I'm going to Belgium

Hi!

I only have 3 more weeks of holiday, so tomorrow I'll go <em>(I'm going is more common)</em> to Belgium with some friends. I'll visit Brussels, Brugge, Ghent & Leuven.

I wanna try all types of chocolates and beers. Yeah, it will be a good travel <em>(suggestion: it will be fun traveling)</em>.

Regards!

<em>(note: traveling is US spelling, travelling is UK spelling)</em>

<em>Great job, your notebook entry was very well written!
</em>

Can you give us the name of the song and the artist? A lot of slang is situational/contextual, or even made-up. To be honest, I usually understand less than half of slang in most songs! I know that one meaning of half-stepping is to do something halfway, so that it remains unfinished, like, half-baked. In the US, we would say "half-a**edly", but don't say that because it's a bit vulgar! (for a learner of English anyways) Short stroke could metaphorically refer to a car engine.

一, I think the problem is that in this case, the context can - with much effort - be built up from the content of the statement, but explaining that in either the target language or the native language requires a high-level explanation. From my perspective, the sentence suggests a situation where: 1. Persons A and B are both capable of performing the same action Z. 2. [A performing Z] and [B performing Z] are not mutually exclusive events. 3. Observer X sees A performing action a1, which X believes implies that A performs Z, perceivably precluding the event where B performs Z. 4. Observer Y sees B performing action b1, which Y believes implies that B performs Z, preventing A from performing Z. 5. Because of imperfect sharing of information and the assumption, by both observers, of mutual exclusivity of A and B performing Z, a statement such as the one provided by the asker arises in a variety of circumstances. I agree that it would help immensely if askers gave more context in their questions! example: asker - Is "she went to the store" or "she is going to the store" correct? answerer - I don't know!

You are right. The first suggested translation is correct. And I have to say this is a rather difficult question! The second translation - "it is more reasonable to assume that they don't want to emulate others" - is more of an inference/conclusion (than a fact), so it's not exactly the same as the example sentence. Although it could be true, it could also not. I thought of the situation outlined in the example sentence like this: Suppose A, B, X, and Y are four people. A and B are singers/musicians and X and Y are fans who are observing them (them = A & B). Timeline of events: 1. X sees a video of A doing a cover of one of B's songs (i.e. A sings one of B's songs). 2. Y reads a news article that reports B is performing a song written by a songwriter. This songwriter wrote several of A's songs. 3. Y says to X, "I think B is copying A's style (of music or singing)." 4. X replies, "Isn't it more reasonable to assume that A is emulating B?" Although it could be true that B does not want to emulate A, it is not necessarily true.

Hmm, not sure what you mean by "father" and "dress". Also, pet names are a special kind of nickname, used between family or lovers (usually, I think). They replace the entire name, first and last. Hope that helped.

Ooh, this is a tough question. Especially because my mother likes to use the phrase "here we go" incorrectly, haha. Please excuse the length of this response. In general, I would avoid trying to 'change' the phrase into other forms because it is very idiomatic. In this case, since the phrase has 'you' in it, we use it when talking to someone. "There you go" is used (but in a limited number of situations) when the situation of whom you are talking to has improved in some way. You have to be careful or you may seem condescending to your listener, in a bad way. example 1: an employee at an ice cream store/parlor gives a child customer his or her ice cream cone and says "There you go". example 2: a teacher looks over a student's shoulder and says "There you go!" when he or she completes the exercise successfully. In both cases, the speaker is in a position that is superior in some way. Here I don't mean superior as in necessarily "better". The speaker may be capable of providing something the listener does not have or cannot accomplish (a service/服务), or the speaker may be more skillful or knowledgeable in a subject. Or maybe the speaker is significantly older than the listener. The speaker could even just be trying to be friendly or encouraging. As an example, you won't hear a toddler saying to a parent "there you go" when the parent fixes a meal for the toddler. In addition, note how the situation has improved for the listener/addressee in both cases. In the first example, the child now has ice cream, and his or her situation has improved (嗯，好吃!). In the second example, the student accomplished something and demonstrated a skill to the teacher, which is good for the student's education as well as his or her grades. If we didn't have this phrase, I imagine people would have to compensate with body/face language. Think of a waiter/waitress staring at you without smiling as they serve you your food silently. Scary. This is all my theory, however. I would look around on the web or ask others to see what their opinion is on this phrase.

I think you might be confused by the inverted/flipped word order. When you ask a question and the word order changes (subject auxiliary inversion or Aux inversion is the technical term), you should practice, uh well... What I'm trying to say is, it will take practice to know with confidence that you conjugated a verb correctly. And correct conjugation will help you form the question (interrogative) form of the sentence. Here are some examples. a) A has B. --> Does A have B? b) A had B. --> Did A have B? c) A will have B. --> Will A have B? d) A has had B. --> Has A had B? etc. p.s. - "does someone has something" is incorrect!