"Romantic" vs "浪漫"

More than once I heard that some Chinese students coming to the US said the word "romantic" and caused confusion to Americans. For instance, when he (she) found a beautiful view and uttered "How romantic!", an American would ask, "Why? There's no boy or girl falling in love in this scene." It seems that in America, the word "romantic" strictly means "displaying or expressing love or strong affection". Last night I was watching Jane Austen's "Sense and Sensibility" on TV. When the Dashwood family moved to the seaside cottage, the lady praised the view with the word "romantic". So the British, at least back then, did not have the restriction on this word. In fact, dictionary.com lists 8 meanings, and about half of them are not related to love. If it was restricted, the word "romanticism" in arts would be hard to understand.

Translation: 加油

> 有些糊涂，书上说是come on
> 现实中有的人说是 go go go
> 还有人说是 hop on
> 韩国人经常使用 fighting

> 那么，老外到底怎么说加油的呢？
> (上次举办拔河比赛的时候，我们公司的外籍员工都叫一个单词pull~pull~
pull~pull~，难道老外没有加油专用词？)

"Pull" is obviously a proper word in cheering for the tug-of-war game. But in general, "go" is the word. It's commonly followed by the player or players on your own side, like "Go China", "Go Accounting" (suppose you're in the Accounting department of the company).

"Come on" is OK too. But you don't shout it many times in a row as you shout "go". I don't know "hop on" or "fighting" in this context.

Translation: college recruiting

>这里有先进的仪器设备，宽敞明亮的学习环境，
>浓厚的学术氛围和热情的老师和同学们，为你
>实现自我价值搭建了坚实的平台。这里纪律严
>明，理论与实践相结合，为你将来的发展打下
>坚实的基础。

"We have sophisticated instrumentation, and bright and spacious study environment, where teachers and students find comfort in academic study and where you fulfill your potential. Disciplines and the philosophy of theory combined with practice in study will lay a solid foundation for your future development."

Not every word is properly translated, though.

"must have to"

>>> "must have to" 常常被说英语国家的人在使用，在
>>> 网上你可以找到很多的带有must have to的句子
>> Can you give some examples?
> http://corpus.byu.edu/bnc/x.asp :

> He must have to have about half a dozen though, mustn't he?
> So you must have to get one from somewhere then?
> A place of that size must contain thousands; and must have to feed thousands.
> He was so dark that he must have to shave two or three times a day, ...
> Presumably they must have to pay for all the preparation leading up to an operation of this sort, ...

Thank you. That byu corpus site is interesting. I did a little more search on Google. There *are* some people out there that say "must have to", I guess to emphasize the point, as if either "must" or "have to" alone is not strong enough. Next time I talk to my coworker or neighbor, let me say that and see how he (she) responds!

"smile" vs "laugh"

> 每次想起这件事情的时候，总觉得很好笑
> It makes me smile every time it comes into my mind.

"Smile" should be changed to "laugh". These two words have different meanings; not just one means a little facial expression and the other means loud laugh with mouth wide open. You can say

"Every time I think of this, I want to laugh."
or
"Evert time I look back, it makes me laugh."

"agree more", but no "believe more"

> These scientists could not believe the two Curies more.

It's easy to cause confusion. In English, we often say "I can't agree more", meaning "I wholeheartedly agree with you". But "I can't believe them more"? Mmmh, I think this author intends to say "absolutely believe them". But in real life, who would say that weird sentence? If you read it too fast, you would even think it was "... any more", which is the opposite.

It appears that, not all verbs can be used in the structure "somebody can't [verb] more..." to mean "[s]he very much [verb]'s...".

"scheduled for", not "scheduled at"

Many Chinese say "The meeting is scheduled at 8am July 8.", probably because that's a direct translation from Chinese. But "at" is incorrect unless the schedule was made at 8 o'clock; it should be "for" instead. If you do need an explanation, it's because "at" refers to the time this scheduling action is done, not the time the event being scheduled will happen. So it's reasonable to make this sentence: "After long discussion, at 11pm Sunday night, they scheduled the meeting for 9am Monday." But it may cause some confusion or at least a few seconds' pause if it reads like "After long discussion, they scheduled the meeting at 11pm Sunday night for 9am Monday", although I think it's understandable.

Pronunciation: 学习英音还是美音好？

> 现在美音很流行，我学美音很吃力，听也听不清楚，英音感觉和上海话
> 像多了，也清楚，可是现在都是学美音的，就怕学了英音还受美音影响，
> 成了mixture。

If you expect to talk to Americans more, practice American pronunciation. If you talk to the British people, practice British. If you don't know, then it doesn't matter. A mixture of pronunciation is perfectly acceptable, as long as you pronounce words clearly. People living in the New England area of the US have a mixed pronunciation. Nobody laughs at them.

Chinglish: "遇到问题" and "meet a problem"

Some Chinese students translate "遇到问题" to "meet a problem". This is not correct. The correct way to say it is "I have a problem", "I had a problem", "this problem happened to me before". Say whatever but avoid "meet", because that's a word for people, as in "I met him on the street". If you have to have an exact match for "遇到", say "encounter", as in "the operations team encountered a serious problem at the time the system went live". But it's too formal for normal use.

"in [with] regard to" ,"regarding","concerning", "about"

> Can i use them as a sentences like the followings?
> 1) I have set bunch of ideas as regard the problem.
> 2) With regard to the problem,i have set bunch of ideas.
> 3) I have set bunch of ideas with regard to the problem .
> 4) In respect to the problem, i have set bunch of ideas.
> Are those sentences correct?

There's no difference between these words or phrase ("in regard to" ,"regarding","concerning", "about", and "with regard to"). But it sounds weird when you mix formal words ("with [or in] regard to") with informal words such as "bunch of". And obviously whoever uses formal words should never write "i" when he means "I". Many Chinese and Indians have this horrible yet easily correctable mistake in not using capital letters when they should.

I don't think you can say "bunch of" not following "a"; "a bunch of" is correct but "bunch of" is probably not. "As regards" is heard. I'm not sure if anybody says "as regard".