pretended to.
I don't feel like I was proposing some serious fix you're talking about, more like pointing out and correcting some misconceptions. Even if no one actually cares about them, why should that be considered a no-no?
acapnotic пишет: 08 фев 2020, 09:03 Besides, you are a newcomer to the club and shouldn't begin with requirements. If you had participated for a long time and helped a lot to keep the club running, then your suggestions would carry some weight because we would be unwilling to part with you, but now you are just a passer-by and will most likely remain one, judging by your activity on the forum, even if we agree to your suggestions.
That's a fair assessment. You can definitely count on me dropping out of any club-like activity and never consider me a reliable contributor or a valuable member (or just a member at all).
You could also indicate my propensity to refrain from generating long and meandering passages of texts (which seems to be viewed as a good thing for developing the writing ability - the main goal of this club). I'm not exactly a fan of the idea that quantity of output is the only thing that matters. I would even hazard a claim that the quantity of writing could and should be sacrificed for the quality of thought (to a certain extent, of course; like the size of your penis and the amount of money on your bank account - it doesn't matter unless it's too small).
But at the end of the day, everyone is going to write the way they believe is more conducive and beneficial to their own goals. I'm not sure how my own convictions could prevent anyone from doing just that.
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#145

Сообщение acapnotic »

Dragon27, OK, apparently there was misunderstanding between us. I've just reread your first post and indeed there is nothing really bad in it. Strange but true. Maybe what annoyed me at the time was its critical tone: this is wrong, that is wrong, everything is wrong... So I interpreted it as "Guys, stop talking nonsense and go learn the right things." :)
Dragon27
Сообщения: 2163
Зарегистрирован: 01 мар 2018, 06:57
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 847 раз

#146

Сообщение Dragon27 »

On one hand, people who are being criticized by having their mistakes pointed out by somebody else usually react under the assumption that the person is just a cheap show-off who is trying to make himself look better by putting down everybody else (especially when they don't believe that the points that are being critiqued are actually of any importance). Which is not completely unreasonable as this kind of motivation is inevitably there, even if the person is aware of it and no matter how much effort he puts in diminishing its influence on his behavior. It's part and parcel of being a human.
On the other hand the cocky know-it-all is also driven by positive impulses (that are not always met with understanding, since no one actually asked for his stupid corrections) of making everybody else around him happier and better by slightly nudging them along the path of improvement and enrichment of their minds (or, at least, addressing his pet-peeves in the form of some common fallacious beliefs). It is not universally justifiable to just assume negative intentions on his part.

The interplay between being critiqued and being called out on being a smart-ass could be rather amusing, and the balance between good faith and bad faith rather... precarious.
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#147

Сообщение acapnotic »

Yes, motivation is usually mixed, but we tend to indentify with our better half, which results in our main misconception. We base on this misconception our expectations of ourselves and of others' reaction to us.

We identify with our kind feelings, good intentions and high standards rather than with our actual behavior. It can't go without consequences, just as any other use of incorrect data in calculations.
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#148

Сообщение Michelangelo »

Eventually, what is a translationless method? I think that most people do not mean to count the processes of translation going on in their heads, they just think that if they use monolingual dictionaries and English textbooks it means that they use the translationless method. However, in my opinion any input that is undergoes conversion from English into something having anything common with Russian means translation to the extend. Some people whose memory is better can use correct English sentences and it seems as if they have got used to non-translating in no time, and it actually could be true. However, many other people who even don't use Russian sources they could only understand English through imagining either Russian pictures of English words, or even Russian counterparts of the English words, thus creating a certain amount of Russian calques, which means using the translation method in my opinion.
Of course part of learnt-by-heart phrases and sentences could be comprehended directly, but if a person use Russian calques, ie, misuse articles or prepositions, it means that they don't know how to use English directly and make up sentences or part thereof based on Russian structures.
Аватара пользователя
acapnotic
Сообщения: 3912
Зарегистрирован: 02 мар 2018, 07:49
Благодарил (а): 279 раз
Поблагодарили: 922 раза

#149

Сообщение acapnotic »

Michelangelo пишет: 17 фев 2020, 17:04 Eventually, what is a translationless method?
Pretending that you are learning English as English children do. :)

I think that even in that case we eventually map English words onto Russian ideas. So the only difference is that we don't use Russian words in between. Or rather we try not to use them, but is it really possible? As soon as you figure out what idea is named by an English word, I guess it's inevitable that you will think of the corresponding Russian word. Because it's hard to separate ideas from the words that denote them.

Some ideas are the same in both languages, like the names of animals, trees, etc, but others differ. 'Go' is not equal to 'идти', for example, is it? So, can we form an English idea for the word 'go' and automatically use the word in strict accordance with it? I don't know.
Аватара пользователя
Michelangelo
Сообщения: 4958
Зарегистрирован: 12 апр 2018, 08:19
Благодарил (а): 32 раза
Поблагодарили: 705 раз

#150

Сообщение Michelangelo »

acapnotic пишет: 18 фев 2020, 13:33 Pretending that you are learning English as English children do. :)
I tried that, and I found it much more difficult as compared with the translation method where you know the proper meaning of English words. I tried to learn some sentences without knowing the meaning of specific words - I just wasn't able to remember them without learning their meaning. I don't understand how children can memorise those sounds which don't mean anything to them. :(
acapnotic пишет: 18 фев 2020, 13:33 I think that even in that case we eventually map English words onto Russian ideas.
I am sure we do that because it is hardly possible to block our Russian personality. Even if you could forget your own language, it will be much harder to forget your Russian habits.
acapnotic пишет: 18 фев 2020, 13:33 As soon as you figure out what idea is named by an English word, I guess it's inevitable that you will think of the corresponding Russian word.
Even if I don't remember the exact Russian word for that English word, I will have "a Russian idea" for that phenomenon described by that exact English word. Therefore I will perceive that phenomenon through the comprehension system grown on Russian. I won't ever become Stirlitz or somebody like him to comprehend the language directly like natives comprehend it. This translationless method could help, of course, but it won't let us become natives anyway. Just make a small pace towards them as compared with that translation technique.
acapnotic пишет: 18 фев 2020, 13:33 'Go' is not equal to 'идти', for example, is it?
You know they are different like majority of other English words differ in meaning to those relevant Russian words.
acapnotic пишет: 18 фев 2020, 13:33 So, can we form an English idea for the word 'go' and automatically use the word in strict accordance with it? I don't know.
We can, but not always. Only where we have learnt how to use it properly in a native way of use. In some cases we could use English words properly, but in most cases - not. Even if you have a C2 certificate it won't mean you can use all the words properly. Only that part which is required by the certificate - maybe more, maybe less but of course the knowledge will be limited by those things which you have properly learnt. It won't make you a native at all.
Ответить
  • Похожие темы
    Ответы
    Просмотры
    Последнее сообщение

Вернуться в «Practise Your English»